New Technical Information About RSX???...But In Japanese

[KOA]

Here's the BADblefish interpretation. Can someone who knows a little more Japanese do better than this?

As for the graphic tip/chip of PS3 as for the NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX base it was widely conveyed, but according to collection of data, as development advances at each studio, filling rate efficiency insufficiency has started being appealed from some of the developers of PS3.

At the beginning, prototype of graphics for PS3 title is made in the PC base and the development studio which has been packed says, performance without occurring to the occasion where it keeps having to the PS3 apparatus, that it was suitable and suffered hardship. On site of each studio, rendering resolution is lowered, passing the デチƒ…ーン process of the specification that, シェーダ is peeled, it kept having in the PS3 apparatus, it seems.

Although it is the same GeForce 7800 based GPU, whether why this kind of thing occurred...... the cause of that is listed about 3.

As for RSX of PS3, although the design says the GeForce 7800 GTX base, as for video memory with 128 bit bus connection to tell the truth the subordinate model 7600 we have become suitable, it is narrow video memory zone (by comparison with 7800 systems). You can think this one of the cause of that.

As for second, the specifications of RSX which is released in 2005, the point which was lowered. Core clock 550MHz, video memory 700MHz it is RSX of PS3 which is published at the time 2005, but with E3 2006 the う っ て changing, that it became "secret", with the final sale model core clock 500MHz, was lowered to video memory 650MHz it has been transmitted.

The fact that 3rd ROP unit is only the half of GeForce 7800 GTX.

RSX are same 24 ピクセルシェーダ as GeForce 7800 system, but really you write the output from here to video memory as the data (pixel is portrayed), "ROP unit" (Rasterize OPeration Unit. Even レンダーバックエンド says), as for RSX are only half 8 bases vis-a-vis being 16 bases of GeForce 7800 type. This exactly GeForce 7600 suitable of the subordinate model has become same. Rather than the stingy っ it is...... with being ROP unit, the video memory bus is decided 128 bits first, this and ROP unit was designated as 8 bases in order balance to do...... with it probably is the feeling which was said.

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/20060925/3d_tgs.htm

 

[blakjedi]

"one" might need to start getting paid for his/her translations...

 

[TurnDragoZeroV2G]

Don't even need to know Japanese.

Core clock: 500MHz (down from previous target of 550MHz)
Memory clock: 650MHz (down from previous target of 700MHz)
8 ROPs (other 8 disabled)
128bit bus to memory
24 pixel shader pipes
G7x (NV47) based, and some people want to parallel it more with a 7600 than a 7800 due to the memory bus and ROPs.

Nothing we didn't already know about there.

 

[babcat]

From what I could make of that translation it does not seem the article is telling us anything new. It's a shame that Kutaragi did not present us with any new information himself. Actually, this article does not have anything very interesting.

 

[KOA]

My Japanese is rough. I haven't touched Japanese since I graduated college. But the gist of it is basically, after the cuts and downgrades (or sacrifices), the RSX performs more like a 7600 GT.

This seems a far cry from the 1.8 "terrorflops" monster that Sony eagerly pimped at E3 2005. They don't even mention it in their marketing anymore. They even go as far as calling Blu-Ray PS3's "graphical heart".

It's as if Sony's embarassed with the RSX's final result.

 

[22psi]

A lil OT, but judging by the gfx so far on some of the games, I don't think the slight downgrade is a problem.

 

[pipo]

They don't even mention it in their marketing anymore.

That was when my Spider sense started tingling. E3. Of course I was a heretic.

It's as if Sony's embarassed with the RSX's final result.

That's pushing it. Maybe some devs have to adopt to it, but I'm still seeing some great stuff on the system.

It's a minor change.

 

[babcat]

These minor changes really don't mean much because we have NEVER been told the internal differences between this GPU and the same PC part. Those are the aspects which will make or break the RSX in a closed system.

 

[DemoCoder]

There's not much point to having more ROPs except perhaps for non-AA z-fill/stencil-fill given memory bandwidth. The theoretical non-AA fillrate is the same as the XB360, 4gpix/s.

 

[Kryton]

I hope this is better, I've tried to reduce the Ingrish.

Initally a prototype of the PS3 title's graphics is produced in a PC development studio which isn't where the problems occur, it is on the PS3 they arise.

Why do these occur if the GPU is a 7800?

The PS3, although quoted as having a 7800 GTX base, has a 128bit bus (more like the 7600)
Secondly, the clock has been lowered
Thirdly, although RSX has 24 pixel shaders you have to write the output to the video memory, due to fewer ROPs this is problematic (again, RSX has 8 compared to 16 in a 7800+, more like the 7600). Sony decided upon a 128bit bus first then picked the 8 ROPs as it was more suitable.

With the ability to target games it doesn't matter too much and, the flip side, is it allows lower power consumption.

Is this actually a developer speaking or a website opinion? The rates make me feel slightly dubious:

For 7800GTX:
Triangle Fill Rate 860M tri/s
Fill Rate 6880M p/s

For RSX:
Triangle Fill Rate 1000M tri/s
Fill Rate 4000M p/s

Does the new Triangle Fill Rate include Cell's contribution?

 

[22psi]

how reliable is this website?

 

[babcat]

What we really need is to get the information strait from Sony, because the rumors are never going to end until that happens.

 

[Carl B]

how reliable is this website?

Never heard of Watch Impress?

 

[TurnDragoZeroV2G]

Does the new Triangle Fill Rate include Cell's contribution?

Looks to be nothing more than triangle transform rate calculated from 8 vertex shaders at a 500MHz clock. Their rate for the 7800GTX, however, is off due to independant clocking of the vertex shaders (IIRC).

 

[KOA]

What we really need is to get the information strait from Sony, because the rumors are never going to end until that happens.

Seriously, do you really want PR banter and smoke and mirrors from Sony? I'd feel better if a third party examined the RSX and reported on it.

I'm sick of PR fluff.

 

[babcat]

Before any third party will have a chance to do proper benchmarks on the RSX Sony will have told us the specifications (hopefully).

I sure wish the NDA's were loosening up so that some of the developers on here could comment.

 

[KOA]

Before any third party will have a chance to do proper benchmarks on the RSX Sony will have told us the specifications (hopefully).

I sure wish the NDA's were loosening up so that some of the developers on here could comment.

Sony did tell us the specifications last year. We know how that ended up. It was damn near propagandish.

 

[Carl B]

KOA stop being angry and just relax for a moment.

Sony gave us what they promised, just 50MHz slower. That's hardly propoganda. Do you think they didn't try to reach that? In fact obviously they could (and did) - it was reaching it within a certain thermal envelope that was the issue.

People (on both sides of the fence) need to gain some perspective here.

 

[Archgamer]

So the only changes to the specs are the core clock speed at 500Mhz and the video memory at 650MHz? That's nothing I should be worried about.

 

[babcat]

Basically, if the RSX has several tweaks that they did not tell us about at E3 of 2005 that could make up for the 50MHz downgrade if one eventually happens.