Outlandish NV40 specs appear from Russian site

Was this supposed to be serious?
I mean, damn, everything is obviously wrong, beside the 8 pipelines... And even that is questionable, IMO...

My guess ( and this really is just a guess ) is that nVidia is taking another direction. Probably not an hybrid PS/VS architecture, but you're gonna get a change for sure. Probably a TBDR, with a few nifty additions.
I know I'm gonna look insane saying this, but nVidia seems to use the number "4" for whatever it a profound change in their thinking.

NV4 = TNT
NV34 = GeForce FX 5200 ( Exactly the contrary of the GeForce 4 MX: high-end features at the low-end. It's a big difference for nVidia )
NV40 = ?

Okay, so it's a small pattern, of course. And it's hardcore speculation. But... But...

See what you people make me do! If you gave me real NV40 info, I wouldn't have to do that! But now I've got to! So gimme! Gimme!
Yes, yes, I'm lame


Uttar

 

Numerology is a very questionable science.

 

It's one of the forces of the INQ 8)

 

Indeed.


Uttar

 

and furthermore how do you compute the memory bandwidth of that? Is it relative to the core clock? I know my Gamecube has embedded dram and it looks better than xbox and the ps2

 

Clockspeed * buswidth, of course.

The difference being that embedded RAM tends to have really, REALLY wide buses - PS2's GS's embedded memory, for example, has a mind-boggling segmented 2,560-bit bus!

 

IIRC, GC has a decent amount of 1T SRAM (very low-latency), whereas the PS2 has a small amount of embedded DRAM. No eDRAM in GC, right?

 

GC has something like 2.25MB of 1T SRAM (which basically is eDRAM with some SRAM caches/buffers to hide DRAM penalties on first access/page switch and refresh) for framebuffer storage, plus 1MB 1T SRAM texture cache.

PS2 has a 4MB continuous chunk of eDRAM framebuffer/texture storage, so it's actually got more actual on-chip memory. Then again, GC can load its texture cache with S3TC-compressed textures, so one could say it has more "virtual" on-chip memory...

I wouldn't go that far though.


*G*

 

from invisibledream.com
The Gamecube on the other hand uses 24MB of main memory called 1T-RAM, 16MB of standard DRAM and 3MB of on-die embedded 1T-RAM. 1T-RAM is some of the fastest memory on the market coming in at 10ns latency. For the full spec sheet, check out the mosys homepage

I haven't been fully briefed on the practical difference between eDram (if there is such a thing) and embedded 1t-ram . 8) I guess i need to read some whitepapers

 

Mmmm, maybe these NV40 rumours are not all that wacked, if Nvidia is targeting some NV40 variant for the XBOX 2... Then the large on-chip ram starts to make a lot of sense.

Guenther

 

You guys also aren't looking at the process used for the e-DRAM. Depending on the process it can take less on chip space, I have no clue on the transistors involved though.

Speng.

 

1TSRAM is Mosys' name for for their version of embedded DRAM (which is generally a DRAM that is made in same process as standard logic). I'm sure somebody's got eDRAM trademarked, but its still the same thing.

Standard SRAM has a lower latency than 1T SRAM.

 

Russ,

1T SRAM is *not* the same as eDRAM. Thanks to the buffers it uses to make it SRAM-like in access time and addressing (it's linear like real SRAM, not rows/columns like DRAM) makes it take up considerably more die space than standard eDRAM.


*G*

 

Indio,

You are kidding, right? Not by choice, but I have all of the latest consoles. PS2, Xbox, and Gcube. My honest opinion is that the Xbox looks best out of the 3. PC still rules for the most part due to final resolution, but out of the 3 consoles, Xbox has better overall graphics. And, xbox live - well - a good deal.

Only thing I don't understand is what is going on with splinter cell on the Xbox vs PC - it looks better on the xbox. /boggle.

Kids - but hey - they saved, so whatever. I'm guessing also that graphic output is a matter of opinion. But when I took some of the games, rented them for each, then compared, well. It was no contest.

 

You're right, its eDRAM with an interface + buffers on the front. But, its still eDRAM at the back end. Currently its twice as dense as normal SRAM, I hear they're coming out with a version that is 4x as dense as SRAM.

 

My brother in law has a Xbox with component output and I think my Gamecube blows it away and I have a crappy tv (ps2 is crap so lets not bring it up) Have you seen the latest Resident Evil or the new Zelda even Super Mario Sunshine looks awesome. The gamecube does have a horrible selection of games but I think the picture quality is better. I think only a direct side by side camparison should be in order using Splintercell or something. Sorry about going OT

Another thing... I did see his Xbox on a 52 inch rear projection and his couch might have a been a little too close making it seem not as crisp. That might have something to do with it in light of the fact you have compared them directly.

 

When you guys talk about SRAM are you talking about Synchronous or Static RAM? In my book SRAM is Static-RAM which is, by definition, not Dynamic RAM (DRAM). If you're talking about Sychronous DRAM then I was under the impression that was called SDRAM.

I swear a lot of arguments around here wouldn't happen if people checked their terminology.

 

There have been DRAM implementations which have SRAM buffers in them to improve performance characteristics. 1T SRAM, just seems like the eDRAM version of that.

SRAM = STATIC RAM
SDRAM = SYNCRONOUS DYNAMIC RAM

THere doesn't seem to be any confusion of terminology. Well at least not on Russ' part.

 

list of BS

350, 0.09, timeframe, 800, 16 meg onchip, 16 vs units, DX10

list of correct

8 pixel units (8х1), ~600, ddr2 (1..1.4GHz) up to 512 meg onboard mem vs/ps3.0, launch up to end of year

i think

~150/200 mil trans, more freq, more riscy style of architecture, common texture units for ps/vs, ddr2 256 bit, no _big onboard mem but defenitely bigger than 3X family

 

Are you sure you're not talking about logical layout instead of physical? AFAIK 1T-SRAM is about 10% less desnse thatn eDRAM but that could be specific to the GameCube and came up in overheard due to the buffers. The overhead scales in terms of absolutes, but the percentage is static. So, I think Russ is right on this one.