Chaperone

I don't get it why a "Chaperone" would be a good name for PS3 GPU :?
It's not there to "chaperone" anything. A "Chaperone" would be more suitable name to something like a SPU that is dedicated to DRM, One of the (eight) SPU's that is solely reserved for DRM and "keeping the system healthy".

A PS3 GPU would be named something like..... "Genesis" :LOL:
 
Jaws said:
It would make more sense just to keep 'NV'! ;)
NVIDIA no longer have just a single product line. Their nForce codenames are prefixed C (for chipset), it makes sense that their GeForce codenames be prefixed G (for graphics).
 
rabidrabbit said:
I don't get it why a "Chaperone" would be a good name for PS3 GPU :?
It's not there to "chaperone" anything. A "Chaperone" would be more suitable name to something like a SPU that is dedicated to DRM, One of the (eight) SPU's that is solely reserved for DRM and "keeping the system healthy".

A PS3 GPU would be named something like..... "Genesis" :LOL:

We have no idea really what Chaperone is in this thread. Just SPAM Dave to get some more info! :p ...Or make a Voodoo Dave Doll! :p

However,

...Since the environment of the cell is characterized by hydrophilic groups (mostly water), incompletely folded proteins or misfolded proteins with exposed hydrophobic groups have a tendency to aggregate. This aggregation is extremely detrimental to the cell, and chaperones help to prevent this by providing encapsulated hydrophobic environments that allow the protein to properly fold.
...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaperone

You can also infer from that link, 'protein folding' to imply 'folding@home' distributed computing. Perhaps distributed rendering/computing for 'CyberWorld'! ;)

Who knows...my advice is SPAM Dave! :p
 
4Ghz Cell CPU + NV GPU + lots of active cooling.

PS3: Leaf blower edition.

Manual: Please make sure the console is bolted down securely; we take no responsibility for the console flying around the room.
 
Fodder said:
Jaws said:
It would make more sense just to keep 'NV'! ;)
NVIDIA no longer have just a single product line. Their nForce codenames are prefixed C (for chipset), it makes sense that their GeForce codenames be prefixed G (for graphics).

Okay but in that sense, it makes sense *not* to keep NV, but change NV so that it's something else. Like NVc, NVg, NVm etc...there are plenty of options.

But who knows what 'G' really means...it makes sense to me to fuel Gigapixel which is as good as any! :p
 
Jaws said:
Fodder said:
Jaws said:
It would make more sense just to keep 'NV'! ;)
NVIDIA no longer have just a single product line. Their nForce codenames are prefixed C (for chipset), it makes sense that their GeForce codenames be prefixed G (for graphics).

Okay but in that sense, it makes sense *not* to keep NV, but change NV so that it's something else. Like NVc, NVg, NVm etc...there are plenty of options.

But who knows what 'G' really means...it makes sense to me to fuel Gigapixel which is as good as any! :p

I would think G is for "Graphics" instead of that dead horse that is Gigapixel but what do i know... :p
 
london-boy said:
Jaws said:
Fodder said:
Jaws said:
It would make more sense just to keep 'NV'! ;)
NVIDIA no longer have just a single product line. Their nForce codenames are prefixed C (for chipset), it makes sense that their GeForce codenames be prefixed G (for graphics).

Okay but in that sense, it makes sense *not* to keep NV, but change NV so that it's something else. Like NVc, NVg, NVm etc...there are plenty of options.

But who knows what 'G' really means...it makes sense to me to fuel Gigapixel which is as good as any! :p

I would think G is for "Graphics" instead of that dead horse that is Gigapixel but what do i know... :p

Hehe...but anyway *all* this speculation is 'coz Dave is spamming his own board and will not *confirm* anything... ;)
 
Jaws said:
london-boy said:
Jaws said:
Fodder said:
Jaws said:
It would make more sense just to keep 'NV'! ;)
NVIDIA no longer have just a single product line. Their nForce codenames are prefixed C (for chipset), it makes sense that their GeForce codenames be prefixed G (for graphics).

Okay but in that sense, it makes sense *not* to keep NV, but change NV so that it's something else. Like NVc, NVg, NVm etc...there are plenty of options.

But who knows what 'G' really means...it makes sense to me to fuel Gigapixel which is as good as any! :p

I would think G is for "Graphics" instead of that dead horse that is Gigapixel but what do i know... :p

Hehe...but anyway *all* this speculation is 'coz Dave is spamming his own board and will not *confirm* anything... ;)

I mean... i'd think it means "Google" before i think about freaking "Gigapixel"... :devilish:
 
london-boy said:
Jaws said:
london-boy said:
Jaws said:
Fodder said:
Jaws said:
It would make more sense just to keep 'NV'! ;)
NVIDIA no longer have just a single product line. Their nForce codenames are prefixed C (for chipset), it makes sense that their GeForce codenames be prefixed G (for graphics).

Okay but in that sense, it makes sense *not* to keep NV, but change NV so that it's something else. Like NVc, NVg, NVm etc...there are plenty of options.

But who knows what 'G' really means...it makes sense to me to fuel Gigapixel which is as good as any! :p

I would think G is for "Graphics" instead of that dead horse that is Gigapixel but what do i know... :p

Hehe...but anyway *all* this speculation is 'coz Dave is spamming his own board and will not *confirm* anything... ;)

I mean... i'd think it means "Google" before i think about freaking "Gigapixel"... :devilish:

Read the whole thread L-B! :p ...There's a series of posts from page1 that lead to that 'G' for GigaPixel on page2-3... ;)

However, if asked without context, I'd say *G* spot was first to mind... :devilish:
 
london-boy said:
Jaws said:
However, if asked without context, I'd say *G* spot was first to mind... :devilish:

:LOL: Imagine the adverts:

Hit all the right spots with NVIDIA...

Hehe...this thread is on it's way to being locked now! :p ...And without Dave saying f*ck all on what Chaperone is! :(
 
london-boy said:
Well the thing is that it's hard to stay on topic when there is no topic! :devilish:

I conclude then from BS logic that all the speculation in this thread is *correct* 'coz Dave would only step in if we're *off* topic! :p
 
Jaws said:
rabidrabbit said:
I don't get it why a "Chaperone" would be a good name for PS3 GPU :?
It's not there to "chaperone" anything. A "Chaperone" would be more suitable name to something like a SPU that is dedicated to DRM, One of the (eight) SPU's that is solely reserved for DRM and "keeping the system healthy".

A PS3 GPU would be named something like..... "Genesis" :LOL:

We have no idea really what Chaperone is in this thread. Just SPAM Dave to get some more info! :p ...Or make a Voodoo Dave Doll! :p

However,

...Since the environment of the cell is characterized by hydrophilic groups (mostly water), incompletely folded proteins or misfolded proteins with exposed hydrophobic groups have a tendency to aggregate. This aggregation is extremely detrimental to the cell, and chaperones help to prevent this by providing encapsulated hydrophobic environments that allow the protein to properly fold.
...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaperone

You can also infer from that link, 'protein folding' to imply 'folding@home' distributed computing. Perhaps distributed rendering/computing for 'CyberWorld'! ;)

Who knows...my advice is SPAM Dave! :p
Doube D said:
if i remember bio 101, chaperones are proteins which help other proteins do a variety of tasks in cells (including and most notably folding properly into their tertiary forms). :)
[source: http://www.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=43842 ]
 
nAo, Jaws - I can't believe I'm hearing things from you guys like 'it was rumored Sony and NVidia started working together years ago...'! Rumored nothing! :)

Here's the link to the David Roman interview, and here's the relevent portion of said interview:

*dated Jan 17 2005*

Anna (X-bit labs): As far as I know NVIDIA may claim that there was not that much investment into the RND: only about 50 engineers. Is this the result of the fact that Sony’s own engineers contributed to the development of the GPU in a significant way?

David Roman: We do not disclose anything on the actual resources. Obviously there is a major economy of scale. This chip is a custom version of our next generation GPU. So we’ve been working on the next generation GPU for close to two years now, namely about 18 months. I don’t know the cost of this one but I know the cost of the last generation: it was 350 million dollars. These are expensive chips to develop. So, the fact that we didn’t have to do that development just for the Sony application obviously is a major economy of scale, because we are doing the development for the new chip anyway. The amount of work involved into customization, I don’t know. I know that we designed a new generic team, we had been working with Sony before on the actual development platform, we had actually been working on the details of the chip. We now have assigned an engineering team to work as a Sony engineering team. And the numbers? I don’t know what the numbers are but I am sure they are growing, but there is a lot of work that’s going on. As I have said we do not disclose the details, but there is certainly some economy of scale due to building it on the technology that we have been working on for a long time. So, it is the next generation of GPU.

EDIT - sorry nAo and Jaws! The article's focus on the PS3 had me reading too much into Roman's responses
 
That interview quote doesn't prove anything. The real question is when did the meat of the development start. They could have been working with Sony for a couple of years on the high level architecture and working out a contract, but until that contract was signed they probably didn't put a lot of resources on the project. It's not impossible just unlikely as doing so would have been a big risk should the contract fall through.
 
3dcgi said:
That interview quote doesn't prove anything. The real question is when did the meat of the development start. They could have been working with Sony for a couple of years on the high level architecture and working out a contract, but until that contract was signed they probably didn't put a lot of resources on the project. It's not impossible just unlikely as doing so would have been a big risk should the contract fall through.

True - after re-reading it I see they're really only talking about having worked on the next-gen GPU for ~2 years, and not the PS3 version specifically. I've read this article like twenty times for different reasons; it's funny how sometimes you miss little details right in front of your face.

I remember a year or two ago, 2003 I think, financial news and other rumors talking about NVidia approaching Sony with a proposal for the PS3 GPU; I haven't searched for this in forever, and don't know if it would be easily found - but if one were able to find that article, it might lend insight into when the relationship between Sony and NVidia may have started.

I'll spend some time searching when free moments present themselves.
 
3dcgi said:
That interview quote doesn't prove anything. The real question is when did the meat of the development start. They could have been working with Sony for a couple of years on the high level architecture and working out a contract, but until that contract was signed they probably didn't put a lot of resources on the project. It's not impossible just unlikely as doing so would have been a big risk should the contract fall through.
I think that interview suggests though that nothing is being lost in the development process since the R&D is being shared with the PC part. So those 50 engineers are really part of a larger corps of engineers. And if the change in naming convention suggests a revolutionary product design, then maybe it's the PS3 that's wagging the dog, and not the other way around. PEACE.
 
One thing is fairly certain:

PS3 GPU is going to have alot of SGI / 3Dfx / GigaPixel / Nvidia and other technologies in it. itshould be such a huge difference in appearance and 'look' compared to PS1 and PS2. the PS2 rasterizer was basicly a super glorified PS1 GPU with eDRAM and some features. the 3rd Playstation console is getting so much SGI/PC graphics heritage in its rendering pipeline, compared to PS1, PS2 and even the fairly modern PSP.
 
Back
Top