SCEI & Toshiba unveil 65nm process with eDRAM

Discussion in 'Console Technology' started by Vince, Dec 3, 2002.

  1. Vince

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    7
    http://www.sony.co.jp/SonyInfo/News/Press/200212/02-1203/

    http://www.nyse.com

    Wow, I've heard that before.... :roll: This is going to be so much fun watching people finally STFU.

    PS. Hey Ben, ever hear that comment in bold about preformance being directly proportional to lithograph before? I could have sworn I did, but then someone said it was wrong... I dunno...
     
  2. Blade

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,168
    Likes Received:
    3
    So maybe there is some ground being made in the "every appliance will be a computer" project that Sony is working on.
     
  3. Glonk

    Regular

    Joined:
    May 26, 2002
    Messages:
    334
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Markham, Ontario
    Vince, do you work for Sony?

    Honest question.

    This isn't some kind of breakthrough, it's an expected development.

    Sony will most likely be on 0.09micron chip/0.06 micron DRAM by 2005, and so will Intel. :roll:

    The way you're trumpeting this around like a major breakthrough or that Sony's going to own everyone is laughable at best...
     
  4. KnightBreed

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    203
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not sure what you and Ben argued about, but it seems to me the article is worded poorly. The performance increase does not directly come from the lithography process - it comes from the higher clocks and greater gate concentration the smaller process allows.

    Toshiba only recently began offering their .13um process to third parties. I wonder if they plan on ramping up R&D spending to stay competitive with the other titans (IBM, TSMC, UMC, Chartered).


    As a side note, Intel will be at .09um when the Prescott core bows late next year, and should be at .065um in 2005. Truth be told, if anybody beats Intel to market with either of the 2 processes I'll be incredibly surprised.
     
  5. Glonk

    Regular

    Joined:
    May 26, 2002
    Messages:
    334
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Markham, Ontario
    I agree, Intel has been incredibly aggressive in process technology the past couple years.

    0.09 micron will be in mass production by the 2nd half of 2003, and Toshiba probably won't do that until 2004 sometime...
     
  6. PC-Engine

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,799
    Likes Received:
    12
    What's the link to NYSE for? :-?
     
  7. Vince

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    7
    I realise, but after arguing over and over the exact same points listed here, only 6 months ago - I'm entitled to be a bitch. No, I don't work for Sony, but these things are pretty cut and dry, yet people argue them to death and it pisses me off. That is all.

    True, but as stated, the increase in preformance will come from the increased concurrency/parrallelisation (is that a word?) of the architecture thats possible with a smaller lithography process. Look historically at specilized hardware (3D works well) and even counting the NV30, the clockspeed increase has been perhaps 5-7X since the Riva128, yet the preformance is several orders of magnitude greater.

    They will be farther IMHO. Target for MS's specs and SCE seems to point to necessitate sub-90nm.

    Nobody will argue this with you.


    The NYSE link is for the mainbody quote, taken from a PR release on NYSE.com
     
  8. fbg1

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2002
    Messages:
    135
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY USA
    Didn't Gordon Moore say that? I'm no engineer, but I was under the distinct impression that that is the basis of Moore's Law. Increases in transistor density depends in large part upon advancements in lithography. No? Or is it the "directly proportional" part that you're questioning?
     
  9. BenSkywalker

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    823
    Likes Received:
    5
    Are you still not understanding what I have been trying to tell you for quite some time now? Increasing transistor density in a general purpose processor in no way whatsoever indicates that it will be able to compete with dedicated hardware at the same tasks. A P4 still can't compete with a TNT1 in rendering real time 3D graphics. Transistor density allows you to do more things, a point I have never argued. The issue has always been dedicated hardware versus software.

    If Sony relies on software rendering they will not be able to compete with dedicated hardware. For that matter, I think they are still iffy trying to push out 6.6TFLOPS based on .065u in a general purpose CPU.

    The best I can figure you either work for Sony or have an investment in them. You are honestly quoting a press release as 'evidence' in a discussion here?
     
  10. randycat99

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,772
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    turn around...
    It's not like they are trying to do "software rendering" on some x86 CPU (had they been, you would certainly be indisputibly correct). If it is an array of rapid execution vector units (albeit, governed by software), that pretty much blurs the line with "dedicated hardware". It just happens to not be what nVidia is up to, IMO.
     
  11. V3

    V3
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    3,304
    Likes Received:
    5
    I wouldn't call PS2 VUs and GS a software route. They are pretty dedicated hardware.

    Hmm, don't know about that. Those P4 is getting pretty fast.
     
  12. Vince

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    7
    But, see this is what pisses me off, your argument is fundimentally flawed, yet you keep arguing it.

    Whats the diffrence between a VU and a VS? Explain to me how a VU is 'general computing'. Whats the fundimental diffrence between a VU and the NV3x's new TCL front-end?

    Explain to me why a 'general processor' like the EE or SH-4 can outpace the <quote> Hardwired <quote> solutions that you speak of that nVidia produced at the same time. Why does the EE utterly destroy the NV1x's TCL front-end?

    ANSWER: Because it's throwing more tranistors at the problem. You [programmable] can maintain parity with a hardwired solution if you devote more resources [read logic] to the problem. This is simple. This is my point. Yet you fight it, over and over.

    Thank you Lord!! Look at OGL and DX10+. The merger of the PS and VS is comming, architectures like the P10/9 are going to be the future.

    Yep, what I'm advocating is that threw advanced lithography, you can increase the programmability of an architecture by a large amount while still maintining preformance parity with a comparable hardwired design. But, in order to do this, you must 'beat' Moore's Law - and thus to equal a hardwired design while maintaing flexibility - you must increase the usable transistor counts. This can be done threw: (a) More Advanced Lithography, (b) Multichip, (c) GRID/Cluster/Pervasive/or otherwise Computing, (d) Architectural Advance.

    Heh, neither... just know that I'm not wrong. Honestly... no. I was posting it anyways and it had the part that supported my position. This is all. Hey, had nothing better to do on here other than act out my ambitions to be a contemporary Patrick Henry and start an argument. Hey, and your always ready to argue back ;)

    There is no way they will yeild a true 6.6TFLOPS in one console... period. I'll be impressed if they can output a true TFLOP and sustain it, but I'm not so sure.

    I too, wonder if SCE will use a full software rendering approach with PS3, with the idea that the hardware will be more of a 'VU' like, scientific computing approach [not like the traditional CPU].

    The upsides if they can pull off a true TFLOP of sustained computer power thats fully programmable would be huge. Some very interesting things can be done by the developer who takes iniative and designs a custom pipeline for their work... atleast IMHO. SCE would definatly need some nVidia caliber Dev Rel.

    I doubt it would be near an nVidia powered solution, but does it have to be? Interesting questions emerge, such as with 1TFLOP [Which is well over the GSCube IIRC which rendered FF:TSW and Antz at 60fps] isn't that suficient? How much of a visual diffrence would be seen?

    The biggest question I have, is if a developer had full control, and could tailor the entire 3D pipeline for his title - how much is gained in effeciency? I mean, they could literally do anything... hell, banish trinagles. All the petty arguments about the nV2A's PS and the TEV's features would disapear.

    But, I bet there will be some sort of rasterizer/GSx
     
  13. Geeforcer

    Geeforcer Harmlessly Evil
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,297
    Likes Received:
    464
    BTW, a company I used to work for now offers of 80 nm (yes, 80) lithographic equipment.
     
  14. MfA

    MfA
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    6,682
    Likes Received:
    444
    As long as it is not economically viable it is irrelevant.
     
  15. PC-Engine

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,799
    Likes Received:
    12
    I've got a prototype quantum computer in my backyard that works, the only problem is it doesn't work at any temperature above absolute zero. :lol:
     
  16. Gubbi

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,505
    Likes Received:
    829
    If Sony goes for the all software approach in PS 3, they will lose. While it's true that the pixel/vertex (and soon to be unified) shader are just small SIMD processors, alot of operations are sunk into other tasks, such as early Z rejection, Z comparisons for MSAA, for texture filtering etc. These are all operations that can be solved with great efficiency in hardware.

    Just imagine the amount of work a general purpose processor would have to do to take 6 Z-samples (like the R300) for MSAA, shade each fragment based on numerous anisotropically filtered textures, with say 2-8 bilinear samples per texture.

    Can you say *ouch* ?

    Cheers
    Gubbi
     
  17. Guest

    Guest Guest

    PS3 will rule with CELL!
     
  18. zurich

    zurich Kendoka
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    2,376
    Likes Received:
    2
    You forgot the :oops:
     
  19. Guest

    Guest Guest

    PS3 will rule with CELL!
    Xbox2 or GC2 will not stand up to PS3 if they are released within the same time frame. :oops:
     
  20. JF_Aidan_Pryde

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    601
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    New York
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...