RSX - G80 & Crazy Ken's 4D connection

[archy121]

For quite a while I have been exploiting the possibility that the RSX is nothing that was spec'd at E3 2005 but in fact something a lot more like the G80.

I have come across some more information just recently which to me pretty much confirms my beliefs but i cannot share those thoughts yet until i have a little more proof.

Below are 2 postings from my thread on another forum.
Please feel free to offer your opinion on my reasoning.

The RSX being a G80 Derivative is very possible.

I know it may sound a little far fetched but let me explain how & why I believe that the RSX is a lot more than what was on the E3 2005 spec sheet.

Sony has repeatedly said that they want to build True Nextgen System that will last 10 years – i.e. high long term investment plan.

Sony spent silly amounts of money to create a NextGen CPU
Sony spent loadsa money to create a NextGen BluRay Media
Sony spent bags of money to get NextGen HDMI1.3 Connectivity

Sony did not spent wads of money to get yesterdays NV47 core glued to Flexio.

The N47 GPU part does not fit at all with the selection of other truly NextGen components. There is nothing NextGen about it today & hardly back in spring.

Having followed every piece of PS3 news for over a year I took a step back to look at the whole history of events that unfolded pre E3 2005 to post E3 2006.

If you do this you will realise something very apparent that we fail to notice when we look at the daily picture - Sony NEVER had a Spring 06 release in mind.
It was impossible even if they had wanted to consider it as they were clearly way behind on there PS3 roadmap with too many milestones still to cover.

Sony have made so many changes between spring & now that it makes you realise spring was never meant to be. The PS3 has evolved & taken so much more shape since its expected release date, that it really does look like Fall 06 was always the intended release date. Even the dev kits seem to be in good supply with a few months to go.

Sony did not fudge up there project management by this much.
A reschedule to fall 06 for release was not just because of BluRay or HDMI as otherwise everything else could have been polished & ready to go apart from these components. Instead lots of things were & are still being changed or completed e.g. controller, case, OS (XMB/Internet browser/Live), RSX chips apparently rolling out just recently & not pre spring if they were to make it into a console.

I believe Sony has been masterfully applying Sun Tzu - The Art of War in there business.

They always intended to release PS3 around Fall 06.
They bought time with loyal fans by selling them not so far Spring 06 release date & they did a great job – I’m still here !

I believe the RSX figures they gave from NVIDIA were arbitrary for a top GPU that was going to hit around Spring 06 (7800). This was a strategic move by Sony to keep the fans satisfied, media in frenzied & MOST importantly to force there competitors to respond & bare there console secrets - XBOX360 GPU specs etc.
It was executed brilliantly!

It would have been utterly stupid business sense for Sony to reveal the true RSX spec’s & give the competition the heads up. Especially knowing the XBOX360 had not been released yet & was still possible to changes. Better to lull the competition into false security.

Noticed how RSX specs disappeared from all Sony presentations?
The values they gave at E3 05 served there temporary purpose. The real values will probably be divulged when they are good & ready to strike a blow.

Sony have since had plenty of time to weigh up the competition & make changes where necessary.. Motion controller.. Free online offering.. Standard HD etc
To date they have addressed individual strengths in there rivals console & responded by making the necessary changes to better if not equal them.
Sony is well aware of the XBOX360’s 2 strengths – Live & Xenos & they will surely counter attack them also.

It’s clear that Sony has lot riding on the success of PS3 due to the massive investment made. They seem to be deadly serious to win this war & they will not Microsoft’s XBOX360 get away with it.

The RSX CANNOT be what was on paper at E3 05.
That is plainly illogical if you apply Sony’s though of mind to date.

I believe they will deliver some kind of GPU that will deliver all they spoke of at E3 05 & more. Sony will definitely try to better Xenos without a shadow of doubt. They will have been listening to all the positives & negatives by developers on Xenos so that they can weigh it up against the RSX & make changes if need be.

First of all I was thinking like many hopefuls that it’s a custom built NVIDIA 7800/7900 derivative. But than the other day I came across details of a new NVIDIA GPU – The G80.

If we had a user requirements document for the RSX - the G80 would fit it like a glove.


-G80 will be most powerful GPU out when released & agree with what Sony/NVIDIA proclaimed of RSX

-G80 is DX10 & Shader Model 4 compliant which will increase its life span & make Sony’s ambitious 10 years for PS3 more realistic

-G80 does not use a Unified Processor like RSX even though it is DX10.All DX10 cards are supposed to use Unified Processors according to MS spec. Seems they were developing more for a system like PS3 (non unified processor reuirement) than Vista.

-G80 first NVIDIA GPU to support in built HDCP (Must for HD BluRay Movies over HDMI) as well as HDMI (wish I could confirm it was HDMI 1.3)

-G80 uses GDDR4 memory

Another possible way to look at the G80 is that it is the end product of NVIDIA's customisation that went into a G70 core to make the RSX. G80 is the RSX + more for the PC market & RSX is the custom G80 for the PS3

You have to admit that really does tally up with what we were sold as RSX.
In fact it is a more similar to the Xenos in design but with full DX10 + Shader model 4 support and no Unified Processor. Sony new back at E305 that the Xenos was part DX10 compliant. They knew than what they were up against & would not have settled for anything inferior. I’m sure they are aware of he value of investing in a DX10 Shader 4 card if they wanted it to last in there console for a decade. Would they really settle for DX9 GPU knowing what was around the corner (MS Vista pushing for DX10) ?

Maybe MS did go to NVIDIA first for Xenos but they were not able to deliver a Unified Processor GPU in time & cost terms. I believe MS have personal interests in Unified Processor architecture as it is part of Vista’s DX10 GPU requirement. It makes sense that MS would have wanted to have similar GPU’s in Vista & XBOX360 to make PC port easier & cross develop with XNA.

Sony on the other hand did not have requirements for Unified Processor & were able to contract NVIDIA to build RSX with DX10 + Shader 4.

The G80 will most definitely SMOKE the Xenos & outlast it with full its full DX10 & shader model 4 support. This truly is a GPU that you can see worthy of being in the PS3 with the CELL, BluRay & HDMI1.3. Not very hard to picture at all.

Most likely we will not end up with the G80 but instead some kind of custom derivative that shares its feature set & integrates well into the PS3.

Sony could put all of my logic & reasoning down the pan & the RSX turn out to be nothing like the G80 but I’m 100% convinced at worst case scenario it will not have the E305 spec’s. It will most definitely be more than we were told.


NVIDIA CEO : Postponing the PS3 was a master stroke

KRAZY Ken - " The next generation doesn't start until we say it's time ! "


He truly meant it ! You have to be blind not to see how serious Sony are about this statement. It's definitely no marketing waffle or hype as has been the case by so many others before. This guy is Nuts & Hellbent to make NextGen happen with PS3.

As i have been saying, step back & look at the whole picture since E3 2005 to date. You will see the signs for yourself. And just take a look at this list. Is it just not truly NextGen ?

1. - NextGen Revolutionary CPU (Cell)


2. - [------------ GPU -------------]


3. - NextGen Processor Bus (FlexIO )


4. - NextGen RAM (XDR)


5. - NextGen Media (BluRay)


6. - NextGen AV output (HDMI 1.3)

All that is missing from the picture is RSX. Those of you with basic ability to apply logic & reasoning should be able to instantly rationalize it will take some SPECIAL kind of GPU to fill that blank space. We are talking about the 2nd most important component in a Gaming Console. If they can be so fussy about something small & relatively insigificant as an AV output port than by the same reasoning they will pay very special attention to the GPU.

You can drop the excuse it is a NV47 core as spec'd at E3 2005 & if the PS3 had been released spring 06 it would have qualified as NextGen.

1. There never was anything NextGen in those spec's. Certainly not NextGen in the same way Sony was compiling rest of the PS3 components.
I believe those were just arbitrary spec's to sell the media & its competitors.

2.The PS3 was never meant to come out in spring 06 - see my updated reasoning on first page of thread:

3. And even if you still want to believe it was - take a look at that above component list again. Do you see anything on it that is NOT NextGen for Fall 06 release ? In fact there are things on that list that did not even exist back in spring 06 ! Sony was involved in creating all these things & they new all along when they would be completed & ready to assemble the console. This should make more sense & not sound so arrogant now:

" The next generation doesn't start until we say it's time ! "

In other words Sony will deliver a Truly NextGen Console when they are good & ready. They will dictate the time i.e they know exactly when that time will be.

I have been around since the days of Spectrum & Vic20. In all that time i have seen many hypes for computers & consoles come & go that were promised to be but never delivered. None has ever come anywhere close as the PS3 to delivering what they said they would. It is truly unbelievable that they can make this happen. They will have both the best ever console & launch games to date. We as fans & gamers can only be winners out of this for the first time ever.

Whatever form the RSX takes -whether it is a modified NV47 core or NV50 (G80) it will be something very special & worthy being called NextGen on its launch date.

This is GUARANTEED if you apply all of the logic & reasoning in the world this is the obvious outcome.

I'm sure i have lots of people warming up to this idea but are just too scared to admit it to themselves as it seems too good to be happening.

Whats really funny is the Xbox360 fans are trembling in here when they also see the possibility.. kheee khe..


Archy.

UPDATE - 4D Texture Mapping & Crazy Ken update
*******************************************




Remember this

KRAZY Ken - [=16]The next generation doesn't start until we say it's time ! [/]

Everyone thought he was MAD & arrogant. But i believe he said it's because he was completely confident in delivering what he said he would -Truly NextGen Console. I also believe this to be a sign that he new exactly when he was going to deliver it - Fall 06

And this one

[=16]" We’re looking at a life cycle of 10 years with the PlayStation 3"[/]

As discussed already practically every component that we are aware of in the PS3 is cutting edge technology - NextGen. If a console was to have a chance of lasting anywhere close to 10 years than one would have to admit Sony are giving the PS3 one hell of a chance at it. I believe they have already shown how serious they are about this commitment.



[=14]Lastly THE BIG ONE[/]

[=18]March 14, 2006 - At the PlayStation Business Briefing 2006, Ken Kutaragi has just added another infamous quote to his belt, this time stating that PS3 games are "live" and that the PS3 concept is "4D"[/]

At the time of hearing this whole world thought this MAN has really gone MAD.
4D ?? ! ! I personally became little fearful for Sony to see someone so high up talking gibberish.

Than yesterday as I was scouring the web for information on the RSX, I came across a forum where a member had discreetly left created a thread, left a message & practically disappeared –still no chance to thanks him. It immediately rang BELLS & WHISTLES *&^%$ ! .

It was a link to a PATENT that connected Kens infamous words from E3 2005 [=20]‘4D’[/] to a PATENT that a number of technical guys verified that the patents decisively relate to NVIDIA G80 !

Hang on we have MAD Ken shouting [=20]‘4D’[/] ] to world media & we have a NVIDIA GPU PATENT shouting [=20]‘4D’[/] technology.

See quote from patent.

[=18]

Originally Posted by version


4D !

"A discrete BRDF is naturally stored in a 4D lookup table.
While commercially available graphics hardware has long had
2D texture mapping capability, no hardware currently in use
has the 4D texture mapping capability necessary to implement
this natural representation. Even if 4D texture mapping were
implemented, the tables required to hold a measured BRDF would
be quite large. At four bytes per sample (single-precision
floating point) and a modest sampling rate of approximately
twenty samples per radian (or a parabolic parameterization of
64.times.64 samples), a BRDF requires 64 MB of memory. Since
a modern graphics accelerator board has only 64 MB of total
texture memory, this storage requirement is prohibitively large.
Conventional texture compression algorithms can reduce the space
requirement, but not by more than an order of magnitude.
"[/]

I believe Crazy Ken was ranting about this EXACT 4D TEXTURE technology that the PS3 would come to possess i.e a RSX feature.
The man is not crazy but just obsessed about creating the first ever True NextGen console.

I did a little further exploring and also came across the patent referring to GPU’s Audio processing abilities. We are roughly aware that RSX would also handle Audio in some manner but no one has pinpointed to as how.

[=16]
A graphics system including a custom graphics and audio processor produces exciting 2D and 3D graphics and surround sound. The system includes a graphics and audio processor including a 3D graphics pipeline and an audio digital signal processor. Logical combination of N alpha compares can be used to provide a wide range of imaging effects including but not limited to cartoon outlining. [/]

The patent is 40+ pages & I have not really explored any more at all.
The two examples given are both supposedly from PATENTS belonging to G80 technology. When I asked some technical guys to verify what they thought the patents pointed to I made sure not to put words in there mouths & create a bias of any sort.
In fact they thought I was looking for them to say it was the RSX.

Although what I have shown is not CONCRETE evidence that G80 is RSX but it is the closest we will get to making an educated guess with what little resources we have.

I believe these patent findings combined with my previously discussed arguments enforce what I have suspected about the relationship between the G80 & RSX .

It also makes me think that the RSX is pretty far from being a lightly customised 7800/7900.


[=16]
1. 4D Lookup Table Support –only G80 feature
2. Video & Audio Processing –only G80 feature
3. GPU Built In HDCP support –only G80 feature
[/]


Whether the RSX is a custom 7800 core or a new G80 core it will definitely have to share features of the G80.

Does this mean that RSX will have everything the G80 has e.g. DX10 & SM4 ?
I don’t know & that cannot be answered for sure with what little information we have at hand. The RSX & G80 are termed differently to meet the needs of two different architectures that they must serve -PS3 & PC. But what is clear to me is that we will get a RSX GPU that is MUCH MORE powerful & feature rich than we were all led to believe. It will be worthy to call it ‘NextGen’ & it will match well with the rest of the PS3’s NextGen components.


Additional Reading

Summary / Partial Transcript Of The Following Webcast:
NVIDIA Corporation at Morgan Stanley Semiconductor & Systems Conference (Replay)
03/07/06 at 8:45 a.m. PT

- "Increasing flexibility of the programmability, enabling the artists to express themselves in a free way."
- "Our next generation product will just take [effects] to a brand new level"
- "Our next generation product is the combination of 3 years of heavy-duty work. We started architecting it about 4 years ago, and, you know, my best calculations have this investing $250M into it already, and by the time it launches as well as the entire product family, we will have invested about $500M in R&D."
- "It is a spectacular computing machine and, uhm, we can't wait to show it to you later this year".
- "And this year, along with Vista, is going to introduce a very important new API, it's called DX10"
- "And DX10 is just a giant leap forward in unifying the way people program graphics. Instead of, you know,"
"vertices, and shaders and textures, it's unified in a very elegant way. And it's unified in a way that
"makes it possible for us to abstract [GPU] programming to the next level."
- "Our DX10 [part] is nearly finished now, and uhm, it'll be rolled out this year sometime."
- "And, uhm, if I have my way, our next generation GPU will be the first DX10 GPU in the world."

Ok, first let's put the summary of the invention out here because that really is as close to a brief synopsis as you get in a patent:

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

New systems and methods for the processing of graphical data are disclosed. The systems include a graphics data-processing pipeline configured to generate vertex data that can be used as input to a subsequent pass through the graphics data-processing pipeline. In various embodiments, the vertex data is generated and stored in a format suitable as an input to a geometry processor or a fragment processor. For example, in some embodiments, vertex data is saved in a texture data format. Vertex data may, therefore, be manipulated using techniques that were conventionally restricted to texture data. For example, in some embodiments vertex data is rendered in a first pass through the graphics data-processing pipeline and then used by the geometry processor or the fragment processor in a second pass.

A graphics subsystem includes a geometry processor configured to receive input vertex data and process the input vertex data received to produce vertex data output, a resampler configured to receive the vertex data output of the geometry processor and to generate a resampler output responsive to the vertex data output received, a fragment processor configured to receive the resampler output, to modify the resampler output and to generate a fragment processor output responsive to the resampler output received and a raster analyzer configured to receive the fragment processor output and to generate processed vertex data as output in a format compatible with the geometry processor.

Another graphics subsystem includes a geometry processor configured to receive and produce vertex data, a resampler configured to receive the vertex data produced from the geometry processor and to provide resampled data, a fragment processor configured to receive the resampled data from the resampler and to modify the resampled data to produce fragment data, a raster analyzer configured to receive the fragment data from the fragment processor and output vertex data in a format compatible with the geometry processor and a local memory configured to store the vertex data output of the raster analyzer.

A method of processing graphics data including receiving vertex data at a fragment processor and receiving first vertex perturbation data at the fragment processor. The vertex data received and the first vertex perturbation data is combined using the fragment processor to produce first perturbed vertex data.

Another method for processing graphics data including receiving vertex data, receiving control points representing a primitive surface contour and receiving shader program instructions. The shader program instructions are executed in a fragment processor to produce processed vertex data using the vertex data.

An apparatus for processing graphics data, including a geometry processor to receive primitives and configured to generate vertices responsive to the primitives received, a resampler to receive the vertices and configurable for a first mode and a second mode, wherein the first mode the resampler adapted to increase sample density of the primitives responsive to the vertices to provide polygon meshes and a fragment processor to receive the polygon meshes and to receive control points, the control points being associated with the polygon meshes, the fragment processor configured to produce patches responsive to the polygon meshes and the control points, the patches having surface contours.

A computing system including a host computer and a graphics subsystem. The graphics subsystem including a geometry processor configured to receive input vertex data from the host computer, to receive processed vertex data and to produce a vertex data output. The graphics subsystem also including a resampler configured to receive the vertex data output of the geometry processor and to generate a resampler output, a fragment processor configured to receive the resampler output, to modify the resampler output and to generate a fragment processor output, and a raster analyzer configured to receive the fragment processor output and to generate the processed vertex data as output in a format compatible with the geometry processor.

Another graphics subsystem including means for receiving input vertex data and processed vertex data and for producing a vertex data output, means for receiving the vertex data output and for generating a resampled output, means for receiving the resampled output, for modifying the resampled output and for generating a fragment output and means for receiving the fragment output and for generating the processed vertex data as output in a format compatible with the means for receiving input vertex data.

Now... what does it all mean, as simply as possible? Basically I read it as a patent describing NVidia's hardware solution to the DX10 geometry shading requirement. Of course it doesn't mention DX10 by name, but that is nonetheless what would form the impetus behind such a move, as geometry shading is required for DX10 compliance - and G80 is compliant...

Thanks



Archy

 

[archy121]

MOD - I need to edit & add URLS

I don't seem to have ability to edit my post.

All the URLS that relate to the UPDATED section are missing & i would like to add those in.


Help ?

Also I'm no technical guru - just have decent ability to apply logic & reasoning so go easy on me.


Archy

 

[BRiT]

Nope. RSX has nothing to do with G80. Stop dreaming. It's nothing more than a mid-level 7x00 series with limited bandwidth.

 

[archy121]

Nope. RSX has nothing to do with G80. Stop dreaming. It's nothing more than a mid-level 7x00 series with limited bandwidth.

Did you actually read every line ?

 

[Hardknock]

Developers have had final RSXs since right after E3 dude

With several developers stating that Xenos has the edge over RSX in some areas and vice-versa it's definitely not G80 based.

 

[silhouette]

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29579

 

[Mythos]

Developers have had final RSXs since right after E3 dude

With several developers stating that Xenos has the edge over RSX in some areas and vice-versa it's definitely not G80 based.

You have no point!

Some developers had final RSX ( near final) dev kits.

And those developers does'nt necesarily equate with the developers that had anything to say about RSX vs Xenos.

Finally we don't have enough information to say all together what RSX is.

 

[Npl]

-G80 will be most powerful GPU out when released & agree with what Sony/NVIDIA proclaimed of RSX

Deoends on the final specs of RSX and the planned release-date at the time the statement was made.

-G80 is DX10 & Shader Model 4 compliant which will increase its life span & make Sony’s ambitious 10 years for PS3 more realistic

DX10 means sqat for a console, Shader Model 4 is nice, but only useful if the performance is there to actually make use of it.

-G80 does not use a Unified Processor like RSX even though it is DX10.All DX10 cards are supposed to use Unified Processors according to MS spec. Seems they were developing more for a system like PS3 (non unified processor reuirement) than Vista.

you know that the first 2 lines are contradicting each other? DX10 is the API, the way how Programms do stuff, even if DX10 has unified shaders the hardware could still have seperate Pixel/Vertex Shaders

-G80 first NVIDIA GPU to support in built HDCP (Must for HD BluRay Movies over HDMI) as well as HDMI (wish I could confirm it was HDMI 1.3)

wrong, 1.3 allows more Display-Formats, but the Player could simple convert unsupported Formats. For the most Part its used for Display-Devices that dont even exist yet...

I would certainly hope it would be true, but I agree with BRiT: Wishful thinking.

Besides, I bet developers would opt for additional 256 or 512MB RAM over anything else. And I`d certainly want it too, would give the PS3 an immideate edge over XBox360 (even Launch-Games would make use of this in form of better textures) and Linux with 256MB Main RAM... sucks

 

[Acert93]

Finally we don't have enough information to say all together what RSX is.

We know the triangle setup rate (and thus infer the number of Vertex Shaders because we also know...), the frequency, we know the ROP Z sample rate, we know how many Pixel Shaders it has, we know the memory bandwidth and bus size to the GDDR3, we know the peak flops of the programmable pipeline, etc and so forth.

Actually, we know a lot about RSX publically, and even more so not publically. RSX was always said by NV to be a derivative of their G70 line, and everything has pointed to such. Even NV's recent interview noted it was a derivative of their PC part. The Sony roadmap showed RSX was final before E3 2006.

RSX is basically a 7900GTX @ 550MHz with some added cache and effeciencies and loses half the ROPs due to the limited bandwidth dedicated to the GPU. There are some other things, but that is the main thrust.

 

[ERP]

I think this slide is pretty clear

from here http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/20060329/3dps309.htm it comes from a Sony presentation.

 

[Acert93]

I think this slide is pretty clear

I picture says a thousand words.

 

[Carl B]

Well, and especially when that picture is posted as sort of a non-answer answer by a developer.

 

[Darkon]

not here too

and are those gflops not a bit high for a g7x derived card ? or are the gflops from Vertex shaders accounted also ?

 

[Darkon]

Darkon what do you mean?

sorry XB i qouted you by mistake , meant to qoute archy

 

[Carl B]

It's cool, I deleted my post when I saw you removed the quotation.

 

[Darkon]

It's cool, I deleted my post when I saw you removed the quotation.

That was fast anyway could you answer this , if you can

and are those gflops not a bit high for a g7x derived card ? or are the gflops from Vertex shaders accounted also ?

 

[Megadrive1988]

even though RSX is not G80, the PS4 GPU will probably be a derivative of the G100

 

[Darkon]

even though RSX is not G80, the PS4 GPU will probably be a derivative of the G100

If so that would make ps3 console life about 2-3 years , G120 would be a safer bet

 

[Carl B]

...anyway could you answer this , if you can

Well GPU FLOPS derivations are not my 'thing,' but I will quote Jaws on the exact matter, as he is certainly a master in the art if ever there was...

The G7x PS units are 16 flops/cycle each and the VS units are 10 flops/cycle each. The only valid solution is,

16 Flops/cycle x 24 PS units ~ 384 Flops/cycle

Therefore 24 PS units.

So that number doesn't include any VS flops/cycle. You can infer that there aren't any VS units in RSX or they omitted them in the slides. The latter being more likely...

Regarding the E3 2005 numbers, 8 VS units, 2-issue and the dot product numbers didn't match. Only 4 VS units, 4-issue matched with 24 PS units... so there's something 'fishie' still there with the VS units!

There was an NV patent that described combined vertex/ geometry shader units... so that would be one 'extreme' speculation...

Anyway so there are still some question marks on RSX's throughput, but the idea here is that the 384/cycle figure represents pixel shaders alone.

Note also that Jaws keeps the idea of geometry shading on RSX in play - which actually would harken back to that patent (though a different patent) I'm found quoting above in relation to G80/NVidia/DX10. I think though that with the hints that are out there of what is going on between Cell and RSX, it seems Cell would be taking care of that on it's end.

 

[Proelite]

RSX a G80? , that would make the Xenos a R700.