Dreamcast-on-a-chip isn't something new -some points to make

[Megadrive1988]

sorry if this was already mentioned (and I probably mentioned it myself in another thread awhile back.... the Dreamcast-on-a-chip is not a new thing.

the original Dreamcast-A-On-Chip is almost 5 years old. Sega themselves announced it, if I recall. It was to be used in PC cards, to provide Dreamcast compatibility with PCs, set-top boxes (including the PACE stb), as well as other devices, like DVD players, probably for televisions, and also probably to reduce the price of dedicated Dreamcast consoles.

it was announced back in 2000.


http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.games.video.sega/msg/d212e3dc11d99b6d?dmode=source
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000

"Steps Sega will take to expand its business include: minimize the
Dreamcast architecture to a single chip, provide the Dreamcast
architecture for manufacturers of Wireless devices, PCs and Set Top
Boxes, promote Dreamcast as a network content technology and supply
Dreamcast network content to appropriate amusement businesses."

http://www.google.ca/groups?selm=8tuqip$i50$1@nnrp1.deja.com&output=gplain
(IGN link isnt working)

http://dreamcast.ign.com/news/27170.html

The news stories about Sega developing for other
CONSOLES is due to bad translation/misinterpretation.

Sega has announced that they intend to develop for
other PLATFORMS. This means Cell Phones, PDAs, and
other DC licensed technology (e.g. DC compatable PC
cards).

Far from abandoning the Dreamcast, Sega's trying to
expand it by licensing its technology. Their goal
is to squeeze its architecture onto a single chip,
so it can fit in cell phones and PDAs.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.games.video.sony/msg/0664a8081f10b1ea?dmode=source

Rather than abandoning the DC and going cross-platform, Sega's trying
to make the DC more ubiquitous by shrinking it down to a single chip that
can be inexpensively offered to companies making DVD players, set-top
boxes, PDA, and wireless phones. Sega intends to sell the hardware at or
near cost and reap the benefits of this as a content provider. Sega will
be able to release the same game (sometimes in stripped-down forms
depending on the device) in arcades, on the Dreamcast, and for a myriad of other devices. It will make Sega's existing game development investments far more lucrative. Someone getting a Dreamcast-enabled device for the first time will be interested in many of Sega's DC classics (Crazy Taxi anyone?) that most DC owners aren't interested in or already own.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.games.video.sega/msg/9e6518de8f2e62d5?dmode=source

Apparently, Sega`s Dreamcast-on-a-chip is a living, breathing reality. In
case you hadn`t heard the rumours, Sega were allegedly planning to launch Dreamcast upgrade cards for personal computers, enabling PC gamers to play the DC`s wide range of games.

Now, officially, two products, the first of which is an internal card, which
plugs into desktop machines will accompany its external USB/Parallel
brother, are being readied for release. At present, the price for these
machines is expected to be around $100, which is something of a bargain. On top of all this, Sega are working with an as yet unnamed manufacturer to implement Dreamcast functionality in a digital set-top box.

Also, something I wanted to bring up - the new so-called Dreamcast-on-a-chip by Renesas, I have not seen any evidence that it is a real Dreamcast on a chip. It does not have the same PowerVR core as Dreamcast, the PowerVR2DC aka CLX2. the Renesas chip contains an MBX variant. It is doubtful that this core as the exact same features as PowerVR2DC / CLX2. and also, it probably does not contain the Dreamcast's Yamaha audio sub-system, which the original Dreamcast-on-a-chip probably had.

so as far as I am concerned, the only true Dreamcast-on-a-chip is the old one announced about 4 and 1/2 years ago. the ultimate proof of that would be Renesas' so called Dreamcast on a chip, the SH3707, I will bet you that it could *not* run Dreamcast software now, could Dreamcast games be ported to the Renesas chip easily? sure, I don't see why not. but that is different from compatibility.

Lazy8s, or anyone else, do you guys have any objections to what I've said? I'm keeping my mind open, because I could be wrong.

 

[Lazy8s]

You nailed it. I had to make the same clarification to myself back when Renesas's SH3707 SoC was announced because of the confusion over whether the term "Dreamcast-on-a-chip" was just being used for familiarity to a general audience or whether the chip actually had some compatibility. Discussed it in this thread:
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=413129&highlight=dreamcastonachip+mbx#413129

MBX's functionality is actually from the Series3 generation.

 

[Megadrive1988]

cool. I was about to read that entire thread.


and also I just got finished reading this entire thread the main thread on the subject, and I did not see any clarification in there (i was specifically looking to see if I had posted anything myself there)



it would be facinating to find information on the specific chip that really was a Dreamcast-on-a-chip. It was said back then, that it included the two main chip, the SH-4 and the PowerVR2DC, but *maybe* the Dreamcast Yamaha/ARM audio chip/chipset as well, but that was not confirmed, IIRC. it would be nice to find out the actual name/number of Sega's DCOAC.

edit: ahh, here is a little tidbit from an IGNDC article, November 1, 2000:

http://dreamcast.ign.com/articles/087/087172p1.html

We've also heard a few specifics regarding Sega's plans to shrink Dreamcast technology enough so that cell phones and PDAs can play Online Dreamcast games. Sega hopes to place the entire Dreamcast format onto a single chip, and is examining the possibility of using 0.15 and 0.13 micron fabrication processes in order to do so (currently, the Dreamcast graphics chip is manufactured through a .25micron process).

 

[one]

Why is it necessarily related to SEGA? Rather it looks like Renesas's business.

 

[Lazy8s]

The SH4 + PVR2DC Dreamcast-on-a-chip is a Sega Sammy product, and Renesas's SH3707 is also for Sega Sammy for their Aurora system.

 

[TEXAN]

Frpm what I have seen of the Aurora, the system completely and utterly destroys the PSP.

SEGA SAMMY mustn't hesistate to take this opportunity to release it for a $130-$150 price point and completely take over the entire scene.

 

[Megadrive1988]

Frpm what I have seen of the Aurora, the system completely and utterly destroys the PSP.

SEGA SAMMY mustn't hesistate to take this opportunity to release it for a $130-$150 price point and completely take over the entire scene.

I don't believe that. since the specs are well below that of the PSP. image quality wise, I could believe that Aurora is better than PSP, though.

 

[jvd]

are they really ? only thing i notice being really low is the polygon count . Other than that it looks like its better than the psp in every other catagory and should be capable of fsaa for free

 

[amk]

are they really ? only thing i notice being really low is the polygon count . Other than that it looks like its better than the psp in every other catagory and should be capable of fsaa for free

Which figures for polygon count are you comparing? PSP is claimed >30 million peak, with 3 million estimated for sustained performance. SH3707 claims 10 million - whether peak or sustained is not stated. For MBX at 120MHz, 2.5 million sustained is quoted around the place - so I'd say polygon counts were similar.

Oh and the PowerVR Press Release concerning the Pace with DC SOC. Seems to have died on its arse.

 

[jvd]

I didn't know the sustained polygon performance of the psp , so i was just going with a third of the maximum haha so yea i guess they are pretty much equal in polygon counts

 

[Fafalada]

I didn't know the sustained polygon performance of the psp , so i was just going with a third of the maximum haha so yea i guess they are pretty much equal in polygon counts

Yep that's how benchmarking should always be done.
Take a fictional estimation for one hw and a hearsay 'realworld' figure for the other and you've got the perfect apples to apples comparison with rocksolid, factual figures.

 

[jvd]

hehe well fal to be fair i still don't know the sustained rate that the cpu they are using can sustain , 10mpps for the cpu isn't siad to be either .

 

[Fafalada]

Well you're trying to compare a chip to software runing on a system to begin with. Even if you had reliable info, that would still be pretty pointless.

And playing these numbers games - PSP CPU is quite capable of manhandling 10-20MPP/s on its own, though it will rarely be used for that.

 

[PC-Engine]

SH-4@200MHz = 10 million raw polys/sec

SH-4@400MHz = 20 million raw polys/sec

Considering games like Shenmue, SC, DOAII, Virtua Tennis, NFL2Kx is running on the 200MHz SH-4, I'd say a DC on a chip blows away PSP chipset.

 

[Lazy8s]

Sustained figures were released for Aurora: 5M to 6M-tri/sec, characterized as around twice the rate of Dreamcast and set-up limited.

If the SH4's T&L scaled linearly in this 300-MHz version like the FLOPS and MIPS did, its peak would be well over 15M-verts/sec, though the report stated something like 10M to 13M.

 

[Lazy8s]

... The VGP would be offloading the T&L, of course. It contributes more than 0.6 GFLOPS extra performance to the system.

 

[jvd]

Well you're trying to compare a chip to software runing on a system to begin with. Even if you had reliable info, that would still be pretty pointless.

And playing these numbers games - PSP CPU is quite capable of manhandling 10-20MPP/s on its own, though it will rarely be used for that.

as allways thanks for the insite fafalada , its how I learn Through making a fool of myself and far smarter people correcting me