PlayStation 3 GPU: NV40 and NV50 Hybrid with XDR DRAM...

[Panajev2001a]

Fillrate is not only used for what you actually see on screen you know

Duh. Still, have you stopped to think exactly how much 20Gpix/s is?

1080P res is just over 2Mpix. That's nearly 20.000 screen fills per second, or more than 160 fills per frame at 60 frames/sec. It's still 40 full-frame fills/frame with 4x supersampling. Can you realistically think of anything you want to do that needs those kind of fillrate figures? And remember, 20Gpix is counting LOW, as NV40 clocks faster than 400MHz in some variants.

3xNV40 performance is completely unrealistic. It's even more silly than expecting 1Tflop from PS3's CPU, because it's actually doable to make a chip with that performance level, as prototype cells clock at 4+ GHz already and there are viable uses for that level of performance in games for a variety of purposes, while you have no use whatsoever for pixel fills in the range of 20 thousand thousand thousand pixels/s on output devices that can realistically only display a fraction of that.

It's simply a prepostrous idea! Period.

Bah... with 16x stochastic sampling AA 20 GPixels/s would only sustain 5x overdraw... not enough .

 

[cthellis42]

You're a scary person sometimes, Pana.

 

[j^aws]

That's true and would satisfy those comments but why omit the major part,

"totally different architecture that is not based on an existing architecture from Nvidia."

...of that quote!

Because I thought that was already a given seeing JHH has already come out and flat out said that its based on their next generation architecture, which is not a "currently existing" architecture.

I don't think that's registered with everyone yet judging by the thread title and the reason for my original post!

...and bearing in mind the 2006 release timeframe (likely released after the R500 rumoured Xe GPU), why would it be based on NV40 architecture and not the NV50 architecture? Which would satisfy those omissions!

Did I suggest that it was NV40 based?

From the skool of DaveBaumann,

Yes.

 

[Megadrive1988]

there is no such thing as 'fillrate overkill'. you can never have enough fillrate.

I want nextgen anti-aliasing to smooth out the complex visuals, all that 60fps and at least 720p 8)

 

[jvd]

I would like 4x fsaa across the board in next gen tittles.

Using an engine like unreal 3 engine which the x800xt pe got about 15-30fps on it . Figuring thats no fsaa to get 4x fsaa we'd need at least double the fillrate power of it. You all seem to think ps3 games will be even higher quality than that . So we will need muc hmore .

 

[Dave Baumann]

Did I suggest that it was NV40 based?

From the skool of DaveBaumann,

Yes.

Errr, how?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

S'cuse me for not knowing any better, but can't massive fillrate be used for multipass rendering effects? If you can render 40x the screen size and refresh rate, that'll give plenty of room for rendering reflections, outline buffers, mo-blur and any other effect developers dream up. I'd rather have too much than too little.

 

[j^aws]

Did I suggest that it was NV40 based?

From the skool of DaveBaumann,

Yes.

Errr, how?

It's not whether you meant to suggest that or not but that's how I read the post in the context of the thread.

Considering the thread title suggesting an NV4x architecture based GPU with some NV5x tech and NOT a completely new architecture; then the reason for my original post suggesting a 'new architecture'; then your post comparing elements of my said post to the NV2A BUT ommiting comparisons with the 'new architecture' element (as already explained earlier) suggested to me that your post implied an NV4x based GPU!...Pheewww...typing it out is way longer than it took the suggestion to register!

Anyway hope that explains it and I was tempted to reply to your question with a simple 'No'...

 

[Megadrive1988]

S'cuse me for not knowing any better, but can't massive fillrate be used for multipass rendering effects? If you can render 40x the screen size and refresh rate, that'll give plenty of room for rendering reflections, outline buffers, mo-blur and any other effect developers dream up. I'd rather have too much than too little.

I would tend to agree. back in 1997-1998, if people knew PS2 was going to have a 2400/1200 Mpixel fillrate, some would have said that's overkill since PC accellerators at the time had at the most 100-200M pixel fillrate.

note that the SGI Ultimate Vision has upto 40 Gpixel fillrate.

 

[ERP]

S'cuse me for not knowing any better, but can't massive fillrate be used for multipass rendering effects? If you can render 40x the screen size and refresh rate, that'll give plenty of room for rendering reflections, outline buffers, mo-blur and any other effect developers dream up. I'd rather have too much than too little.

I would tend to agree. back in 1997-1998, if people knew PS2 was going to have a 2400/1200 Mpixel fillrate, some would have said that's overkill since PC accellerators at the time had at the most 100-200M pixel fillrate.

note that the SGI Ultimate Vision has upto 40 Gpixel fillrate.

If you want to be pedantic you could argue it is overkill. I know of no game that's GS bound.

 

[darkblu]

S'cuse me for not knowing any better, but can't massive fillrate be used for multipass rendering effects? If you can render 40x the screen size and refresh rate, that'll give plenty of room for rendering reflections, outline buffers, mo-blur and any other effect developers dream up. I'd rather have too much than too little.

I would tend to agree. back in 1997-1998, if people knew PS2 was going to have a 2400/1200 Mpixel fillrate, some would have said that's overkill since PC accellerators at the time had at the most 100-200M pixel fillrate.

note that the SGI Ultimate Vision has upto 40 Gpixel fillrate.

If you want to be pedantic you could argue it is overkill. I know of no game that's GS bound.

well, hypotetically one could say that some of the ps2-originating ports to the other consoles have tuned out to be "gs-bound" (re fillrate) 8)

 

[Inane_Dork]

well, hypotetically one could say that some of the ps2-originating ports to the other consoles have tuned out to be "gs-bound" (re fillrate) 8)

Heh. no.

 

[Panajev2001a]

well, hypotetically one could say that some of the ps2-originating ports to the other consoles have tuned out to be "gs-bound" (re fillrate) 8)

Heh. no.

Heh, yes: look at MGS 2 .

 

[Inane_Dork]

Heh, yes: look at MGS 2 .

MGS2: Substance on the Xbox was not GS-limited. Neither was MGS2 or MGS2: Substance on the PS2 (to my knowledge).

The argument only makes sense if GS is the same as fillrate, which is absurd.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Heh, yes: look at MGS 2 .

MGS2: Substance on the Xbox was not GS-limited. Neither was MGS2 or MGS2: Substance on the PS2 (to my knowledge).

The argument only makes sense if GS is the same as fillrate, which is absurd.

MGS 2 used quite a bit the untextured and textured fill-rate of the GS which thanks to the wide e-DRAM and the fact that all render-to-texture operations were done on the on-chip VRAM instead of havign to access shared main RAM does allow you to push such effects farther.

MGS 2 has some clear slow-down on Xbox in fill-rate intensive scenes.

 

[Guden Oden]

S'cuse me for not knowing any better, but can't massive fillrate be used for multipass rendering effects?

Yes, that's true, but we're still simply not going to see 20 gigapixel fillrates in future consoles. Silicon graphics visual supercomputers cost hundreds of thousands of $, high-end graphics boards with a few gigapixels cost a couple hundred $. There's a reason for that, and the reason is fillrate is expensive. Multicore CPU and 20 gpix fillrate? Say hello to a couple thousand $ price tag... Would YOU buy a console priced like that?

 

[Paul]

S'cuse me for not knowing any better, but can't massive fillrate be used for multipass rendering effects?

Yes, that's true, but we're still simply not going to see 20 gigapixel fillrates in future consoles. Silicon graphics visual supercomputers cost hundreds of thousands of $, high-end graphics boards with a few gigapixels cost a couple hundred $. There's a reason for that, and the reason is fillrate is expensive. Multicore CPU and 20 gpix fillrate? Say hello to a couple thousand $ price tag... Would YOU buy a console priced like that?

I'm not saying you're wrong, infact I'm on your side... But what I saw Sony pull with the PS2 as far as raw specs astonished me... But we'll wait and see, we'll wait and see.....

 

[pahcman]

Actually, MGS2: Substance has just as many problematic areas in both PS2 and Xbox version, especially Snake Tales. I think Substance is a less optimise game than SOL.

 

[Megadrive1988]

Inquirer chimes in

Playstation graphics chip a Janus Horribilis

Look at it in two ways

By Wil Harris: Friday 31 December 2004, 10:38
THE GRAPHICS CHIP in the PlayStation 3 will be a hybrid NV40-50, according to reports at PC Watch and Xbit Labs.

While the bulk of the core will use NV40 (that's GeForce 6-series) architecture, techniques developed for the next-generation chip will also be utilised. Interestingly, we have recently been hearing that NV50 is cancelled, but what (if any) relationship this has to its utilisation in the PS3 we don't know.

The reports suggest that the GPU will be made at Sony's own fab, which is well known for having a 65 nanometre process. This kind of shrink will allow the chip to run far cooler than the NV40 does today - we don't expect the PS3 to have a dual slot graphics cooler.

The graphics hardware will support XDR memory, which is a proprietary technology created by Rambus Inc. Console followers will know that RDRAM was used in the PS2 for the main system memory, and we don't expect anything different this time around. As early as 2003, we reported Rambus being used to power Sony's Cell processor, which requires extremely high-speed interconnects to pump data back and forth between subsystems. µ

they have no idea what they're talking about. if they read B3D more often, perhaps they'd be on the same level as this forum 8)

 

[Inane_Dork]

The PS3 GPU will be a mostly NV40 chip? Duuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...