DuckThor Evil
Legend
clockspeed would be nice.
PS3 internals
- Thread starter one
- Start date
Excuse me, I've thought that it does matter, or at least is interesting, that Sony's throwing a lot of money out of the window just for backwards compatibility.
See, all this is in addition to the losses on just manufacturing the basic hardware, and not just a $30 loss on its own...
rendezvous
Regular
It does atleast look a little bit bigger than the G71 according to my measurements.
The area I calculaded was 242 mm squared. I used the ram chips as a reference.
According to this page the ram chips measue 11,0 x 14,0 mm.
http://www.samsung.com/Products/Sem...p.asp?family_cd=GME1002&partnumber=K4J52324QC
And by pure luck it seems like 10 pixels in the picture with the MCM of RSX corresponds to 1mm.
The area I calculaded was 242 mm squared. I used the ram chips as a reference.
According to this page the ram chips measue 11,0 x 14,0 mm.
http://www.samsung.com/Products/Sem...p.asp?family_cd=GME1002&partnumber=K4J52324QC
And by pure luck it seems like 10 pixels in the picture with the MCM of RSX corresponds to 1mm.
Expect a fun little news post from us in a few hours max about RSX
Uttar
Wow, I hope it is up before I go to bed ( in 5 hours). BTW, really sexy motherboard. PS3 has a damn good toned body.
It's probably a fairly safe predition to say that backwards compatibility will be one of the first things to go once the race to meet demand settles and we'll see a full game lineup for PS3.
This time around there'll be real competition on price since MS is in a much better position to drive down cost.
If Sony decides to sink $15-$30 per PS over the lifetime of the console without any real way to recoop the cost (few PS3 owners will buy new PS2 games to run on it), investors will probably be giving Sony top brass a good bollocking (and they don't really need that with the current execution fiasco).
Cheers
Yeah but Gubbi, Sony won't be sinking $15-30 into B/C over the life of the console; as has been mentioned elsewhere, the software emulation is 'almost there.' Not that it's a non-factor, but I wouldn't expect to see the chip in there past the first 25% of the initial five-year run
Just plain commentary in general, I really like the layout of the PS3 - extremely elegant. All the components say 'quality' to me, and I don't think Sony was ahead of themselves to have boasted about the PSU and heatsink designs.
Tossing the EE+GS (and associated MB support structure), rapid BOM drops on the Blu-ray drives as time goes on, 65nm on RSX and Cell (to be reached shortly), and 'lighter' cooling to be used once said drops occur should all lead to a Playstation 3 that a year out from now is significantly cheaper to manufacture than the current version. And I think that eventual system would be mighty fine to own as well from an 'aesthetic of technology' standpoint.
Internals look really nice on the PS3. I especially love the clean design taken in designing the circuit board as well as the love taken in making the whole package. Coming from a electric engineering background, you can really appreciate the mastery Sony has shown. Certainly makes the Xbox360 looks like a design from somebody's 2nd year ECE project.
Of course it matters. But "out of the window" it is not. It's a PStwo. It plays FF12 and Rogue Galaxy and what-have-you. "Out of the window" does not capture that.
It's not a loss. It's a feature that costs money but is good to have on board nonetheless. Like a graphics chip or the networking or whatever.Laa-Yosh said:
Expect a fun little news post from us in a few hours max about RSX
Uttar
This is'nt a trick is it
This is'nt a trick is it
Uttar wouldn't be joking about something like that.
(and oh my god - I just noticed; Uttar are you quoting Scooter in your sig??? That song rules!
)Here is the small bit Uttar was referring to.
http://www.beyond3d.com/#news35566
Edit: Can anyone explain in simple terms what it means?
http://www.beyond3d.com/#news35566
Edit: Can anyone explain in simple terms what it means?
Last edited by a moderator:
hah, you spotted it faster than I could post the link here!
And yup, that's it, and the comment thread is: http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?p=871293
Sorry for doing something on roughly the same piece of data as you rendezvous, I had actually calculated it one hour before you posted that. And I think the related information I'm adding is worth the trouble Feel free to link it in any forum you frequent, too, of course.
Uttar
And yup, that's it, and the comment thread is: http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?p=871293
Sorry for doing something on roughly the same piece of data as you rendezvous, I had actually calculated it one hour before you posted that. And I think the related information I'm adding is worth the trouble
Feel free to link it in any forum you frequent, too, of course.Uttar
Not a great deal. The larger size is news, but the explanation isn't anything we haven't had here before. The suggestion is inclusion of a redundant set of pixel pipes or other shaders and some larger caches. Would that be enough though to make up the larger die, especially if PureVideo has been dropped, which I don't think has been stated anywhere?
The only other news is clarification that though the chips are rated to 1400 MHz, that doesn't mean RSX is still clocked at 600 MHz, with 700 MHz RAM. The probability of the clock-speed 'drop' from E3 '05's specs is still high, with a 550MHz part and 650 MHz RAM.
Here is the small bit Uttar was referring to.
http://www.beyond3d.com/#news35566
Edit: Can anyone explain in simple terms what it means?
Well, it means that unless there's something else coming, they're just telling us what we already knew.
Though that said, the die-size extrapolation and posited theory/confirmation of quad redundancy would be a new element to the knowledge base. Kutaragi had said 'redundancy' might factor in before, and with a G71 derivative back in the day a lot of folk had assumed that meant a 24PP chip down to 20. But if this ends up holding true, it'll actually have been a larger G71 custom 28PP chip down to 24 effective (which we already know to be the operational number of units).
Last edited by a moderator:
RSX was announced at 550mhz @ E3'3005
It is AFAIK a pretty small part of the die. The caches etc. are substantially larger in RSX (I've seen 96KiB instead of 48KiB floating around, but afaik, it's actually 96+48KiB for the texture caches) - and so are the register files (although not to the same extend, perhaps!)
You'll find, however, that one pixel quad is a perfectly normal thing in add in terms of die sizes though, before you question the fact the increase might have had to be larger then: comparing G71, G73 and G72 give a pretty good idea of that, imo. So the increased die size is really both better caches to improve efficiency in relatively more advanced workloads (remember G70 was designed with 2004 games in mind) and redundancy to improve yields, afaik.
Uttar
I meant the numbers for what the numbers are, whether I typed the wrong ones or not! I thought I might be 50 MHz out on the RSX speed but just couldn't be arsed to check as I was talking about RAM speedsShifty meant 500 on the RSX and 650 on the GDDR. (at least I think/hope!
That E3 was a long time ago.
Since then, the PS3 as lost some features (reduced clocks, 3 Ethernet ports, Dual-shock), but it also gained others (Hard Drive, HDMI on the basic model, Playstation Network, SixAxis controller, etc).
Last edited by a moderator:
