ATI - PS3 is Unrefined

[Dave Baumann]

There isn't a lot of solid stuff there to refute in the first place. The E3 stuff seemed to be the meat of his argument.

Curiously I would suggest that the “meat” of his argument, given that it was the largest part of that copied text, was him saying that fundamentally RSX is not a custom design, unlike Xenos, hence not as tailored to the specific needs of a console as theirs is. In his reasoning for saying that he is also making several other assertions, such as this was a last minute switch, RSX isn’t fundamentally different from the PC design, further suggesting that isn’t fundamentally different from a GTX and what that encompasses.

If I were one of the ******s in this thread these are actually the issues that I would want addressed in order to gain a little more understanding about RSX, rather than joining in on the mob mentality.

 

[Farid]

Considering how close Xenos is to DX10 GPUs, Xenos v RSX is looking just like R300 versus NV20.

NV20?

 

[Jawed]

OK, I exaggerated a little bit, NV25.

Jawed

 

[Nicked]

Curiously I would suggest that the “meatâ€￾ of his argument, given that it was the largest part of that copied text, was him saying that fundamentally RSX is not a custom design, unlike Xenos, hence not as tailored to the specific needs of a console as theirs is. In his reasoning for saying that he is also making several other assertions, such as this was a last minute switch, RSX isn’t fundamentally different from the PC design, further suggesting that isn’t fundamentally different from a GTX and what that encompasses.

Thing is, we can't verify this. We can rationalise it may or may not be based on sketchy evidence, but thats all. We know Sony was still paying nVidia to design the chip until very very recently, some may say thats because they were adding cool features whereas others may say they were just getting it to work with the FlexIO bus.
Now I choose to believe features, because they were developing the RSX simultaneously to 7800GTX, and adding a bus interface isn't the most terribly difficult aspect of chip design.

If I were one of the ******s in this thread

You aren't Dave?

 

[Dave Baumann]

Thing is, we can't verify this.

No, you can't, but there are those that probably do have insights (which is what mckmas8808) that haven't refuted such things, and these are the issues that I would put as important.

You aren't Dave?

No, I'm the guy with the Admin rights here.

 

[Nicked]

No, you can't, but there are those that probably do have insights (which is what mckmas8808) that haven't refuted such things, and these are the issues that I would put as important.

Well indeed I can't and anyone who can is under NDA. Really makes it hard to defend claims by an ATi mouthpiece.

No, I'm the guy with the Admin rights here.

Indeed.

edit; That was mean (<red), I at least try to rationalise my posts for the most part.

 

[therealskywolf]

Well, for him to make comments like this is because he knows something about the RSX. In any case, his comments about Ps3 vs Xbox 360 are obviouslly BS, but so what? People reacting badly to it are the same who state that Ps3 will be like Xbox and the Xbox 360 will be like the DC....but anyway, it's pretty obvious he is comparing the GPU's, and he believes that in the long Run, Xenos will have more legs than the RSX. In all honestly, i wouldn't find that very surprising.

 

[zidane1strife]

Unrefined is just the start.

Jawed

We'll find out soon enough

 

[breez]

Considering how close Xenos is to DX10 GPUs, Xenos v RSX is looking just like R300 versus NV20.

Unrefined is just the start.

Jawed

Or NV2x vs. R200?

 

[Farid]

Thing is, we can't verify this. We can rationalise it may or may not be based on sketchy evidence, but thats all. We know Sony was still paying nVidia to design the chip until very very recently, some may say thats because they were adding cool features whereas others may say they were just getting it to work with the FlexIO bus.
Now I choose to believe features, because they were developing the RSX simultaneously to 7800GTX, and adding a bus interface isn't the most terribly difficult aspect of chip design.

Really, what Dave is trying to say, is that Huddy has a point when he says RSX should be based on a PC part.

Some people, lately, are expecting something else but the G70 architecure + FlexIO (Which is powerful as it is) for RSX because it's not yet in production. The thing is nothing corroborate theses specualtions (no rumors, no hearsay, nothing).

Dave isn't talking about efficiency or power of the chip, just about the fact that the latest forum talk about RSX are surely nothing but bunk.

You aren't Dave?

Few things to note.
Someone disgreeing with you is not necessarily a Fan-person, especially in this forum, and especially the person you singled-out.

It's great to have knowleagable folks who do reality checks in the middle of too speculative threads at times.

 

[Farid]

it's pretty obvious he is comparing the GPU's, and he believes that in the long Run, Xenos will have more legs than the RSX.

No, he isn't.

He just stated that RSX wasn't something different than what can be found in the PC space. Let's not put words in the mouth of people.

 

[Brimstone]

I just have a hard time believing that the RSX is the G70 with FlexIO. Months after the nVidia contract came to light, it was revealed Sony was paying for 100 Transmeta engineers to put Longrun2 technology into CELL. After all the time and money invested in the Playstation 3 platform, I hardly think Kutaragi balked at the chance to get a nVidia designed/targeted GPU for the 2006 timeframe.

 

[nelg]

Is there anything better about a non-unified design that makes it better suited for the desktop compared to a unified one without edram?

 

[Geo]

Good thread to bookmark and come back to laugh at *people in a few months. But right now, that's about it.



*Which people will get laughed at, time will tell.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Dave isn't talking about efficiency or power of the chip, just about the fact that the latest forum talk about RSX are surely nothing but bunk.

Plus the fact that the mentality displayed by many in these types of thread stiffles any reasonable discorse.

After all the time and money invested in the Playstation 3 platform, I hardly think Kutaragi balked at the chance to get a nVidia designed/targeted GPU for the 2006 timeframe.

Sony aren't the only ones in this deal though. Consider, as well, what NVIDIA's aims were and what they were willing to offer, especially in light of the work they put into the original XBox prior to its release and what they consider were the ramifications

Is there anything better about a non-unified design that makes it better suited for the desktop compared to a unified one without edram?

Well, personally I would have felt that a unified design would work great with Cell given the likely capabilities it has for pushing poly's, probably far more so than the XCPU. That scenario would work well because developers could choose where to devote the geometry processing (Cell, part Cell part graphics, or all graphics) without necessarily wasting any of the processing resources on the graphics chip.

 

[Nicked]

Really, what Dave is trying to say, is that Huddy has a point when he says RSX should be based on a PC part.

Some people, lately, are expecting something else but the G70 architecure + FlexIO (Which is powerful as it is) for RSX because it's not yet in production. The thing is nothing corroborate theses specualtions (no rumors, no hearsay, nothing).

Well yeah, but based on is not the same thing as essentially. I'm sure its very strongly rooted in G70 architecture, in fact its a given right now...

Dave isn't talking about efficiency or power of the chip, just about the fact that the latest forum talk about RSX are surely nothing but bunk.

...but there is nothing to say thats it.

Few things to note.
Someone disgreeing with you is not necessarily a Fan-person, especially in this forum, and especially the person you singled-out.

It's great to have knowleagable folks who do reality checks in the middle of too speculative threads at times.

Well, that was more of a tongue-in-cheek comment on his close relationship to ATi (and seeming liking for them in posts), than on any PS3 vs. X360 business.

I will say I think there are few unbiased posters on this (or any) forum, and personally I see nothing wrong with that as long as the messages posted provoke thought and discussion rather than mindless corporate circle-jerking drivel.

 

[Fafalada]

Considering how close Xenos is to DX10 GPUs, Xenos v RSX is looking just like R300 versus NV20.

Given how well a Voodoo1 and Alladin7 held their own against NV27.5 this console generation (and with less then half the memory to boot), that looks like a very irellevant difference.

 

[one]

Curiously I would suggest that the “meatâ€￾ of his argument, given that it was the largest part of that copied text, was him saying that fundamentally RSX is not a custom design, unlike Xenos, hence not as tailored to the specific needs of a console as theirs is. In his reasoning for saying that he is also making several other assertions, such as this was a last minute switch, RSX isn’t fundamentally different from the PC design, further suggesting that isn’t fundamentally different from a GTX and what that encompasses.

If I were one of the ******s in this thread these are actually the issues that I would want addressed in order to gain a little more understanding about RSX, rather than joining in on the mob mentality.

So, ah, let me paraphrase it on behalf of ATI:

Xbox 1 GPU (XGPU) is an unrefined, PC-part-bolted design, while GameCube Flipper is a bizarre, customized design.

 

[Kanyamagufa]

Was Sony caught off guard by the X360 in someway? Were they planning to use nVidia for the PS3's GPU from the start of it's development?

I hate to ask more questions before others are answered, but maybe we need to look a little farther back to get some answers.

 

[Metal]

I'm not going to take any comment from ATI serious about the competition's product, just as I don't take anything vice versa serious either. However, the statements he makes about the GPU in the Xbox 360 specifically are exactly correct. It's not a GPU they would put in a PC at this time, it's not a GPU that was designed to just be as powerful as hell regardless of costs, and it's just a different beast that's going to take some time for developers to truly understand how to make games for it. Can Sony claim that from their final GPU. All signs point to no that I've seen, but I'm willing to wait until I learn more about it before passing judgement on it. My comment has nothing to do with power. It's about the relationship between costs, being a console specific design, and development difficulty curve with the GPU.