PS3 specs could change?

Shifty Geezer said:
Where is that confirmed? What about KK's comments that they were adding hardware suport for BC?

It was in a tread in this very forum, they said its all software and the initial emulater worked great on a range of games already.
 
!eVo!-X Ant UK said:
I dout RSX would need it really, what with Cell being so good at Video decodeing.

Good is a relative term and whilst Cell has the horsepower - video decoding also depends on software algorithms - an area ATI and NVIDIA have invested in heavily. Sony have brought in 3rd party solutions to their Bravia series for instance.
 
!eVo!-X Ant UK said:
It was in a tread in this very forum, they said its all software and the initial emulater worked great on a range of games already.

I must have missed that totally. Can you link to that? Are you sure you're not referring to a gamesindustry.biz or eurogamer article that cited "anonymous sources"?
 
Titanio said:
Dave's figure is correct, but the documents he is citing are not public domain.

And yet everyone has them :LOL:

As the official moderator of leaked console documents I request... err demand that you send me your copies and destroy any record of your posession of said item(s). Thanks for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

Acert93
PhD. BS. Console Specitis
Sony Corp.
 
Acert93 said:
And yet everyone has them :LOL:

As the official moderator of leaked console documents I request... err demand that you send me your copies and destroy any record of your posession of said item(s). Thanks for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

Acert93
PhD. BS. Console Specitis
Sony Corp.


:LOL: I have nothing. I'm simply making the inference based on Dave's reference to "documents" because the number of ROPs has not been publically announced, but I know seperately that it's true. "The princess is at another castle" in other words ;)
 
Titanio said:
:LOL: I have nothing. I'm simply making the inference based on Dave's reference to "documents" because the number of ROPs has not been publically announced, but I know seperately that it's true. "The princess is at another castle" in other words ;)

you mean you know its 's 8 rops ?
 
Titanio said:
:LOL: I have nothing. I'm simply making the inference based on Dave's reference to "documents" because the number of ROPs has not been publically announced, but I know seperately that it's true. "The princess is at another castle" in other words ;)

Yes, why not 16 ROP's like Geforce7800GTX?. And why still no final specifications from RSX ?
 
I have to say that I was disappointed when I saw the famous slide with the NV47 architecture.

I ever believed that the G70 was launched months before the ATI R520 only for to take advantage of the market and that RSX was the NV50 with the same capabilities of R520 (FSAA+HDR, Ultrathreading, better Branch prediction and other things).
 
Calcoo said:
Yes, why not 16 ROP's like Geforce7800GTX?. And why still no final specifications from RSX ?

I hope nAo won't mind me cross-quoting him from another board, but here's your best explanation re. ROPs:

nAo/Nostromo said:
RSX has (as latest official data reports, so don't even ask me about spec changes, upgrades or downgrades cause I'm not obviously going to asnwer) a 700 mhz DDR 128 bit memory bus and a 550 Mhz core, that means it can read/write 40 bytes per core clock cycle.
To write (color and z) 5 pixels per clock one needs to write 40 bytes per clock hence 8 ROPs does make a lot of sense, 16 ROPs would be a complete overkill, a waste of transistors.
 
It's my bet :

Cell at 3.5 Ghz and RSX at 600 Mhz...quote me on this only when final specs will be released ! :D

How the hell someone can expect a "downgrade" with a "7 months later" release ?
...and when Sony gave these feagures(3.2 for Cell and 550 for RSX), they were sure to achieve these even with a Spring release, that's my opinion...so...I say again...these feagures are, for me, only conservative estimate for Sony !!!
 
How the hell someone can expect a "downgrade" with a "7 months later" release ?

Same reason some expected a "downgrade" of the PS3's connectivity/ports with a "2 years later" release.
 
Bliss said:
It's my bet :

Cell at 3.5 Ghz and RSX at 600 Mhz...quote me on this only when final specs will be released ! :D

How the hell someone can expect a "downgrade" with a "7 months later" release ?

Very funny man...yuo will see :)
 
vliw said:
Very funny man...yuo will see :)
This is just pointless noise. You're posting in the technical forum, remember?


Why are some people so desperate for an upgrade anyway, isn't the hardware powerful enough as it is? Surely what was announced last E3 will suffice to draw some neat graphics!
 
Guden Oden said:
Why are some people so desperate for an upgrade anyway, isn't the hardware powerful enough as it is? Surely what was announced last E3 will suffice to draw some neat graphics!
Perhaps because after a year longer waiting, it would be nice if the graphics were better than the competitor, rather than simply as good or potentially even worse?
 
Urian said:
I have to say that I was disappointed when I saw the famous slide with the NV47 architecture.

I ever believed that the G70 was launched months before the ATI R520 only for to take advantage of the market and that RSX was the NV50 with the same capabilities of R520 (FSAA+HDR, Ultrathreading, better Branch prediction and other things).


just what if, the ~6 month delay was to allow Nvidia some extra time to engineer a custom midrange GPU based on NV50 tech rather than a midrange GPU based on NV47 tech, dispite the fact that the GDC slide said RSX is based on NV47. and dispite all the info from 2005 indicating RSX was NV47/G70-based. now that would throw the whole equasion for a loop, resetting everything, would it not? maybe it has been an SCEI-Nvidia deception all along, and that RSX has always been based on NV50, not NV47. hmmmm

but, that's probably just a fantasy that hasn't happened. I fully expect that RSX is in fact a midrange GPU based on NV47 technology, and not a "full" NV47/G70/G71.
 
Back
Top