What will Sony add to their RSX GPU development?
- Thread starter leechan25
- Start date
aaronspink said:And I predict that if its the best GPU on the market when PS3 is released, you won't be able to buy a PS3 because they won't be able to produce enough parts to satisfy a 1/10th of the Xbox360 launch volume. You've got you understand that ATI and Nvidia have really gone to the edge and in some respects over it with their high end PC GPUs. They are monsters, they use significant power (and will for the next release too, since the high end buyers don't seem to mind), significant silicon real estate (300+ mm^2), push the process voltages to the max, and are willing to sell parts that are at the very upper end of the yield curve. If sony wants that, they:
A) need a bigger box design and power supply to cool and power it
B) need an insanely high price so they don't loose their shirt
C) need at least 1 more fab for volume
D) their heads checked
Aaron Spink
speaking for myself inc.
Aaron did you sold your soul to MS?Even if the PS3 was like 10X more powerful than the Xbox360 you will still go all out in defending that MS's console is more powerful.
For option D,I think you're the one that should have your head checked.Instead of speaking for yourself you're speaking to youself instead.
aaronspink
Veteran
hugo said:
Hmm, a troll. I probably shouldn't feel the troll, but why not...
In Q1 of '06 both Nvidia and ATI are going to be releasing monster GPUs. ATI will release the R580 with effectively 48 shader pipes, a clock speed likely in the range of 600-700 MHz, ~2 GHz memory, and a power level at least around 100 watts, oh and a die size easily north of 300 mm^2. Roughly a month later, Nvidia will be releasing the G71 with 32 pipes, a clockspeed of around 700 MHz, ~2 GHz memory, a die size well north of 300 mm^2 and a power point of at least 100 watts.
Both of these will likely be significantly faster than the GPUs in either the Xbox360 or the PS3. They will have significantly larger die sizes, they will be at the very top of the speed bin, they will cost in the range of $700 on their own, they will have fairly exotic cooling, and will push the process technology to the edge. Each will be happy if their PE/Ultra parts sell in the range of 100K parts over 6 months, assuming they can actually produce 100K parts at the PE/Ultra clockspeeds.
The cards that these are put on will likely consume as much power as the Xenos and Xenon combined.
The statement that I responded to, was someone expecting the GPU in the PS3 to be more powerfull than either of these. Quite simply, if it is, PS3 will ship in launch numbers that will make the Xbox360 Japan launch look spectacular. Which is why I fully expect Sony, since they aren't idiots (unless certain posters that share a name with Mr Weaving), won't try to put something on that level within the PS3. Will it be competitive with Xenos? Sure. Will it be as flexable? probably not. But then again, Sony's eggs are in the CELL basket.
MS went with a relatively straight forward CPU and a pretty exotic GPU. Sony will likely go with the exotic CPU and a relatively straight forward GPU. The race will be what cool things can the MS developers do with the GPU vs what cool things can the Sony developers do with CELL.
Hmm, guess thats why I actually have respect and you have none...
Aaron Spink
speaking for myself inc.
aaronspink
Veteran
tema said:
Um, you don't consider a unified shader architecture exotic? Fine, care to point to another one?
Why don't you stop trolling and start lurking.
Aaron Spink
speaking for myself inc.
In some cases they might be. In other cases the opposite might be true.weaksauce said:
Some true and exciting innovations (or at least further developments) are:
* Unified shaders (first production GPU ever with this feature)
* Memory export feature; random access to main RAM from GPU (again first time ever)
* Bidirectional CPU-GPU L2 cache interaction (GC had one way; xenos does both)
* Slaving CPU core to xenos to feed it with display list data
Kutaragi has already alluded to the fact that the chip will have redundancy built in as is the case with Cell, so maybe if it's the 32-pipe design most are expecting, they'll go with a disabled quad. Or whatever the configuration, a disabled quad.
Anyway I think I summed things up pretty well in post #4 of this thread; it's crazy seeing us go through the RSX motions every other week here.
Anyway I think I summed things up pretty well in post #4 of this thread; it's crazy seeing us go through the RSX motions every other week here.
Last edited by a moderator:
Like here:Platon said:
But for how much longer, we wonder? With the PlayStation 3 not due until March 2006, won't the next generation of PC graphics be here by then? "At the time consoles are announced, they are so far beyond what people are used to, it's unimaginable," David comments. "At the time they're shipped, there's a narrower window until the next PC architecture." In other words, RSX looks incredible now, but when it launches, there'll be a smaller time until PC looks better.
http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2005/07/11/nvidia_rsx_interview/2.html
yeah PC GPU's will get stronger 6 months to a year after PS3's gpu is completed. However, will PC CPU's give these powerful GPU's the processing power needed to push them what cell & RSX can do together? I think not. if you have to go out and buy a new cpu, ppu, and gpu (maybe even a FPGA chip) just to match what Xbox 360 & PS3 are doing; how can you said that pc hardware has surpassed these consoles? This is the reason why every new console generation takes more people (hardcore gamers) from PC gaming. Yeah, you could be one of those diehard PC gamers who would go out a build a super PC only to play two or three games that require that level of specs. Everything esle can be done on PS3 & Xbox 360 just fine.
That's fubar!
That's fubar!
ihamoitc2005
Veteran
Maybe.
Maybe you are right my friend but we cannot know but if what you say is true then specs of PS3 provided at E3 were not accurate no? In short history of consoles sometimes final specs are lower than early-release specs. Xbox is good example, also PSP. But if Sony is using modified G70 then it is probably that early specs are atleast accurate and maybe possible that early specs are too low. If Sony using G71, then maybe we interpret specs incorrectly such as dot-product and floating point (only apply to GPU not CPU+GPU). But, if pre-summer release of PS3 is true, then I feel it is too late to change hardware since quality tests must begun. My guess is RSX ~ G70. Also, I feel this is enough capability because Sega Lindbergh has maybe best graphics using probably G70 with 256MB.
Bliss said:
Maybe you are right my friend but we cannot know but if what you say is true then specs of PS3 provided at E3 were not accurate no? In short history of consoles sometimes final specs are lower than early-release specs. Xbox is good example, also PSP. But if Sony is using modified G70 then it is probably that early specs are atleast accurate and maybe possible that early specs are too low. If Sony using G71, then maybe we interpret specs incorrectly such as dot-product and floating point (only apply to GPU not CPU+GPU). But, if pre-summer release of PS3 is true, then I feel it is too late to change hardware since quality tests must begun. My guess is RSX ~ G70. Also, I feel this is enough capability because Sega Lindbergh has maybe best graphics using probably G70 with 256MB.
Platon said:
Yet in another interview they stated that the RSX will be the most powerful chip avaible when it comes out.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/editorial/display/ces2005_2.html
scooby_dooby
Legend
that's nearly a year old quote, talk about reaching.
xbdestroya said:
The story was that MS approached Sony about using Windows CE as the OS for the PS2 and after Sony laughed in their faces, MS wanted a vendetta.
Then all the EE hype included talk about the PS2 replacing the PC, which you know is going to get MS excited.
The more prosaic reason is that MS needs growth in new markets where it has low market share. So along with cell phones, TV, etc., gaming is suppose to provide them revenue and profit growth potential.
Regarding the RSX, December is half over so whatever it is, it's in the hands of developers or will soon be, right? The so-called final kit?
wco81 said:
I don't recall the Windows CE move on MS' part, though I wouldn't be surprised with them fresh from their win with SEGA. I *do* remember how MS approached both Sony and Nintendo in the recent past about getting onboard the DirectX and XNA bandwagon, and of course met with expected results.
I'm still going to stick with perceived threat from the PS2 over a vendetta for being scorned as the primary catalyst for MS' entry into this thing, but whatever the case, since 2000 this thing has become about something greater in the war for consumers eyes and dollars.
Sony seems like they might *finally* deliver with PS3 on the promises of PS2 in terms of it's place in the living room - and then some on top of that as well - while Microsoft seems like a year from now they will have a very synergistic relationship in place between Vista and the 360. It'll be interesting to see what happens.
The final dev kits... it's all a mystery at the moment. No confirmation from *anyone* that they've shipped, but something's got to be happening on that front shortly if it hasn't already.
Bill said:
I think Sony has a lot of fans for a number of reasons, good hardware, with lots of good software. Hard to argue against that, and the reason why I am a Sony fan. You can call it hype all you want, but in the end, Sony delivers and gets tons of support.
You should not resent our choices.
On the GPU, I don't see why Sony needs anything above a 24 pipeline part at 550 MHz, it certainly more than powerful enough for the next four years. I have no doubt developers will get amazing results out of those pipelines.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
