Nintendo's Revolution to use MoSys 1T-SRAM

Status
Not open for further replies.

Li Mu Bai

Regular
NEC had a definite hand in this, dating back to March. Since Nintendo & NEC are jontly designing the system LSI, perhaps they influnced Nintendo somewhat? Regardless, we do not know if it's simply for the embedding process, or for the main pool in its entirety. Given that heat destroys the usefulness of on-chip e-DRAM, & 1T-SRAM chips can reduce power consumption to one-fourth of traditional SRAM.


NEC Electronics Embeds MoSys' 1T-SRAM Memory Technology in 90nm Custom ASIC; Companies Extend Agreement To Use 1T-SRAM In Upcoming Consumer Applications

SUNNYVALE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 24, 2005--MoSys, Inc. (Nasdaq:MOSY), the industry's leading provider of high-density system-on-chip (SoC) embedded memory solutions announced today the renewal of the existing partnership with NEC Electronics to incorporate MoSys' 1T-SRAM(R) technologies into high volume semiconductor devices for consumer applications manufactured on NEC Electronics' 90nm process generation.

"Since the commencement of our original licensing agreement in March 1999, NEC Electronics has successfully deployed MoSys' 1T-SRAM because of its unique combination of performance, density and power capabilities not available from any other competing memory technologies," said Tom Nukiyama, senior technical director at NEC Electronics America. "We now look to extend our relationship with MoSys to jointly offer our ASIC customers requiring large quantities of high-performance embedded memory a compelling solution to enhance their consumer electronics SoC designs. The manufacturability of 1T-SRAM memory makes it the ideal technology for reducing costs and increasing quality, which is why, at the end of the day, we see it as the ultimate drop-in memory solution."

"We are pleased that NEC Electronics will continue to use our 1T-SRAM embedded memory technologies on even more aggressive processes," said Karen Lamar, vice president of Sales and Marketing at MoSys, Inc. "This combination of our unique memory architecture and NEC Electronics' most advanced semiconductor fabrication technology provides SoC designers with tremendous capability for their next generation of highly-integrated products."

IGN: May 10, 2005 - Memory maker MoSys Inc. today announced its first quarter 2005 earnings. In a live conference call with investors and media the company's CEO and chief financial officer Mark Voll stated that MoSys would once again be supplying an embedded 1T-SRAM solution for Nintendo's forthcoming console, codenamed Revolution. He also revealed for the first time a general target ship date for the still top-secret next-generation platform.


"During the quarter we announced that NEC Electronics will now use our 1T-SRAM embedded memory technologies on their advanced 90nm process, and that the initial designs to be incorporated in SoCs will be used in Nintendo's next-generation game console, codenamed Revolution," said Voll. "We are excited to be a participating member of the Nintendo team once again as Nintendo will roll out its successor game console to the GameCube in mid-2006."
The news is exciting for two reasons: first, it's official word that Revolution will again use 1T-SRAM, the same memory standard that GameCube utilized with great results. 1T-SRAM provides significant advantages over traditional SRAM in density, power consumption and cost, according to maker MoSys. "Instead of six transistors utilized in a traditional SRAM storage cell, each 1T-SRAM storage cell contains only one transistor and one capacitor, thus reducing the silicon required and lowering cost. This technology has been proven with the shipment of millions of devices," MoSys writes on the subject.

MoSys did not reveal how much memory it would provide for Revolution

Whether either scenario is true, the breakdown of their respective random access cycle times:

GDDR3=2ns
MoSys IT-SRAM=sub 3ns
XDR DRAM=?

Find ths for me as I'm too lazy to look, & have forgotten.
 
Any DRAM - GDDR or not - does not have 2ns access times. It's much MUCH higher than that. If it actually was 2ns, we'd barely need any cache at all on our CPUs. :D
 
Guden Oden said:
Any DRAM - GDDR or not - does not have 2ns access times. It's much MUCH higher than that. If it actually was 2ns, we'd barely need any cache at all on our CPUs. :D

"Both graphics cards are equipped with GDDR3 memory in Samsung chips. Each graphics card is equipped with 256MB of memory. However, RADEON X800 XT Platinum Edition boasts memory with 1.6ns access time, which can work at up to 600MHz (1200MHz DDR) frequency, while RADEON X800 PRO features slower memory with 2ns access time capable of working at the maximum of 500MHz (100MHz DDR)."

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/r420_4.html

Are you sure about that?
 
I thought RAM was in nanoseconds, Cache was in picoseconds. I remember the Amiga used 40-60 ns RAM back in the 80's.
 
Are you sure about that?
Depends what is meant by access time.
From software perspective I would argue it is the time it takes for data to arrive from RAM into processor's local storage/registers.

Afaik, that's usually ~100ns with current Ram solutions (and unless I'm mistaken the Xenon leak implied main memory is around 140ns away from the CPU).
 
a688 said:
... memory with 1.6ns access time...

That's cycle time, not acces time. And considering there is no DRAM device currently with CAS/RAS/... of 1 cycle, you're looking at 3.2ns for just 1 command, which doesn't even get you any data yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top