Panajev, report please :)
- Thread starter Megadrive1988
- Start date
Megadrive1988
Veteran
the Nvidia rumors are like a year and a half old. I still see good reason for Sony to have had Nvidia involved with PS3's GPU. they both need each other. Nvidia needs Sony because Nvidia would have no console presence otherwise. Sony needs Nvidia for Nvidia's expertise in rasterizers. of course, it would only be certain pieces that Nvidia would provide.
I don't think nVidia wasn't to do IP licensing, though, or they'd still be in Xenon--they want to make the chips and perhaps some of the support structures. Sony wouldn't want them near ANY of that--they want chips and boards over which they have complete control. (Or at least "as much as possible" and "nothing in a potentially debilitating way")Megadrive1988 said:
cthellis42 said:
Correction... Nvidia is in the IP business. In the mobile "arena", they sell their GoForce mobile GPUs, but also allow other chip companies to license the (graphics) IP by itself.
However, if they are involved in the PS3.. any reason why not to hype it up in the press ?
I still suspect Sony of doing it all by themselves..
Assuming this 'bizaar rumour' has any truth to it, it is not improbable. After all, Sony/Toshiba don't 'own' MIPS either, but they licensed the tech, then designed and built the EE themselves.
Could be the same thing again. Nvidia(or whoever) actually does not do any design at all. Sony/Toshiba just license the IP they need and do their own design and production.
Anyway, countdown 2 months to CES 2005(Xenon rumoured), 4 months to end of FY '04('CELL workstations' rumoured).
Could be the same thing again. Nvidia(or whoever) actually does not do any design at all. Sony/Toshiba just license the IP they need and do their own design and production.
Anyway, countdown 2 months to CES 2005(Xenon rumoured), 4 months to end of FY '04('CELL workstations' rumoured).
Comparing only the numbers in the spec sheets, the GPU in PSP is one generation ahead of nVidia GoForce 3D 4500 which is the latest in their lineup and the one in Gizmondo, though it may not be appropriate to compare those power-sensitive configurations. So I don't think Sony needs nVidia's wholesale help, while Sony can be licensed some patented technology from nVidia piece by piece if needed, just like getting the license of S3TC from VIA/S3.
Panajev2001a
Veteran
Does nVIDIA make only hardware ?
You are missing the point of what really would mean having nVIDIA on board.
SOFTWARE
.
Reliable OpenGL drivers for a better development environment, OpenGL 2.0 GLSLANG and Cg support, tons of other tools related to shader creation, normal maps creation, geometry optimization, etc...
nVIDIA does not only have experience with the hardware that makes a good GPU, but also of the software thaty goes along with it.
You are missing the point of what really would mean having nVIDIA on board.
SOFTWARE
.Reliable OpenGL drivers for a better development environment, OpenGL 2.0 GLSLANG and Cg support, tons of other tools related to shader creation, normal maps creation, geometry optimization, etc...
nVIDIA does not only have experience with the hardware that makes a good GPU, but also of the software thaty goes along with it.
Panajev2001a said:Does nVIDIA make only hardware ?
You are missing the point of what really would mean having nVIDIA on board.
SOFTWARE
Reliable OpenGL drivers for a better development environment, OpenGL 2.0 GLSLANG and Cg support, tons of other tools related to shader creation, normal maps creation, geometry optimization, etc...
nVIDIA does not only have experience with the hardware that makes a good GPU, but also of the software thaty goes along with it.
That's interesting...though I was thinking someone more neutral like 3DLabs would actually get involved somewhere along the lines with the OpenGL ES side of things. But Nvidia with burnt fingers may be a stronger ally in this case with a point to make!
Panajev2001a said:Does nVIDIA make only hardware ?
You are missing the point of what really would mean having nVIDIA on board.
SOFTWARE
Reliable OpenGL drivers for a better development environment, OpenGL 2.0 GLSLANG and Cg support, tons of other tools related to shader creation, normal maps creation, geometry optimization, etc...
nVIDIA does not only have experience with the hardware that makes a good GPU, but also of the software thaty goes along with it.
The thing is that Nvidia makes good software/drivers for their own hardware.
I'm not sure they'd start building drivers and libraries for hardware they have had no involvement in production phase.
So, the Nvidia hypothesis seems to be valid?
That would be indeed very good for the PS3 GPU thing if true.
Even if this contract is not the same kind as the Xbox deal, Nvidia have to be onboard of a next gen console. Even if they have to almost give away some IPs, having a Nvidia logo on the playstation is a terrific kind of advertisement, on the mass market and the economical market.
That would boost Nvidia shares big time.
Still, like others said, if such a deal existed we must have heard about it eons ago, IMO, just like the STI or Rambus deal.
Maybe the contribution is small (A few IPs licensed, or some software developement help as hinted by Pana) and that would explain why we still haven't heard of this. Maybe...
That would be indeed very good for the PS3 GPU thing if true.
Even if this contract is not the same kind as the Xbox deal, Nvidia have to be onboard of a next gen console. Even if they have to almost give away some IPs, having a Nvidia logo on the playstation is a terrific kind of advertisement, on the mass market and the economical market.
That would boost Nvidia shares big time.
Still, like others said, if such a deal existed we must have heard about it eons ago, IMO, just like the STI or Rambus deal.
Maybe the contribution is small (A few IPs licensed, or some software developement help as hinted by Pana) and that would explain why we still haven't heard of this. Maybe...
That's what you get when you only think of the situation from the Sony perspective. The situation doesn't seem so probable when you look at it from nVidia's perspective.london-boy said:
I mean, sure, it'd be great for Sony and PS3 developers. But why would nVidia do it? Spite? I don't think so.
Inane_Dork said:
MS did choose ATI to design the Xbox2 GPU and Nvidia don't seem to be helping the two parties out with backwards comp..Very wild guess but Nvidia could have a grudge with MS.Unlikely scenario but it would be amusing to see these buisness' stab each other in the back.
Nvidia would gladly help, all MS has to do is to pay and license IPs of the emulated NV2A and MCPX.Xeno said:
Ati and MS could easily emulate the NV2A if there were no intellectual property issues regarding the chip.
NV2A IP belongs to Nvidia, since some Xbox games supposedly used NV2A-only features, a DirectX8.1 compliant chip won't cut it. You'll still need to emulate those features, and therefore ask Nvidia permission... With money.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
basicly, that's exactly how I see it. not saying it is happening though.
I don't mean in all cases, I mean in this one. If they were willing to go the route Microsoft wanted in regards to the Xbox 2, then why wouldn't they? They might not LIKE it as much, but it's still good for them and much less of a headache for Microsoft. (Which means they'd also likely have been willing to give them a bit more favorable terms than ATi.) Since this didn't happen, though, I'm forced to conclude they had overriding issues doing that with their nv##-type cards.loekf2 said:
Now if--after losing the deal--nVidia felt the situation desperate enough they could always backslide with Sony, but I also think Sony would have to be even MORE desperate, because they'd want to own all the the major tech insider their wee beastie that they can. (And as most people would probably agree, I also think Sony is strong-willed in that direction to bring things through themselves ["themselves" in this case also meaning STI] come hell or high water, so they'd have to be PARTICULARLY desperate.)
I also think that if this rumor were the case, we'd have heard a lot more substatial comments (or a much higher volume of rumors) about the partnership. You just can't keep something that big under wraps.
(Unless you're a much smaller company and have Steve Jobs staring at your 24/7.
)