Which chip?
- Thread starter micron
- Start date
micron said:
The XGPU is not exactly a previously made GPU.. its was based on previously released GPU's but it's custom made...
like saying that Flipper is based on the Radeon series or the PS2's GS is based on.......... ehm....................
Gubbi said:london-boy said:like saying that Flipper is based on the Radeon series or the PS2's GS is based on.......... ehm....................
3Dfx Voodoo 1. But with more pipes, faster and with embedded ram.
Cheers
Gubbi
u sure about that???? unless u mean an INSANELY faster voodoo1 then fine..... but i'd say at least a voodoo3... they're just different.. much different than XGPU-Geforce4 or Flipper-Radeon......
i usually consider the ps2 GPU as GS+VU1 anyway, and its not like there's anything resembling that on the market is it....
megadrive0088
Regular
"I know that the Nintendo Game Cube uses an ATI chip to render the graphics, but what chip is it?....is it a chip that is used on a PC board as well?"
The GameCube chip you speak of is only owned by ATI since ATI bought the company that made that GameCube chip. its not based on any of the ATI designed Radeon chips (although Radeon 9700 was made with the help of the people that made Gamecube's gfx chip) The GameCube chip we're talking about is called Flipper, and its not really related to any current PC technology. the company that made it, ArtX, was a splinter that broke away from SGI in 1997 to form their own company with their main goal of getting the contract to make the GPU for Nintendo's sucessor to N64. (Dolphin/GameCube) these are mostly the same people that made N64's graphics chip, the RCP.
ATI bought ArtX in 2000 for $400M. that is part of the reason why ATI's graphics have improved so much from the Rage128 days and early Radeon days. It was very wise of ATI to buy ArtX rather than let Nvidia get their paws on that talent.
ATI gets to stick its label on the front of every GameCube, even though they did not design the chip inside it. the next Nintendo console GPU however, if provided by ATI, would truly be an "ATI designed chip"
now that the intergration of ArtX into ATI has long since happened.
The GameCube chip you speak of is only owned by ATI since ATI bought the company that made that GameCube chip. its not based on any of the ATI designed Radeon chips (although Radeon 9700 was made with the help of the people that made Gamecube's gfx chip) The GameCube chip we're talking about is called Flipper, and its not really related to any current PC technology. the company that made it, ArtX, was a splinter that broke away from SGI in 1997 to form their own company with their main goal of getting the contract to make the GPU for Nintendo's sucessor to N64. (Dolphin/GameCube) these are mostly the same people that made N64's graphics chip, the RCP.
ATI bought ArtX in 2000 for $400M. that is part of the reason why ATI's graphics have improved so much from the Rage128 days and early Radeon days. It was very wise of ATI to buy ArtX rather than let Nvidia get their paws on that talent.
ATI gets to stick its label on the front of every GameCube, even though they did not design the chip inside it. the next Nintendo console GPU however, if provided by ATI, would truly be an "ATI designed chip"
now that the intergration of ArtX into ATI has long since happened.
megadrive0088
Regular
but GameCube and PS2's gfx chips (Flipper and GS respectively) have some unique qualities that XGPU doesnt have. embedded memory and very high bandwidth. among other things. makes them very un PC-like which i like. will be impossible to emulate them for many years also.
megadrive0088 said:
makes me think about emulating CELL one day
london-boy said:megadrive0088 said:
makes me think about emulating CELL one day
(im quoting myself how sad)
(sarcasm ON)...but one day we wont have to emulate CELL because EVERYTHING will have CELL inside... (sarcasm OFF)
megadrive0088
Regular
beyond a shadow of a doubt. both the talent and the technology from ArtX have helped ATI become a leader in 3D graphics. what a vast improvement over the Rage128 days.
but the other talent that often gets overlooked, that also greatly improved ATI, is the talent they got when they hired many of the former Real3D engineers also. Real3D was at least as good as ArtX, if not better. they founded many of the basic building blocks of 3D. far too much to explain here.
megadrive0088 said:
Real3D had me hooked when I saw what Model 3 was capable of since 1996. I go to arcades today and I'm still playing SuperGT (Scud Race) and The Lost World light gun games. Model 3 had to be one of the greatest leaps in 3D graphics for games. Voodoo1, PSX, N64 vs Model 3 in 1996, no contest. Too bad Model 3 costs a fortune even to this day.
megadrive0088
Regular
true. Model 3 games were massively impressive then and even now. 3D graphics in the home paled in comparasion, even Voodoo2 SLI wasnt as impressive, same with TNT2. even the Dreamcast didnt live upto Model 3 in some ways. though overall DC could handle more geometry. now that we have XBox and GameCube however, we're finally got home technology that surpasses Model 3, but not by leaps and bounds.
It's great that ATI has some Real3D people working for them, I was getting tired of seeing Nvidia as the sole leader in graphics