New PowerVR demos

Two texture stages as well, isn't that the same as a TNT ?

 

While EMBM was exposed through the DX6 API, it wasn't required for compliance with the API.

 

Please direct me to the document that defines what features are required for "compliance with the API".

 

An example for DirectX9:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/graphics/hh/graphics/d3d_4bhj.asp

 

These are not hardware features but required entry points for functions or caps in order for the drivers to be loaded as DX9 drivers, i.e. not going through the runtime translation path when DX7 or DX8 drivers are used.

My point is that there is no clear definitition of the DX "level" of a particular 3D chipset.

 

Enough of this bickerin. What I want to know is, why does the coffee machine in building 3 gives you milk when you ask for sugar? I'm convinced its some kind of plot, yes definitley a plot, just have no idea what kind of plot, and I'm not talking about the kind of plot that you grow cabbages on, you know the type with the small shed in one corner and a heap of something steaming in the other. Hmm, maybe I should have stayed down the pub...

 

Because it was made by "The Sirius Cybernetics Corporation" and it has analysed your tastebuds etc etc etc,

Actually, our coffee machines do produce reasonable filter coffee - provided you add milk from the fridge rather than take the option for the powdered muck.

They are - you could crash the previous model by pressing interesting combinations of buttons!

 

I wondered who kept doing that! Do you also have a hobby that involves filling up the drip tray?

 

Its pixel and vertex shader 3.0 not 2.0 FYI.

But to answer your question. Think about it for a moment, they didn't release ps/vs 3.0 demo's for Kyro right?.. so why else would they release them? They released them to get people talking about next gen PowerVR GPU's supporting ps/vs 3.0. After all they're not going to develop these demo's on ATI or Nvidia's cards (they couldn't if they wanted too). So that gets people thinking "they must have developed them of there own pixel shader/vertex shader 3.0 hardware". They also want people to think "they're releasing the new demo's.. they must be doing that to get ready for reviews of there new hardware". Basically its a subtle PR excercise.

 

I've just been looking at some old PowerVR demos on my 9700 Pro cat 3.8. In the Temple Demo (1.0.6) the fire in the bowls is not rendered correctly. And the wall is unlit.

Hope the images aren't too big.

9700


Kyro

 

There are other possible scenarios.
Since they are an IP company, they publicly announce when their designs are liscensed. As with the Series4, and the MBX so far, they announce the deals they strike, and the licensee may or may not use the IP to build a physical part.

There has been no licensee announced for the Series5 apart from STM back in 2001. STM subsequently cancelled the Series4, and buried the mobile gaming platform. I quote from their 2002 press-release:

To my knowledge, no buyer was ever found.

At that point the Series5 was, in all likelyhood, well underway and PowerVR continued development of the part. No new licensee has presented iteself however, and so now they try to get what they can out of their effort. Publishing papers and giving talks on PS/VS 3.0 techniques as well as releasing demos serves to keep them on the map as 3D-gfx development house. It also serves the purpose of letting their engineers present themselves and their work and gain a bit of peer recognition.
So while "a subtle PR excercise" might well be a good description, it might just as well describe actions taken due to the absense of enterprising licensees for the Series5. Since they have no current hardware on the market, they can do this without detracting attention from existing offerings.

Is this scenario less likely than the one you paint?

 

Not really because your scenario isn't actually contradictory to what I said, since I didn't actually comment on the state of Series 5 ect. I said they have released the demo's to make people think "this must have been developed on PowerVR Series 5" and "they must be releasing the demo's to get ready for reviews of PowerVR Series 5". So I didn't say either was the case, I said it could have been done to give people that impression. In your own words they've released them to keep themselves on the GPU map, a PR excercise as I said.

Regarding the scenario you suggested. Well I haven't had my finger on the pulse of all things PowerVR for a while now, so I don't know. But I doubt its quite as bleek as you suggest. I don't think they have neccesarily given up on Series 5 just because they don't have an announced partner yet. I mean there's no rule that a new partner has to be announced straight away is there? Even if they actually don't have a partner yet, if the hardware is PS/VS 3.0 then they may still have a bit of time yet (since ATI and Nvidia don't have fully announced PS/VS 3.0 hardware yet either).

 

Wouldn't know about that. They sell IP, and I'd assume that they would announce a sale. I can't see how they could avoid mentioning it at stockholder conference calls for instance. But they're British, and corporate law might be different there.

I hope the Series5, if it isn't produced, at least gets the public airing the Series4 never got. From the perspective of the technologically interested, that was pretty frustrating. Not only could I not buy it, I never got to know what I had missed. Would be a pity if the Series5 met the same fate of total obscurity.

 

Unfortunately I don't think we'll hear anything about Series 5 (unless someone leaks the info years from now) if it is never released. As you say we didn't hear anything about Series 4, so I don't see why IMGTEC would tell us about Series 5 either.

I'd also like to know exactly what Series 4 was. I'd heard a decent amount of info on Series 4 and I'd like to know how much of that was correct

 

I think it's also possible, that PowerVR already has a partner for Series 5 but this Partner doesn't want to be mentioned till Series 5 ist ready. Or perhaps there could be a possible Partner who's interessted in Series 5 but first want's to see Series 5 in action. As i think John Metcalfe (PowerVR) said (don't remember his words exactly) : "Possible IP-partners today don't want to see chips on paper, but silicon." (in a powerpoint presentation of a ImgTec Preliminary Results Report earlier this year i remember ImgTec saying that one possible Partner is interessted in Series 5 but on contract yet - don't remebmer the link sorry)
So everything is possible. We'll have to wait and see....

CU ActionNews

 

Its a bit of a blanket statement, but this was in Img's interim results statement today: