PSX not at 90nm?
- Thread starter passerby
- Start date
- Status
Not like it would make a whole lot of a difference, but i thought it was 90nm all the way... Does it REALLY matter if it isn't?
Apart from the fact that Sony is lying to the public, which is common practive among corporations these days....
Apart from the fact that Sony is lying to the public, which is common practive among corporations these days....
V3 said:
Personally i wouldn't be able to quantify the transistors size in my PSX. I would never buy a PSX anyway.
PR is strong in some companies...
Also, if it is not something important, why informing everyone of a delay in the process if it doesn't affect the production of the product?
I mean PSX exists right, you can buy one in the territories where it has been released, so who cares if EEGS is at 90nm or 13nm...
...
Well, that kind of explains why PSX2OAC was larger than expected based on my calculations....
If SCEI has no 90 nm production parts while Intel, IBM, and AMD do, then SCEI is behind, not ahead of, the industry leaders in fab technology curve.
This has great implication for the future of PSX3 and PSP. This fab process transition schedule setbacks might explain why SCEI decided to price the PSP at 48,000 Yen, while reducing the CELL FLOP rating to upto 10x of contemporary PC processors.(~128 GLOPS per chip???).
Well, that kind of explains why PSX2OAC was larger than expected based on my calculations....
If SCEI has no 90 nm production parts while Intel, IBM, and AMD do, then SCEI is behind, not ahead of, the industry leaders in fab technology curve.
This has great implication for the future of PSX3 and PSP. This fab process transition schedule setbacks might explain why SCEI decided to price the PSP at 48,000 Yen, while reducing the CELL FLOP rating to upto 10x of contemporary PC processors.(~128 GLOPS per chip???).
Locked in 5.....4......3..........2............1.............. GONE
...
Since when is a factual news article a flame???
SCEI lied about the readiness of its process technology and was caught with its pants down, that should be enough to entertain us for a while...
Anyhow, I too am interested in how SCEI managed the die size of 90 mm2 on a 130 nm process. I recall that previous 130 nm EE and GS were ~78 mm2 in die size respectively
Since when is a factual news article a flame???
SCEI lied about the readiness of its process technology and was caught with its pants down, that should be enough to entertain us for a while...
Anyhow, I too am interested in how SCEI managed the die size of 90 mm2 on a 130 nm process. I recall that previous 130 nm EE and GS were ~78 mm2 in die size respectively
Re: ...
And you ask why this should be locked.....
U amaze me everytime...
Deadmeat said:
And you ask why this should be locked.....
U amaze me everytime...
Yes, mod shouldn't really lock this news, its pretty interesting and serious issue too.
Ohh the ramification is quite serious for Sony. Remember there are alot of public investors putting their money on Sony.
If this is true, Sony has lied to gain investor confidence, and that's not a good thing from any companies.
To consumers it doesn't matter much, but then again this info are mostly PR for investors and that matters.
Ohh the ramification is quite serious for Sony. Remember there are alot of public investors putting their money on Sony.
If this is true, Sony has lied to gain investor confidence, and that's not a good thing from any companies.
To consumers it doesn't matter much, but then again this info are mostly PR for investors and that matters.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
IBL.
I would have to side with Deadmeat on this having implications (not good ones) for PS3.
if Sony lied, and if Sony is behind in process / fab technology, it only shows Sony is not as good as they want everyone to believe.
does it matter that your PSX is 13 nm instead of 90 nm ? no, not for the user, but its not good overall for Sony in the tech race. which is in turn good for Nintendo and MS.
I would have to side with Deadmeat on this having implications (not good ones) for PS3.
if Sony lied, and if Sony is behind in process / fab technology, it only shows Sony is not as good as they want everyone to believe.
does it matter that your PSX is 13 nm instead of 90 nm ? no, not for the user, but its not good overall for Sony in the tech race. which is in turn good for Nintendo and MS.
V3 said:
If what you're saying here is that before getting to 90nm they were producing at 130nm, therefore they have a stock of 13nmEE+GS they are now trying to get rid of by putting them into the first PSX, then it's what i was thinking.
...
You just don't move between processes like that easily, since the implementation to each process generation is essentially a redesign and re-verification.
SCEI claimed that PSX2OAC was designed for and was the first 90 nm product out of its fab, that it was ahead of Intel and IBM in fab process ball game. According to this new find, SCEI's 90 nm is not production ready, and this has great implications for PSP, which is an exclusively a 90 nm part.
You just don't move between processes like that easily, since the implementation to each process generation is essentially a redesign and re-verification.
SCEI claimed that PSX2OAC was designed for and was the first 90 nm product out of its fab, that it was ahead of Intel and IBM in fab process ball game. According to this new find, SCEI's 90 nm is not production ready, and this has great implications for PSP, which is an exclusively a 90 nm part.
Panajev2001a
Veteran
V3 said:
Good point... I seriously do not know how they could fit both EE and GS ( old revision with stacked capacitors structure for the e-DRAM, the trench capacitor structure was co-developed with Toshiba [ASC9 e-DRAM process] ) with 130 nm technology: the EE was 73 mm^2 in 150 nm technology and the GS in its 6th revision was 73 mm^2 in 130 nm technology.
Think about it for a second: what is likely is that they produced some early EE+GS@90 nm chips with larger than 90 nm masks, thus the final chip using their CMOS4 process ( co-developed by Toshiba and with IBM's IP inside it ) would be 86 mm^2 ( 90 mm^2 in 130 nm and 86 mm^2 in 90 nm technology ? Well, if this is true there go all Deadmeat's claim about Sony not being capable of high transistor density ).
...
Whatever the truth is, PSX2OAC numbers look bad next to contemporary Intel Dothan with 150 million transistors crammed into an 88 mm2 die clocking at 2 Ghz.
SCEI has much to learn from industry leaders, and are in no position to teach them a lesson about chip fabrication...
Whatever the truth is, PSX2OAC numbers look bad next to contemporary Intel Dothan with 150 million transistors crammed into an 88 mm2 die clocking at 2 Ghz.
SCEI has much to learn from industry leaders, and are in no position to teach them a lesson about chip fabrication...
Since when is this a factual news article? It's a press release, a rather specious way to present findings like this. Considering that SI is essentially claiming to have caught Sony in a lie about a product shipping to consumers why is there no indication that they've tried contacting Sony about this and why must we pay $1000 to see whether their findings are in fact accurate?
Seems more like opportunistic appropriation of permissive press release services for cheap marketing on SI's part, more than anything else.
- Status