Nvidia helping Sony with Graphics synthesizer 3.

[Paul]

I remember reading a few months ago that Nvidia has talked to Sony about "next generation consoles". Now I find out that this talks were indeed about the PS3 rasterizer and Nvidia helping Sony out with it so it doesn't end up to bring PS3 down hardware wise.

Ive also heard people say that the CEO of nvidia even hinted it, well does anyone have a link for any of this? Or know anything, because im interested.

Speaking of this, I think it's a VERY wise move of Sony if it's true. PS3 will need all the good effects xbox2/cube2 will be able to do on top of the already amazing Cell or EE3 or w/e they call it.

Anyone else think this is a good move on sony's part?

 

[zidane1strife]

If true that's inteteresting.... and could mean nvidia and sony might make someone open up their wallet wide open...

 

[Brimstone]

If true, the pressure on Microsoft to produce something in the same league as the PS 3 would be very intense. It does seem kind of convinent that Nvidia is working with IBM now (a close Sony parnter) to produce its GPU's.

 

[jvd]

If true, the pressure on Microsoft to produce something in the same league as the PS 3 would be very intense. It does seem kind of convinent that Nvidia is working with IBM now (a close Sony parnter) to produce its GPU's.

Eh . Ms doesn't seem to care if they loose money on thier hardware so who knows mabye we will see dual r500s or dual power vr chips . Ms can beat sony if they want to spend more money . Thats the way it works .

 

[randycat99]

Eh, so the important thought here is not that a prominent GPU designer may now be helping Sony to make the M.O.A.GPU's, but that M$ will beat $ony at whatever?

 

[Sonic]

That very well may be true. MS can throw so much money at a problem until the money factor just doesn't count much any more. To MS, the gaming industry is just another way for them to make a quick buck and to turn in a profitable revenue stream. They're doing this from the philosophy that they will burn more money at first then reap the benefits later down along the road. There's only so much money that stockholders will allow MS to throw at the industry before they tell the company it's enough. We might see the company make a profit with the Xbox 2, which it intends to do so then MS will start making a return on their investment. Still, Xbox2 should be much more than jut a gaming machine to MS, it should be a gateway to home entertainment.

Sony's spending of money on the PS3 is probably a bit more careful than that of MS's. Sony's next gen plans are probably more crucial and scrutinized than MS's also. The reason I say this is because MS has plenty of funds to keep money coming in. Sony does too, but if the PS2 isn't a success like PSX or PS2 are then that's going to make one massive dent in Sony and seriously hurt the company. It does look as if Sony's made a few investments in the previous years that are going to pay off tremendously in the next gen. Their alliance with Toshiba and IBM are going to make it pretty darn hard to topple the PS2 performance wise. And if this nVidia rumor is true, it only adds more fuel to the ever growing fire that is PS3. If nVidia helped Sony on the rasterizer side of things, and pretty much take out any portion of vertex shaders in the GPU then it could focus much more on the rasterization side making it even more faster. If nVidia has some part in the making of the GS3 I wouldn't be surprised to see 32 pipelines or something along the sorts.

I don't see MS coming up with a more powerful hardware than PS3 in the next generation, even if it launches 6 months later. If they launch a year later then it could probably happen, maybe. I do think the architecture MS comes out with will be much easier to program for and get performance out of.

Anyway, this was all a bit off topic.

Yeah, it would be a great move on Sony's part, but it might also be too late in the game for it to happen. If it's even remotely true, then nVidia will be reaping benefits left and right. I guess we'll see in the near future as info is leaked or spilled if it's all true or not.

 

[Phil]

jvd:

Eh . Ms doesn't seem to care if they loose money on thier hardware so who knows mabye we will see dual r500s or dual power vr chips . Ms can beat sony if they want to spend more money . Thats the way it works .

I disagree. You see, Microsoft may have money to burn, but that does not mean they'll throw money at something that just doesn't want to turn in a profit. Take this generation for an example: Despite the weaker hardware that Sony has this generation, it's still selling an insane amount of more units than anyone could have imagine. Microsoft is basically fighting here with free games and what not to even stay competitive. Even if Xbox 2 will be more powerful than PS3, it will not succeed unless the games are there. IMO, it's going to be pretty hard for Sony not to fail if they do things right, may they have the better hardware or not.

Now, fast forward and take a good look at Microsoft. Knowing that [that Sony will be hard to beat, even with more powerful hardware], do you think Microsoft will just dump money into their hardware hoping to succeed? It didn't seem to work this time around - how much more money are they going to throw at the problem next gen?

The thing is, even if Microsoft ends up outperforming PS3 thanks to insane investments, the outcome of Sony succeeding yet again is more likely to occur. The difference is, the more Microsoft decides to throw at it, the more likely they are to loose even more money. They're not stupid... Hardware won't be the issue - it's smart business, i.e. exclusives, marketing, content that will ultimately lead to success.

Oh and yes, any company cares if they loose money or not.

 

[PC-Engine]

PS3 won't have a head start like PS2

 

[cybamerc]

Sonic:

> To MS, the gaming industry is just another way for them to make a
> quick buck and to turn in a profitable revenue stream.

I disagree. To M$ gaming is way of strenghtening it's Windows monopoly. Games are the one area where no other OS can compete.

I think it's worth keeping in mind that M$ hasn't made any money on it's gaming divisions, from PC to Xbox, in years (perhaps ever, never bothered to check). The losses on the other hand have been quite substantial.

 

[London Geezer]

PS3 won't have a head start like PS2

U never know... we are arleady seeing plans and designs for PS3, but nothing for the next nintendo or microsoft consoles.

throwing the best PC parts in a box at the last minute won't to the trick this time around. this is all in my very humble opinion...


EDIT:

well it would do the trick if they were willing to spend a whole lot of money...

i guess it would cost much more making a last minute solution to be more powerful than PS3 than making PS3 itself....

am i wrong?

 

[ChryZ]

PS3 won't have a head start like PS2

2003 ... PS2 is still outselling X-Box/GC, but why? I'm not sure if the "head start" makes the difference, IMHO it's all about franchises, brand recognition/acceptance, 3rd party support .... to name just a few

2005 ... will be interesting indeed

 

[PC-Engine]

PS3 won't have a head start like PS2

2003 ... PS2 is still outselling X-Box/GC, but why? I'm not sure if the "head start" makes the difference, IMHO it's all about franchises, brand recognition/acceptance, 3rd party support .... to name just a few

2005 ... will be interesting indeed

Head start = higher installed base = more games = more console sales

 

[London Geezer]

PS3 won't have a head start like PS2

2003 ... PS2 is still outselling X-Box/GC, but why? I'm not sure if the "head start" makes the difference, IMHO it's all about franchises, brand recognition/acceptance, 3rd party support .... to name just a few

2005 ... will be interesting indeed

Head start = higher installed base = more games = more console sales

yeah of course that helps. but the reason PS2 keeps selling LOADS more hardware than the others has not to do with the headstart alone..... it's pretty clear that the headstart gave PS2 the initial push, but if it weren't for other aspects of Sony strategy, the Xbox or GC would have surpassed it by now.....

 

[Phil]

Head start = higher installed base = more games = more console sales

Didn't quite work with Dreamcast, did it?

 

[zidane1strife]

2005 ... will be interesting indeed

Not to mention 2004...

In a few months after launching in all territories the ps3 will most likely surpass the 10M units sold, that's if there are no mayor manufacturing probs... it will be hard to surpass in h/w sales

 

[London Geezer]

2005 ... will be interesting indeed

Not to mention 2004...

In a few months after launching in all territories the ps3 will most likely surpass the 10M units sold, that's if there are no mayor manufacturing probs... it will be hard to surpass in h/w sales

u mean 2006...

listen, was gonna ask u, zidane, whats with the OLED display thing? sounds interesting, have u got a link i can get some info from? thanks

 

[zidane1strife]

No, I meant 2004, with the consoles at $99 and the announcement of the next gen consoles... It will be interesting indeed... (yeah, 2006 should also be interesting, giving us the first next gen. games with some real dev. time...)

As for OLED
http://www.idtech.co.jp/en/news/press/20030312.html

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/display/overview.jhtml

Dupont is also doing their own stuff... and I've heard sony is researching this too..

Googled for a net article on the sony research(read it in a mag a while back...)

Here it is

http://au.playstation.com/technology/OLED.jhtml

YES the NEXT GAMEBOY will most likely have OLED....(I hope.)

 

[Brimstone]

Sonic:

> To MS, the gaming industry is just another way for them to make a
> quick buck and to turn in a profitable revenue stream.

I disagree. To M$ gaming is way of strenghtening it's Windows monopoly. Games are the one area where no other OS can compete.

I think it's worth keeping in mind that M$ hasn't made any money on it's gaming divisions, from PC to Xbox, in years (perhaps ever, never bothered to check). The losses on the other hand have been quite substantial.

Huh?

I would asume on the PC side they've done fine. Age of Empires, Dungeon Siege, and Combat Flight Simulator come to mind. They bought Access Software to get that Golf game franchise. At least I thought they bought Access. They just released Freelancer that recieved good reviews so I'm sure that will sell well for them.



My opinion on what Microsoft needs more than fast hardware to compete with Sony is a bigger game software division. They've grown their studios a lot, but they still need to be bigger. Microsoft has a serious dilema with EA. EA not liking their online strategy is a huge problem. Their sports line-up (Madden football being the biggest franchise) are system sellers. To me SEGA is a no brainer to acquire if possible. The platform franchises like Sonic to the sports franchises like NFL 2k are worth a lot.

 

[London Geezer]

No, I meant 2004, with the consoles at $99 and the announcement of the next gen consoles... It will be interesting indeed... (yeah, 2006 should also be interesting, giving us the first next gen. games with some real dev. time...)

As for OLED
http://www.idtech.co.jp/en/news/press/20030312.html

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/display/overview.jhtml

Dupont is also doing their own stuff... and I've heard sony is researching this too..

Googled for a net article on the sony research(read it in a mag a while back...)

Here it is

http://au.playstation.com/technology/OLED.jhtml

YES the NEXT GAMEBOY will most likely have OLED....(I hope.)

CHEERS

 

[zidane1strife]

Sony - OLED Panel

Running 3+ deep all the time, in the most crowded section of any exhibit, were two operating EL (electro luminescent) Display Panels by Sony. If you can believe it, the most photographed part of the exhibit was the back of the panels, which were totally blank. These panels had the usual fantastic color of organic displays but I doubt they were more than 1/8" thick. The backs were totally smooth. This was right out of Houdini. Each panel was under continual watch by Sony personnel and in a glass case. The sign above the display called these Organic EL.

From another net article....

OLED RULEZZZ... the fact that its cheap to manufacture, and costs will go down, is one of the most enticing things about it...

Responsive, extremely thin, Bright, better image quality... The only prob. on some of the prototypes was lifespan but research is being done constantly to extend it, and that sony (10,000hour) lifespan is quite good.

Plasmas have burn in, shorter than lcd lifespan, and currently cost alot... Lcds have had bad response(it's improving.), but need backlight, and have less viewing angles, and are more costly than OLED...

Cheap, can be made flexible, no backlight, good image quality, good response, that is what OLED brings...

In the not to distant future this is likely to be embedded into car's glasses, toys, windows, etc...

This will be one of those techs that will make the world around you more scifish, just like the car, the internet, the consoles, the pcs, etc...

CRT (is that the correct spelling?)