So is PS3 GPU one generation beyond Xenon graphics chip?

[Vince]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Intel was still sampling it's 90nm Prescott and Dothan cores in September of 2003 and suffered problems which delayed production from Q2 2003 to Q1 2004. SCE was sampling according to the one report (posted above) that summer and you could buy a 90nm PS2 or PSX that Fall or Christmas (Dec 13th) respectively.

• Intel finally announced the new 90nm core for Pentium 4 processors, Xbit Labs[/url]]So, today, on February 2, 2004 Intel Corporation announced and started selling new processors formerly known as Prescott. These processors based on a new 90nm core will continue the Pentium 4 family at least for another year little by little ousting the previous 130nm Northwood core.

 

[one]

If 45nm is positive, what's 65nm like? Super-duper-positive? 8)

well once you use the sony hype processor to industry standard process decoders your sentence reads as follows...

"if 65nm is positive, what's 90nm like? Super-duper-positive? 8)"

Sony has a habit of embelishing their technology. Lets state a positive. I am positive that no one will beat Intel to a process node. In general the companies pushing the technology are doing good to hit within 6 months of the Intel transition. This is generally the case because Intel does a large portion of the tools development with the process equipment vendors.

Aaron Spink
speaking for myself inc.

Intel is free from hype? Where's my 4GHz?

Well I hate to point out something to those who don't bother to use google by themselves

Intel released 90nm Pentium 4E (Prescott) at 2004/02/01.
Sony released 90nm EE+GS (SoC with eDRAM) in the PSX at 2003/12/13.

I don't know jack about how well the process technology at Intel is, but I'm sure the design of Prescott and its too high TDP prevented Intel from moving in 90nm process any quicker as it was too hot for a commercial product. IIRC they planned to release 90nm Prescott in late 2003 but the fact is they couldn't and it's the official history too. Enough of execuse already

 

[jvd]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Intel was still sampling it's 90nm Prescott and Dothan cores in September of 2003 and suffered problems which delayed production from Q2 2003 to Q1 2004. SCE was sampling according to the one report (posted above) that summer and you could buy a 90nm PS2 or PSX that Fall or Christmas (Dec 13th) respectively.

• Intel finally announced the new 90nm core for Pentium 4 processors, Xbit Labs[/url]]So, today, on February 2, 2004 Intel Corporation announced and started selling new processors formerly known as Prescott. These processors based on a new 90nm core will continue the Pentium 4 family at least for another year little by little ousting the previous 130nm Northwood core.

vince my fathers centrino is 90nm tech and was puchased last nov .

Intel has a habit of using the new manufacturing process for mobile chips first where it is needed the most then moving the desktop chips to it

 

[Megadrive1988]

I think both Xenon and PS3 GPUs will be similar in many ways. both should be capable of peak vertex performance in the low billions and in-game real-world performance of hundreds of millions of vertices/polygons with lighting, shaders, textures, rendering features on. it might be Xenon is is the low-to-mid 100s of millions and PS3 is in the mid-to-upper 100s of millions. there will be some difference but not too much. kinda like the difference between Gamecube and Xbox (geometry wise) and about the same in terms of shader capability. still, i'm just specu-guessing 8)

 

[one]

vince my fathers centrino is 90nm tech and was puchased last nov .

Intel has a habit of using the new manufacturing process for mobile chips first where it is needed the most then moving the desktop chips to it

Pentium M @ 90nm (Dothan) was released at 2004/05/10.

 

[jvd]

vince my fathers centrino is 90nm tech and was puchased last nov .

Intel has a habit of using the new manufacturing process for mobile chips first where it is needed the most then moving the desktop chips to it

Pentium M @ 90nm (Dothan) was released at 2004/05/10.

Hmm time to look in the laptop again !


In other news tsmc has been installing 65nm machines since november

TSMC believes immersion lithography may be called upon for 65nm production and are the preferred method for 45nm production. TSMC said it began installing its first 65nm immersion lithography system in early November.

http://www.reed-electronics.com/electronicnews/article/CA489760.html?ref=nbth

 

[Vince]

vince my fathers centrino is 90nm tech and was puchased last nov

Interesting, what core is it? It was my understanding that Banias was 130nm and that the 90nm Dothan was pushed back to 2004:

• Register[/url]]Most recently scheduled for an early Q1 launch, the 90nm chip will now ship during Q2, probably in May

EDIT: One, you're too damn fast.

 

[jvd]

vince i can be wrong , one says i'm wrong , I have to check again , I could have read the core wrong .

 

[Vince]

I wouldn't have responded to you if I saw his post, which is why I said he's too damn fast. I do step away from the laptop from time to time

Concerning 65nm, TSMC's roadmap. Makes you wonder about the supposed eDRAM since TSMC is fabbing the GPU, something (perhaps the roadmap) doesn't seem right.

EDIT: It's listed as a "Fall 2004" Roadmap and has the following:

• Logic
  [list:2ced363522]
• High-Speed
  [list:2ced363522]
• CLN90GT (1.2/2.5V) Sampling 2004, Production 2005
• CLN65HS - Sampling 2H2006, Production 2006

[*]General Purpose

• CLN90G (1/1.8/3.3V) Available Now
• CLN65G - Sampling 2H2006 (4Q), Production to follow

[/list:u:2ced363522]
[*]Embedded High Density

• 1T-Q - CL013G Available Now
• 1T-P - CL013LP Available Now
• 1T-MiM - CLN90GT (1.2/2.5V) Sample 1H2006, Production 2006

[/list:u:2ced363522]

 

[jvd]

whats it say , i refuse to have the pdf viewer installed on my system (used to crash my system for so long )

anyway thats the news from today according to that website haha

 

[aaronspink]

When did the EE+GS@90 powered PlayStation2's go on sale, refresh my memory Aaron.

We can get into quote wars if you like. I stand by my statement.

I'm sorry... I had a recollection from 1999. I can't say much more than this, you just continue to defy all logic -- there are 90nm first generation Cell chips in circulation today.

I never said there weren't first generation 90nm chips in circulation today.

65nm samples are being evaluated today with an investment in 65nm production of well over $3Billion and a Sony contract on initial production from this node. Ohh, and 45nm has a ~2006 introduction -- stop being obtuse.

well over $3B eh? And the only way they'll get 45nm production in 2006 is if they lie their asses off. 2008. Mark my words. They may do a press demonstration of something that call a 45nm PS3 before that but they will not be in volume production.

Aaron Spink
speaking for myself inc.

 

[DeanoC]

Intel is producing when it supplies them for OEM production test, AFAIK that occured in September 2003 for 90nm.

Test was a good few months before. Intel and AMD have to supply OEMs with lots of chips so they can test them, the time you can actually buy them is significantly delayed.

Intel are currently in test with 65nm processors. Which means if you have a very good reason its possible to get one (last time I was involved with getting a test Intel processor (it was a Katmai 300Mhz) it was hand delivered and I was told it cost about $50,000 to produce). Sampling (relatively low volume production) will occur very early 2005, you'll be able to buy one late next year.

 

[Vince]

We can get into quote wars if you like. I stand by my statement.

What quote war? The fact is anyone could buy a PS2 or PSX fabricated on a Low-K 90nm process in Fall of 2003, you couldn't do the same from Intel or anyone else in the consumer sector for that matter. You can't argue this fact.

well over $3B eh? And the only way they'll get 45nm production in 2006 is if they lie their asses off. 2008. Mark my words. They may do a press demonstration of something that call a 45nm PS3 before that but they will not be in volume production.

Yeah. And I'll assume you're not talking for AMD/IBM for that matter as AMD has stated they anticipate 2007 for 45nm and their development agreement covering 32nm runs untill 2008. So, I'll mark your words all right; I look forward to 2008 and my PS4.

 

[Mulciber]

What quote war? The fact is anyone could buy a PS2 or PSX fabricated on a Low-K 90nm process in Fall of 2003, you couldn't do the same from Intel or anyone else in the consumer sector for that matter. You can't argue this fact.

you're going to compair availability of a process when one companys target clockspeed is >3ghz and the others is 200mhz

 

[Jov]

What quote war? The fact is anyone could buy a PS2 or PSX fabricated on a Low-K 90nm process in Fall of 2003, you couldn't do the same from Intel or anyone else in the consumer sector for that matter. You can't argue this fact.

you're going to compair availability of a process when one companys target clockspeed is >3ghz and the others is 200mhz

Isn't the argument is regarding 90nm in a commercial device available for purchase (thus mass production)?

It wasn’t regarding GHz, otherwise they'll be debating which had the samples first.

Can we safely assume a Cell chip at 4.6 GHz @ 90nm exist, given its going thru ICCC? If so what does Intel have that they can reveal to the world? I am sure they have something beyond their current top crop, but how ready is it?

 

[Mulciber]

What quote war? The fact is anyone could buy a PS2 or PSX fabricated on a Low-K 90nm process in Fall of 2003, you couldn't do the same from Intel or anyone else in the consumer sector for that matter. You can't argue this fact.

you're going to compair availability of a process when one companys target clockspeed is >3ghz and the others is 200mhz

Isn't the argument is regarding 90nm in a commercial device available for purchase (thus mass production)?

It wasn’t regarding GHz, otherwise they'll be debating which had the samples first.

no, that was not "the" arguement. that was the arguement that Vince put forth. considering the nature of what is being argued, clockspeed and transister count both play a crucial role in determining how quickly a chip can be put into a commercialy viable product.

 

[Jov]

Isn't the argument is regarding 90nm in a commercial device available for purchase (thus mass production)?

It wasn’t regarding GHz, otherwise they'll be debating which had the samples first.

no, that was not "the" arguement. that was the arguement that Vince put forth. considering the nature of what is being argued, clockspeed and transister count both play a crucial role in determining how quickly a chip can be put into a commercialy viable product.

So you want to factor in process size (@90 nm) and speed (xHz)?

Firstly, when comparing the EE+GS to the P4 is already "apples vs oranges".

Secondly, haven't AMD (and Sony and others) proved it’s not just the speed of the chip, but the performance? At lower Hz some chips still blow those a lot fast out of the water under certain conditions.

So what was it we're debating again?

 

[Mulciber]

Isn't the argument is regarding 90nm in a commercial device available for purchase (thus mass production)?

It wasn’t regarding GHz, otherwise they'll be debating which had the samples first.

no, that was not "the" arguement. that was the arguement that Vince put forth. considering the nature of what is being argued, clockspeed and transister count both play a crucial role in determining how quickly a chip can be put into a commercialy viable product.

So you want to factor in process size (@90 nm) and speed (xHz)?

Firstly, when comparing the EE+GS to the P4 is already "apples vs oranges".

um, did you miss the point of my question to Vince entirely, then?
that is exactly what i was pointing out

Secondly, haven't AMD (and Sony and others) proved it’s not just the speed of the chip, but the performance? At lower Hz some chips still blow those a lot fast out of the water under certain conditions.

I dont care to look up the flops and gips counts of the p4 or the ee, but my guess is the 3.8ghz p4 is still faster than a 200mhz ee.

edit: though i'd like to add that (to forstal any rebuttles of "well the ee clockrate could go as high as...") that actually has no bearing on the point I was attempting to make

 

[Brimstone]

Can we safely assume a Cell chip at 4.6 GHz @ 90nm exist, given its going thru ICCC? If so what does Intel have that they can reveal to the world? I am sure they have something beyond their current top crop, but how ready is it?

The SRAM running a 4.6 GHz might be related to "CELL" needing to have low latency because of all the cores and wire delay issues. I believe Deadmeat has guessed at 1.2 Ghz per SPU. To me Deadmeats estimates are more plausible, but maybe he is wrong. It won't be long before the world finds out or someone leaks some real info.

 

[SiBoy]

I'm sorry... I had a recollection from 1999. I can't say much more than this, you just continue to defy all logic -- there are 90nm first generation Cell chips in circulation today. 65nm samples are being evaluated today with an investment in 65nm production of well over $3Billion and a Sony contract on initial production from this node. Ohh, and 45nm has a ~2006 introduction -- stop being obtuse.

Nice guess. You have no idea. I love how all of your "evidence" comes from links in the press room on sony.com.

ISSCC != circulation and test chip != sample

About the only thing we know is that at 90nm the Cell test chip is huge, and Sony knows they better get to 65nm PDQ.