TSMC was shipping 90nm since the end of 2003. Hardly a similar comparison to 28nm.
Do you think it would be a mistake for MS and/or Sony to launch in 2012?
- Thread starter kagemaru
- Start date
TSMC was shipping 90nm since the end of 2003. Hardly a similar comparison to 28nm.
upnorthsox
Veteran
TSMC 28nm has been in production since 2010.
http://www.tsmc.com/download/brochures/2011_28 Nanometer Process Technology.pdf
http://www.tsmc.com/download/brochures/2011_28 Nanometer Process Technology.pdf
...
I fully expect 28nm GPU's early next year (2012) from Nvidia and AMD.
Do you not?
Last edited by a moderator:
I suppose that will be the turning point then.
If by E3, TSMC doesn't have their act together in producing 28nm high-end GPUs for Nvidia/AMD, then MS/Sony will sit on their hands.
If that is not the case, and TSMC has 28nm in mass production of large complex GPU's shipping by June, I fully expect MS/Sony to announce their new systems and start manufacturing for a release by years end 2012.
I don't think either Sony or MS are sitting on their hands. I don't think they've sat on their hands at any time since the generation began.
The decision on a 2012 release won't be made at E3, it was probably made made in 2010 or earlier.
If the chipset is designed for 28nm, and the node isn't ready for primetime by mid 2012, they can't launch then.
The design can't just be transferred back to 40nm and launch in 2012.
There are other factors at play.
Personally, I think they won't have an issue as the node will be producing large scale GPUs by then.
Correct, they won't need E3 to decide to launch.
What they need is to ensure that the intended manufacturing node for their chipset is viable (as I stated).
I don't believe either one is intending to launch on 40nm. Thus, they won't have designs ready for 40nm.
I believe they both will be targeting 28nm.
Thus, as soon as the manufacturing node is viable, they can proceed with putting their designs to work and start producing the chips.
They may not know for sure until Summer 2012 if the 28nm node is ready. Which is right around the time of the E3 event (a fitting time to announce new gaming hardware as we've seen time and time before).
They can PLAN to be ready to launch 2012, but if they intend to be on a manufacturing node as new as 28nm (critical as it gives the necessary gap between hardware generations to see a notable difference in hardware), then they will need to wait for the process to prove itself viable for the intended purpose.
If they are waiting until summer to decide if they are going to launch next year, they aren't launching next year...
There are significant logistics involved in manufacturing and building up enough inventory so that you can ship a reasonable amount of product to consumers around the world for a launch. It doesn't just take them a month to produce a couple million units.
There are significant logistics involved in manufacturing and building up enough inventory so that you can ship a reasonable amount of product to consumers around the world for a launch. It doesn't just take them a month to produce a couple million units.
...
I don't recall saying anything about it taking a month to produce a couple million units...
But speaking of launch window:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/05/commentary/column_gaming/index.htm?section=money_latest
So lets say they wait for the next major process shrink.
Wouldn't there be another major process shrink on the horizon in 2013 or 2014?
Just like any technology, there is always something better in the wings. It's been 6 years already since the 360 launched?
Is there any doubt that consoles launched in 2012 (with the exception of Nintendo) would get the bulk of the installed base to upgrade or aspire to upgrade?
Or put it another way. Whatever success this generation has attained, wouldn't they have been better off waiting another year instead of launching in 2005/2006?
IOW, it's always going to be the case that waiting another year is going to deliver a better product, whether in 2006 or 2012 or 2013 or 2014.
Wouldn't there be another major process shrink on the horizon in 2013 or 2014?
Just like any technology, there is always something better in the wings. It's been 6 years already since the 360 launched?
Is there any doubt that consoles launched in 2012 (with the exception of Nintendo) would get the bulk of the installed base to upgrade or aspire to upgrade?
Or put it another way. Whatever success this generation has attained, wouldn't they have been better off waiting another year instead of launching in 2005/2006?
IOW, it's always going to be the case that waiting another year is going to deliver a better product, whether in 2006 or 2012 or 2013 or 2014.
for MS there really wasn't an option but to launch in 2005, they needed to EOL the Xbox. It still wasn't profitable, and it was never going to be profitable.
That's from the start of production (meaning the logistics were all in place), not from the day they decided, 'hey lets build a console'. That means they already had working silicon etc. And if MS could, they would not want to have the shortages they had with the 360 at launch, it certainly wasn't an ideal scenario. (and interestingly, 69 days prior to Nov 22nd means they started production before the end of summer)
As I've said multiple times, they can PLAN to launch in 2012, but if the process node that they have PLANNED for isn't ready to produce their product as PLANNED, then they will have to wait for the process to be ready to produce, thus delaying their launch.
They've been planning and designing the nextgen consoles for quite some time now.
EA and Ubi soft have had target dev kits since early this year. By years end, they are expected to have final devkit hardware. Coincidentally, 28nm is just now coming on board.
I fully expect 28nm to not be a problem, but they have plenty of time between now and E3 (typical console unveiling event) to see if the process node is ready for primetime ... as planned, or if they need more time.
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe for Intel if they get really lucky, not for anyone else.
NO!!!
Honestly, no. I wish consoles had a lifespan no more than 4 years tops. I'm starting to hate this trend of PCs getting shoehorned ports of consoles games (poor multithreading coding, lack of GPU configuration settings "IQ-wise", console-ish textures displayed above 720p, etc..) and the poor development support on fixing issues of these poor port over's. I do understand development costs are skyrocketing and the need for reduction of cost across multiplatform titles. However, that's not an excuse for sh**ty plopping of wares across any platform, especially a platform that is superior in many ways.
I figure, if console gaming will be the new de facto for lead platform title development; then the lifespan for these next-gen platforms needs to be shorten. This will force improvements in hardware and software on moving forward towards a better experience. Having the PC IQ fidelity, physics, etc... staggered by console gaming isn't fair at all. Please don't take this as PC-fanboy talk, because it is not. I can honestly say, I own every game console since the late 80s and love console gaming for what it is. I just hate seeing multiplatform titles that I decided on purchasing for my hi-end PCs (higher IQ, better FPS, etc...); just to feel cheated on the lack luster (lazy) port. Just how I feel...
Honestly, no. I wish consoles had a lifespan no more than 4 years tops. I'm starting to hate this trend of PCs getting shoehorned ports of consoles games (poor multithreading coding, lack of GPU configuration settings "IQ-wise", console-ish textures displayed above 720p, etc..) and the poor development support on fixing issues of these poor port over's. I do understand development costs are skyrocketing and the need for reduction of cost across multiplatform titles. However, that's not an excuse for sh**ty plopping of wares across any platform, especially a platform that is superior in many ways.
I figure, if console gaming will be the new de facto for lead platform title development; then the lifespan for these next-gen platforms needs to be shorten. This will force improvements in hardware and software on moving forward towards a better experience. Having the PC IQ fidelity, physics, etc... staggered by console gaming isn't fair at all. Please don't take this as PC-fanboy talk, because it is not. I can honestly say, I own every game console since the late 80s and love console gaming for what it is. I just hate seeing multiplatform titles that I decided on purchasing for my hi-end PCs (higher IQ, better FPS, etc...); just to feel cheated on the lack luster (lazy) port. Just how I feel...
I'm not sure it is fair to say that the consoles are to blame for poor multithreading on the PC. I sometimes even feel that it is the other way around. Don't forget that a lot of stuff still starts out on PC. And also don't forget that while a lot of 'our' PCs are capable of much more than consoles, developers still target much slower PCs to keep their 'installbase' high.
However, yes, if the next console generation comes around, then I do agree that this will benefit PCs insofar as that there will be higher resolution assets available. On the other hand, I can pretty much guarantee that the PC will get more love prior to the launch of the next generation than after, and ever more so the longer the console generation lasts, because some gamers flock back to PC in the last few years of the console generation because of the much better performance available. They generally then migrate back when the next console generation has arrived.
Personally I'd gladly see the next generation at the end of next year. But this thread is about whether it was a mistake for MS or Sony, not about what I want.
However, yes, if the next console generation comes around, then I do agree that this will benefit PCs insofar as that there will be higher resolution assets available. On the other hand, I can pretty much guarantee that the PC will get more love prior to the launch of the next generation than after, and ever more so the longer the console generation lasts, because some gamers flock back to PC in the last few years of the console generation because of the much better performance available. They generally then migrate back when the next console generation has arrived.
Personally I'd gladly see the next generation at the end of next year. But this thread is about whether it was a mistake for MS or Sony, not about what I want.
Didn't the first 90nm gpu based desktop cards release during the same quarter as the launch of the 360 with the X1300 Pro releasing in Oct 05 and the 360 releasing in Nov 05? Didn't Nvidia release its first 90nm gpu based cards in Jan 06?
28nm would have to be delayed past q4 2012 to delay the next Xbox launch unless there is something tremendously wrong with yields even after a delay into q4 2012 to make launching MS's next console too costly for holiday 2012.