Unofficially RSX = G80

[j^aws]

Ugh... this wouldn't surprise me at all...

*disclaimer, expect the worse, hope for the best*

Now that's out of the way, ever since E3 2005, the disclosed numbers never added up for the VS pipelines... and I've mentioned that several times on this board...

I've posted a bunch of patents before suggesting G80 tech, one of them hinting at a hybrid GS/VS unit and I wouldn't be surprised if the PS units were an evolution of the NV47's for the G80...

Anyway, when confronted with the number of VS units (which is widely assumed to be 8), there has always been silence! Hmmm...

 

[ZiFF]

G80?

Seems like wishful thinking. But maybe Sony will pull a blinder in their October conference.

 

[babcat]

I'm more eager than ever for Sony to disclose the truth about the RSX whatever version it might be. We all need to keep our ears and eyes open for anything coming from nVIDIA. Perhaps they will release the information very soon and we can all know the truth.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

More likely IMO they'll keep quiet and let internet forums the world over spread the idea of technology in PS3 in advance of what's actually in there. Why would they be in any hurry to declare that PS3 uses last-gen PC GPU tech and quash the rumours?

 

[babcat]

Because consumers are going to be buying the PS3 and deserve to know it's specifications. They are going to be saving up for it, pre-ordering it, and putting a lot money down on it. Regardless if the RSX is a N47 (that is what it currently is) or gets UPGRADED to a brand new model (RSX Ver. 2.0) the consumers should know what they are paying for!

That is the reason, period.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Because consumers are going to be buying the PS3 and deserve to know it's specifications.

They're buying it to play games and whatnot. What's inside doesn't matter when the public are buying based on what it shows when in use. Nintendo aren't releasing the Wii's specs for precisely that reason; their numbers won't benefit them with people who compare metrics.

There's no legal (or moral) requirement for Sony to post specs that I know of.

 

[Arwin]

Once the PS3 is released, I'm sure people will take it apart in any way possible and uncover what's in there. Sure, not everything is easy to find out, but especially if Linux is half decent and/or homebrewers manage to hack into the system and/or stuff will eventually leak out from beyond the NDAs ...

 

[Geo]

So if it's not G80, then everyone will be crushed and mutter hateful stuff about Sony having fooled us again, etc?

This kind of thing seems more aimed at creating disappointment in the reality than anything else. I suspect Sony doesn't talk about RSX much because while it is a solid choice, it's just not the sexy part of PS3 at this point.

 

[j^aws]

...
There's no legal (or moral) requirement for Sony to post specs that I know of.

There maybe a legal precedent for Sony because they've already announced clockspeeds, i.e. 550Mhz for RSX, but if it ships at a different speed, then they maybe forced to disclose... and as a consumer, I should hope so.

So if it's not G80, then everyone will be crushed and mutter hateful stuff about Sony having fooled us again, etc?

Well, they're already off my Christmas list! And my record book doesn't have a classification below "scum", so they're okay on that front!

 

[Cheezdoodles]

I can unofficially confirm that the RSX will be based off NVIDIA’s upcoming G80 technology. The latest IP has been done for quite sometime (actually 3 months); NVIDIA will be announcing details soon. Anyhow, my source is very legit…works for NVIDIA!! You don’t have to believe me…but my source is a very honorable person. Maybe not to NDA agreements....

this is about as likely as the Xenos becoming an R600 over a dashboard upgrade.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Regardless if the RSX is a N47 (that is what it currently is) or gets UPGRADED to a brand new model (RSX Ver. 2.0) the consumers should know what they are paying for!

That is the reason, period.

Relax, please... and may I suggest that you spend a few more months with reading B3D before trying to contribute to it? Your current activity, to say the least, only adds to the unnecessary noise...

 

[El Leone]

I don't really see the need for Sony to upgrade the RSX, as the general consumer responce is that the PS3 will have superior graphics to everything else anyway.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

There maybe a legal precedent for Sony because they've already announced clockspeeds, i.e. 550Mhz for RSX, but if it ships at a different speed, then they maybe forced to disclose... and as a consumer, I should hope so.

I can see a case for disclosing changes for already advertised info (though is anyone really going to sue Sony for buying a PS3 based on the E3 '05 specs?) but disclosing the architecture isn't warranted. If the Intarweb wants to promote an idea that PS3 has a G80 type GPU, there's no need for Sony to disclose it's a less advanced GPU and I wouldn't expect them too. Letting fans and the poorly informed do much of your PR work is a benefit of having strong mindshare and I expect any company would ride that if they had the chance.

 

[Brimstone]

That is not what I read that announcement as at all!

PSP2 I think is what most of us concluded back during the actual announcement...

But whatever the case we already *know* that RSX has 24 pixel pipes. And yet you throw up a theory that adds 50% to both it's pixel and it's vertex pipes, bases it on G80, and does god-knows-what to it's thermal footprint...?

Sony hasn't even die shrunk the PSP to the 65nm node yet. The hardware manufacturing has remained at the .90nm node thus far. Plus the PSP hasn't even been out that long. To me logic dictates Sony wants to get the price lower as fast a possible with the PSP platform. Spending more money than the "nv47" contract and creating a new PSP2 model this soon just doesn't hold water.


One thing that has always jumped out at me is Rambus XDR makes a lot of sense in a console GPU. Sony probably already cut a very sweet royalty deal with Rambus in the first place because of the CELL project. Their license fee is going to be very low.

Now the reported main supplier of XDR for the PS3 is going to be Elpida with Samsung supplying GDDR-3 (at least this is how I understand it). If Sony was to use XDR also for the GPU, they would double the volume they consume, which would help drive down cost more over the longterm. Elpida not long ago completed the construction of their new 300mm fab in Hiroshima. They're going to have a strong desire to supply Sony with memory. If the PS3 was to utilize only XDR, Samsung would only be used as a second source.


I don't dispute the GPU hardware in the developer kits is nv47. I'm just skeptical that is the final GPU that will be in the retail consumer PS3 machines. Heck, I won't all that suprised if the video ram doubles to 512 MB. Sony and Kutaragi posses that overkill mentality. Look at the PS2 compared to the Dreamcast.

If Sony updates their specs to something like this

G80 hertiage architechture GPU
128 bit XDR bus with 512 MB of total video ram

they willl have essentially Dreamcasted the XB360 hardware. This would have a chilling effect on the perception of the XB360. They already have the favor of Blu-Ray vs. DVD drive. This is similar to PS2 DVD drive vs Dreamcast enhanced CD drive. They could promoste the hell out of PS3 1080p games vs. 720p XB360. 1080p is double the pixel resolution of 720p.

The only thing left to do would be for Sony executives to come to their senses and license Immersion rumble (haptic) technology. Not having rumble is one of the lamest things possible for a dedicated game machine.

 

[INKster]

I wonder how the game console market even survived before rumble came along, some 10 years ago...

Someone do something about this thread, before it ends up at The Inquirer as another *fact*.
It might even give "Crazy" Ken another whacky late night idea and postpone the launch for another 6 months...
Europe has suffered enough.

 

[Carl B]

Brimstone ok, if you don't want to entertain why the PSP2 contract would be initiated so far in advance, then at least let's look at this very basic information:

Work on the chip described in this 'second' contract will conclude in early 2007. PS3's are being manufactured now. How in the world is that second contract related to G80/RSX when it's target delivery date is after the RSX has been shipped to millions of homes?

I wonder how the game console market even survived before rumble came along, some 10 years ago...

Someone do something about this thread, before it ends up at The Inquirer as another *fact*.
It might even give "Crazy" Ken another whacky late night idea and postpone the launch for another 6 months...
Europe has suffered enough.

This would absolutely *never* end up at the Inquirer, because it's a positive rumor about RSX. They have standards you know!

 

[babcat]

Jaws,

The numbers don't add up because they have never been honest with us about the RSX in the first place. Or at least they have not given us the full specifications. They need to come forward and just lay the facts on the table so we can all have them.

To a few others on here,

The fact is consumers deserve to know the specs of a product they wish to purchase. Additionally, the simple truth is that unless at least the overall specs of the RSX are not released by launch then a lot of people are going to start making a lot of noise. Right now tons of people are saying that they will just wait until launch to get the specs, but if the specs don't come out by then Sony is going to have enough people upset they will be forced to release the information. Of course they don't have to give us anything at all, but the truth is there is a peaceful and respectful but always vicious "war" between producers and consumers. As a consumer I don't care if Sony is obligated to give the specs or not. If they don't give the specs by launch I will join up with all the other voices and peacefully and respectfully demand Sony to give us the information.

Quite frankly, I'm a consumer so I could care less what is best for Sony. I care what is best for me the consumer and part of that is knowing the specifications and facts about a product I am about to purchase. I'm not about to bow down and worship their products and blindly purchase them.

Also, I'm very happy that at least some people are publically expressing their feelings about the RSX on this thread. The RSX has been a big mystery for a long time and since the launch is only a couple months away it's about time we start getting some kind of confirmation about the true nature of the RSX.

By the way, specifications do matter. They are important. There are literally thousands upon thousands of gamers I see talking about the specs of the 360 and PS3 in various forums. They all have dollars that are going to be spent on gaming related products. For goodness sakes, one friend of mine a while back called me up (he does not have internet access and knows nothing about hardware) to ask which console is going to be the most powerful because that is the one he wants to purchase, because he is only going to purchase one of them. People do care about the specs. Lots of other things matter too and perhaps even more so. But no one in God's green earth is going to make me fall for that line that the specs don't matter. Because they sure do!

 

[Brimstone]

Brimstone ok, if you don't want to entertain why the PSP2 contract would be initiated so far in advance, then at least let's look at this very basic information:

Work on the chip described in this 'second' contract will conclude in early 2007. PS3's are being manufactured now. How in the world is that second contract related to G80/RSX when it's target delivery date is after the RSX has been shipped to millions of homes?



This would absolutely *never* end up at the Inquirer, because it's a positive rumor about RSX. They have standards you know!

The additional work that would last into 2007 would be for getting the design up and running on a .65nm process. For .90nm that work is already finished.

 

[Arwin]

Look, what people seem to keep forgetting is that the price of the PS3 console is a very important factor. They can probably afford to be a little more expensive than the 360, but not much. At best, they might be able to afford adding some more XDR memory on the Cell side, but they might even do that more because they want the Linux stuff to work out than anything else.

By now I think it is safe to assume that the RSX is going to be what was announced, and the only really interesting bits are what adjustments have been made to fully integrate the chip in the PS3 hardware. Here you have to think about how it connects with the Cell and RSX memory, not just in terms of the graphics we already have seen, but in terms of specific functions supported, actual performance, and so on.

 

[trinibwoy]

No, the G80 technology is more than that. It is a completely different architecture with all kinds of new methods for doing things.

Yet you think that after months of work on G71 Sony can just "switch" in a G80 based part and everything will be fine and dandy. I can see why so many are getting upset with this simplistic view. You are treating the situation like a PC where you upgrade a graphics card and presto! Higher 3DMark scores galore.

If Nvidia and Sony were planning this fabled coup they would have to be building two G80 based cards in parallel - one for the PC and one for the PS3. I won't mention the obvious wastage of millions invested in RSX integration and game development till now (oops I just did!)

You should really take Laa Yosh's advice and learn a bit more before embarking on these crusades. People are giving you technical reasons why this is not practical and it doesn't look like you're equipped to counter those reasons.