new (?) Rambus XDR memory and PlayStation 3 information

zidane1strife said:
This isn't ddr400 ram they will be using. This is cutting edge extremely expensive ram. I would wager that 256 megs of 50gb bw ram will be at least 100$-150$ if not more when the ps3 launches .

Uhmmm like I'm speaking japanese or something today? I mean first legion now you, nobody seems to understand what I write.... ahggghhhh... Anyway, I said small pool of expensive stuff, vast pool of ultra cheap ram of less performance, akin to gamecube, but this time with useable ram instead of a-ram.

Again I don't know what tech/cost hurdles such a thing would bring, that's why I'm asking, but if none or little exist, it'd be an adequate solution for providing both high-bandwith and high amounts of ram.

IT would be costly .

THey would either have to do it cpu > fast ram > slow ram and have it go back through which i don't think they can do .

Or have
slow ram
^
cpu > fast ram

Only thing is thats two buses instead of one. THat would increase costs and complexity of the pcb .

Not only that but depending on how slow the slow ram is it may end up being the same thing as vpus having to go to main system ram . Way to slow to be usefull
 
bbot said:
According to the leaked Xenon whitepaper, the aggregate bandwidth of the 256MB of main memory for Xenon is 22.4GB/s. Did Sony see this and decide to boost the memory bandwidth from 25.6MB/s to 51.2MB/s?
If I was designing a console with 25.6GB/s and found out a competitor had 22.4GB/s I wouldn't double my bandwidth. Rather I'd think I made the right decision.
 
3dcgi said:
bbot said:
According to the leaked Xenon whitepaper, the aggregate bandwidth of the 256MB of main memory for Xenon is 22.4GB/s. Did Sony see this and decide to boost the memory bandwidth from 25.6MB/s to 51.2MB/s?
If I was designing a console with 25.6GB/s and found out a competitor had 22.4GB/s I wouldn't double my bandwidth. Rather I'd think I made the right decision.

True, however, the leaked specs could just be bait and if that were the case you wouldn't know whether to stay at 25.6GB/s or double it. If you wanted to be safe then you'd double it. I'm not saying this is indeed the case, just throwing in likely or unlikely possibilties. :)

Then again this is bandwidth we're talking about here, which consumers don't care about. Only the software developers and hardware engineers are concerned with it. Bandwidth will likely be what is needed, not what the competition has. OTOH, memory capacity is another issue which at 128MB isn't really much to be a marketing bulletpoint nor a software developer's wet dream. :LOL:
 
Vince said:
I'm just going out onto the proverbial limb here, but I've become intrigued by the possible duality behind an increase in aggregate external bandwith and the chatter concerning an increase in the BE's logic.

I have the feeling a more fundimental, strategic, change has been occuring; The knee-jerk reaction is something Microsoft would do Bbot.

Are you thinking that this increase in external bandwidth is an indication of eDRAM being dropped with an increase in the number of PUs/ L2 caches, APUs/ SRAM on the BE. :?:
 
If xbox 2 is going to be out 1 or 2 years before ps3, and is less bandwidth reliant, then I'd double my....or should I say sony's bandwidth.
 
Jaws said:
Vince said:
I'm just going out onto the proverbial limb here, but I've become intrigued by the possible duality behind an increase in aggregate external bandwith and the chatter concerning an increase in the BE's logic.

I have the feeling a more fundimental, strategic, change has been occuring; The knee-jerk reaction is something Microsoft would do Bbot.

Are you thinking that this increase in external bandwidth is an indication of eDRAM being dropped with an increase in the number of PUs/ L2 caches, APUs/ SRAM on the BE. :?:


Less eDRAM should result in a higher clocking chip and/or better yields to help lower costs.

This would seem to be a fundamental change to the design. Sony wouldn't just go to it's Rambus XDR manufacturing partners and request a reduction in RAM density because of a claimed leaked document on Xbox 2.
 
Brimstone said:
Jaws said:
Vince said:
I'm just going out onto the proverbial limb here, but I've become intrigued by the possible duality behind an increase in aggregate external bandwith and the chatter concerning an increase in the BE's logic.

I have the feeling a more fundimental, strategic, change has been occuring; The knee-jerk reaction is something Microsoft would do Bbot.

Are you thinking that this increase in external bandwidth is an indication of eDRAM being dropped with an increase in the number of PUs/ L2 caches, APUs/ SRAM on the BE. :?:


Less eDRAM should result in a higher clocking chip and/or better yields to help lower costs.

This would seem to be a fundamental change to the design. Sony wouldn't just go to it's Rambus XDR manufacturing partners and request a reduction in RAM density because of a claimed leaked document on Xbox 2.

Nothing set in the IBM/Sony patents are set in stone, they are all 'preferred embodoments'! ;) The patents have flexibilty for a plan B! :p

I don't think the XB2 specs have anything to do with this. Sony have stated previously that they wiil follow their own agenda and any changes to what we've anticipated (mainly from speculation! ;) ) will likely be from tests/samples from various pre-production options that are currently being evaluted. AFAIK, nothing is in mass production yet for the PS3. Also a change in RAM density to 256Mb chips (but how many, what speeds and pin density?) may not even be for the PS3 but perhaps the Cell workstations due Q4 2004! :p
 
Jaws said:
Brimstone said:
Jaws said:
Vince said:
I'm just going out onto the proverbial limb here, but I've become intrigued by the possible duality behind an increase in aggregate external bandwith and the chatter concerning an increase in the BE's logic.

I have the feeling a more fundimental, strategic, change has been occuring; The knee-jerk reaction is something Microsoft would do Bbot.

Are you thinking that this increase in external bandwidth is an indication of eDRAM being dropped with an increase in the number of PUs/ L2 caches, APUs/ SRAM on the BE. :?:


Less eDRAM should result in a higher clocking chip and/or better yields to help lower costs.

This would seem to be a fundamental change to the design. Sony wouldn't just go to it's Rambus XDR manufacturing partners and request a reduction in RAM density because of a claimed leaked document on Xbox 2.

Nothing set in the IBM/Sony patents are set in stone, they are all 'preferred embodoments'! ;) The patents have flexibilty for a plan B! :p

I don't think the XB2 specs have anything to do with this. Sony have stated previously that they wiil follow their own agenda and any changes to what we've anticipated (mainly from speculation! ;) ) will likely be from tests/samples from various pre-production options that are currently being evaluted. AFAIK, nothing is in mass production yet for the PS3. Also a change in RAM density to 256Mb chips (but how many, what speeds and pin density?) may not even be for the PS3 but perhaps the Cell workstations due Q4 2004! :p


As it stands right now, it looks close to impossible for the PS3 to contain 512 mb of external ram. Although it would cost MS to take advantage of this situation, I don't think they'll hesitate to exploit this by having the XB2 contain half a gig of ram.
 
Brimstone said:
Jaws said:
Brimstone said:
Jaws said:
Vince said:
I'm just going out onto the proverbial limb here, but I've become intrigued by the possible duality behind an increase in aggregate external bandwith and the chatter concerning an increase in the BE's logic.

I have the feeling a more fundimental, strategic, change has been occuring; The knee-jerk reaction is something Microsoft would do Bbot.

Are you thinking that this increase in external bandwidth is an indication of eDRAM being dropped with an increase in the number of PUs/ L2 caches, APUs/ SRAM on the BE. :?:


Less eDRAM should result in a higher clocking chip and/or better yields to help lower costs.

This would seem to be a fundamental change to the design. Sony wouldn't just go to it's Rambus XDR manufacturing partners and request a reduction in RAM density because of a claimed leaked document on Xbox 2.

Nothing set in the IBM/Sony patents are set in stone, they are all 'preferred embodoments'! ;) The patents have flexibilty for a plan B! :p

I don't think the XB2 specs have anything to do with this. Sony have stated previously that they wiil follow their own agenda and any changes to what we've anticipated (mainly from speculation! ;) ) will likely be from tests/samples from various pre-production options that are currently being evaluted. AFAIK, nothing is in mass production yet for the PS3. Also a change in RAM density to 256Mb chips (but how many, what speeds and pin density?) may not even be for the PS3 but perhaps the Cell workstations due Q4 2004! :p


As it stands right now, it looks close to impossible for the PS3 to contain 512 mb of external ram. Although it would cost MS to take advantage of this situation, I don't think they'll hesitate to exploit this by having the XB2 contain half a gig of ram.

M$ could increase the amount of RAM and flex their marketing kudos for XB2 in a similar fashion to the CPU MHz ratings this gen. But if they're releasing before PS3, Sony would be in a position to counter it!

We could always look at the bright side and assume Sony is using the 128MB as a smokescreen...the mind games...you gotta luvit! :D
 
M$ could increase the amount of RAM and flex their marketing kudos for XB2 in a similar fashion to the CPU MHz ratings this gen. But if they're releasing before PS3, Sony would be in a position to counter it!

We could always look at the bright side and assume Sony is using the 128MB as a smokescreen...the mind games...you gotta luvit!

What if we flip that and use the bandwith of ms's ram as a smoke screen. Is that a dark or bright side ?
 
jvd said:
M$ could increase the amount of RAM and flex their marketing kudos for XB2 in a similar fashion to the CPU MHz ratings this gen. But if they're releasing before PS3, Sony would be in a position to counter it!

We could always look at the bright side and assume Sony is using the 128MB as a smokescreen...the mind games...you gotta luvit!

What if we flip that and use the bandwith of ms's ram as a smoke screen. Is that a dark or bright side ?

Well, it would be more easy to MS or Nitendo put more RAM than Sony change the tides of prodution at last minute.
 
pc999 said:
jvd said:
Jaws said:
M$ could increase the amount of RAM and flex their marketing kudos for XB2 in a similar fashion to the CPU MHz ratings this gen. But if they're releasing before PS3, Sony would be in a position to counter it!

We could always look at the bright side and assume Sony is using the 128MB as a smokescreen...the mind games...you gotta luvit!

What if we flip that and use the bandwith of ms's ram as a smoke screen. Is that a dark or bright side ?

Well, it would be more easy to MS or Nitendo put more RAM than Sony change the tides of prodution at last minute.

It could be like a poker game, all three players 'bluffing' each other until the stakes get so high, we get exactly what we want in the end, 1GB XDR @ 102.4 GB/s! :D
 
If we all got what we wanted in the end all the companys would go broke selling us multi gpu configs with 50 cell chips and 50 gigs of ram all for 300$ .
 
jvd said:
If we all got what we wanted in the end all the companys would go broke selling us multi gpu configs with 50 cell chips and 50 gigs of ram all for 300$ .

A minor detail...
 
Jaws said:
jvd said:
If we all got what we wanted in the end all the companys would go broke selling us multi gpu configs with 50 cell chips and 50 gigs of ram all for 300$ .

A minor detail...

well anyway I would say in 2006/7 1024 mbs of 102.4gb/s ram would most likely run over 500$ if not more . Which makes its chances slim to none.


i would expect the buget to be about 200$ for your cpu and gpu , 100$ for ram. then about 100$-150$ for the rest of the components . Making up 450$ cost . Them taking a 150$ loss sounds about right .
 
jvd said:
Jaws said:
jvd said:
If we all got what we wanted in the end all the companys would go broke selling us multi gpu configs with 50 cell chips and 50 gigs of ram all for 300$ .

A minor detail...

well anyway I would say in 2006/7 1024 mbs of 102.4gb/s ram would most likely run over 500$ if not more . Which makes its chances slim to none.


i would expect the buget to be about 200$ for your cpu and gpu , 100$ for ram. then about 100$-150$ for the rest of the components . Making up 450$ cost . Them taking a 150$ loss sounds about right .

The ratio sounds reasonable...that would leave $150 to cram in Blu-ray, a hardisk, comms (wifi, network etc)...other bit 'n' pieces, just about squeeze all that in perhaps! Mind you they'll still flog a multi-tap for $30, a silly stand for $10 and memory sticks for $30 etc...they'll quickly make it back! :p
 
jvd said:
I don't think you will find bluray in the ps3 unless it costs under 20$ a drive

Hmmm...I see a confict in costs between *both* blu-ray and hardisks. I'd rather ditch Blu-ray for the harddisk, but Blu-ray is Sonys little 'trojan horse'! :p
 
Back
Top