Will case size limit Revolution's processing capability?

[Fox5]

It's still a laptop, and horses for courses. "Competitive" lies entirely in what kind of laptop you are looking for.

The kind with high end performance hardware stuffed into a small box.
Yes, revolution could go mac mini style and be severely underpowered and small, but it doesn't have to be.

Will case size limit Revolutions processing capability?



If this is the case size....

2005 launch: Yes
2006 launch: Most Likely
2007 launch: Doubtful but possible.
2008 launch: No

Err, you mean limit it from being as high as xbox 360? Because honestly, I don't think high end performance parts are going to get cooler as the years go on, if rev launched in 2008 with xbox 360 graphics, well that'd be pretty pathetic, especially since ps4 and xbox 720 would be unveiled around that time.

Yes the x360 was the mental comparison, you have to admit by looking at that pic there is not much room left. GC atleast had room vertically. I don't think it matters much, Gekko was argueably the weakest CPU this gen and that didn't hinder the GC this gen from some great games. I don't think we've seen anything yet. I'm expecting the big cost of the system to be in the input device.

Gekko was the weakest? It was more flexible than the Celeron in the Xbox, and it probably had the best memory performance out of any console which probably put it in the lead for console cpu performance.(higher bandwidth than the xcpu, and considerably lower latency than the xcpu or the ps2 cpu)
I might even go as far as saying the gamecube was the only system that was designed so that the cpu was a significant part of the system, rather than following the old school console design of powerful graphics chip and coprocessors with just a cpu there to tie it all together.(so gamecube was designed more like the genesis than the super nintendo)

 

[Teasy]

I don't think Revolution will be quite as small as some people think either (though it will be very small obviously). Nintendo said it would be as tall as 3 DVD cases but longer. Also it goes without saying it will be a bit wider then a DVD. From the shots and what Nintendo have said I'd estimate the following size:

Revolution:

1.8"(H) x 6.5"(W) x 8.5"(D)

GC was about 30% smaller then N64 and if my estimate is right Revolution will be about 35% smaller then GC.

 

[PC-Engine]

Remember that the gamecube is vertical, there's some additional equipment underneath the motherboard.(actually appears just to be a small power regulator).

GC was about 30% smaller then N64 and if my estimate is right Revolution will be about 35% smaller then GC.

Also if you flip the GCN upside down, you'll realize there are a bunch of removeable port covers. Remove all three of them and you'd uncover a lot of empty unused space. Since Revolution has external ports and built-in WiFi, there is no need to include empty slots into the actual case that just takes up space.

 

[[maven]]

I haven't really followed this thread (nor the one it was supposedly split off from), but as a comparision:
Mac Mini (1GB Ram, WLAN, BT, HDD, 1.43Ghz PPC, ATI 8500 w/ 32MB) draws <20W under full load. I think any next-gen console should (when it is made a priority) be able to live with <100W.

 

[Ty]

This analogy assumes that the output can go to infinity (i.e. no constrictions), which is not the case (haha, no pun intended) of what we are talking about.

For instance, take the water pipe example and attach it to a case where the case has a single outlet.

Case A with wide pipe fills up and water begins to flow out through the outlet.

Case B with small pipe fills up and water begins to flow out through the outlet.

If the cases are the same and the GPM of the pipes are the same, then the water pressure out of the outlet (the turbulence and therefore "noise") is likely the same because the average ambient pressure within the case are about equal. Note that I am NOT a fluid dynamics guy so I could be make incorrect assumptions.

But the flaw in this analogy is leaving the air resistance and hence pressure up to flipping a coin. Yes if you have a faucet, the faucet will be the limiting factor in terms of resistance and therefore airflow pressure, but this is not how smart cooling designs work. Designers do not simply leave the airflow path to fipping a coin.

Not sure what you mean. I basically took the often used water pipe analogy and get attached it to the real world, i.e. a case with restrictions. This is precisely what exists in reality be it small pipe or wide pipe, both are attached to a case and thus must deal with the upper limits imposed by the case (and components).

In other words, if the GPM/CFM flow into and out of a case is the same with a wide pipe or a smaller diameter one, then really it wouldn't make much of a difference - both the flows from either pipe would likely produce the same amount of turbulence and hence noise.

I could see that the higher pressure/small pipe would produce more turbulence at the entry point but once the average pressure in the case is the same nominal point, then the pipes are basically identical. And perhaps that is where most of the noise would come from anyway. /shrug.


Either way, it's as I've stated before. Liquid cooling is about better efficiency, but the same amount of heat (expressed in watts) still needs to be removed, simple thermodynamics here.


Frankly I think Entropy said it best and first, that the Revolution is likely a cut down version of the X360 where the extra performance is less likely to be noticed.

 

[PC-Engine]

Case A with wide pipe fills up and water begins to flow out through the outlet.

Case B with small pipe fills up and water begins to flow out through the outlet.

If the cases are the same and the GPM of the pipes are the same, then the water pressure out of the outlet (the turbulence and therefore "noise") is likely the same because the average ambient pressure within the case are about equal. Note that I am NOT a fluid dynamics guy so I could be make incorrect assumptions.

This is a flawed example because you are assuming the "outlet size is small" relative to the "inlet" in case A. If case A has a big inlet while case B has a small inlet then they're not the same cases regardless whether the "outlet" is the same or not. That's not how smart designs are created. This is called a dumb and hugely unbalanced design creating a huge bottle neck. This is where my motorcylce engine hooked up to a bicycle trainy example comes in. In a smart design the inlet and outlets would be about the same. Why have a big inlet if you end up being limited by the outlet? That's like flipping the proverbial coin to determine outlet size.

In other words, if the GPM/CFM flow into and out of a case is the same with a wide pipe or a smaller diameter one, then really it wouldn't make much of a difference - both the flows from either pipe would likely produce the same amount of turbulence and hence noise.

No, it would NOT produce the same amount of noise. GPM/CFM is NOT pressure it's rate of flow/flowrate. Pressure is analogous to Voltage, flowrate is analogous to current. Or think of it as bandwidth (flowrate/CFM). With a wider bus (bigger pipe/bigger fan) you can run it at a lower clock speed (rpms/pressure) and still get the same bandwidth as a narrow bus running at a higher clock speed.

With a small pipe or restrictred airflow path you have back pressure which makes your fan work harder to push the same CFM vs a big pipe or unrestricted airflow path. Just take a simple fan example. A smaller fan has to work harder to move the same volume of air as a larger fan and as a result will produce more noise. You cannot get any more SIMPLE than this.

I could see that the higher pressure/small pipe would produce more turbulence at the entry point but once the average pressure in the case is the same nominal point, then the pipes are basically identical. And perhaps that is where most of the noise would come from anyway. /shrug.

That's like saying if my car had 50 more hp, it would be equal to yours.

In a vacuum you could negate stuff like friction, but this is the realworld wherre you have to take everything into account.

Either way, it's as I've stated before. Liquid cooling is about better efficiency, but the same amount of heat (expressed in watts) still needs to be removed, simple thermodynamics here.

And as jvd and I stated before, that's not the point. Efficiency becomes very important as that allows even more efficiency. Maybe you should go back and reread everything that has been posted because this is getting really tiring not to mention redundant.

Frankly I think Entropy said it best and first, that the Revolution is likely a cut down version of the X360 where the extra performance is less likely to be noticed.

Nobody is claiming Nintendo's goal is to beat the competing consoles on raw theoretical power. The only claim was that they could come really close in a smaller package if they so choose because all technology is there for the asking.

 

[SoVos20]

I love how so many of you anti nintendo people act like you have inside information. FOR THE LAST TIME IT IS YOUR OPINION THAT REVOLUTION WON'T BE AS POWERFUL SINCE IT SMALLER. STOP SAYING IT IS A FACT. IT IS NOT A FACT. IT IS YOUR OPINION. YOU PEOPLE KEEP SAYING IT IS A FACT THAT REVOLUTION WILL BE WEAKER. NO IT IS NOT A FACT.

 

[London Geezer]

Gee take a chill pill matey

 

[archie4oz]

]I haven't really followed this thread (nor the one it was supposedly split off from), but as a comparision:
Mac Mini (1GB Ram, WLAN, BT, HDD, 1.43Ghz PPC, ATI 8500 w/ 32MB) draws <20W under full load. I think any next-gen console should (when it is made a priority) be able to live with <100W.

The 7447A in the Mini (at leat the 1.42GHz one) will draw around 30W alone running at full tit (although you're more likely to only hit about 1/3-1/2 that with normal operation).

Gekko was the weakest? It was more flexible than the Celeron in the Xbox

Define *flexible*. Xbox cpu can outperform Gekko on a greater mix of codes...

and it probably had the best memory performance out of any console which probably put it in the lead for console cpu performance.(higher bandwidth than the xcpu, and considerably lower latency than the xcpu or the ps2 cpu)

*Memory performance*? Aside from cache a CPU doesn't have "memory performance" as that largely a function of the memory sub-system and more represented by the system as whole, not the CPU. The two cases where the memory IF would come into factor would be streaming data (due to higher bus clock) and cache-bound algorithms that spill over on Xbox. Even streaming would be questionable since 60x bus requires an idle cycle in between tenures, athough in the case of working with quantized floats strictly, Gekko might have an upper hand (my SSE is a little weak so I dunno about packing vectors in that regard).

As far as latency goes, main memory performance isn't that much of a factor unless you spend a LOT of time with cache misses, and I'd say outside of some special cases of REALLY random memory access and cache polluting, I don't think Gekko is really all that much better off (although the additional 128KB is definately nice). You only really notice something like that on the PS2 or Dreamcast with their minute L1s... And for sequential read/write latency, the PS2 owns that category hands down...

I might even go as far as saying the gamecube was the only system that was designed so that the cpu was a significant part of the system, rather than following the old school console design of powerful graphics chip and coprocessors with just a cpu there to tie it all together.(so gamecube was designed more like the genesis than the super nintendo)

I dunno, I say the EE is a pretty good example of the CPU being a significant part of the system...

And the volume of the gamecube is way smaller than the ps2, and slightly smaller than the dreamcast.

Which PS2?

 

[Ty]

This is a flawed example because you are assuming the "outlet size is small" relative to the "inlet" in case A.

It's better than assuming drag goes to zero which is obviously unrealistic.

What I am really assuming is that within both Case A & B the OUTflow is the limiting factor (i.e. the pressure build up in BOTH Cases are equal). Or I am assuming that ambient pressure within the case is what drives the outflow.

Yes, I believe this can/will occur if the outlet is relatively smaller to the inlet.

It's quite possible and likely imo that the pressure within a case never builds up to this point though.

However, do you disagree with the following?:

Scenario
Two Cases with different sized inlets but have the same CFM flowing through them. Pressure within each Case normalizes to the same millibars. Same sized OUTlets. Would the OUTflow be the same?

If case A has a big inlet while case B has a small inlet then they're not the same cases regardless whether the "outlet" is the same or not.

I didn't say they would be the same case. I surmised that IF the INflow and OUTflow was the same for both Case A and B, then the noise level from either case would be roughly the same.

It's not as if you could just add the largest possible fan and automatically that it would be better than a smaller one. It's all about tradeoffs and finding a balanced solution.

That's not how smart designs are created. This is called a dumb and hugely unbalanced design creating a huge bottle neck. This is where my motorcylce engine hooked up to a bicycle trainy example comes in. In a smart design the inlet and outlets would be about the same. Why have a big inlet if you end up being limited by the outlet? That's like flipping the proverbial coin to determine outlet size.

I totally agree that it's about a balanced design.

No, it would NOT produce the same amount of noise. GPM/CFM is NOT pressure it's rate of flow/flowrate.

Yes but the CFM coming out of the rear of the case can driven by the ambient pressure within the case. I'm assuming this btw. Perhaps this wrong and I'm willing to be open about it.

Pressure is analogous to Voltage, flowrate is analogous to current. Or think of it as bandwidth (flowrate/CFM). With a wider bus (bigger pipe/bigger fan) you can run it at a lower clock speed (rpms/pressure) and still get the same bandwidth as a narrow bus running at a higher clock speed.

Yes but Ohm's law even states that the 3 are inter-related.

With a small pipe or restrictred airflow path you have back pressure which makes your fan work harder to push the same CFM vs a big pipe or unrestricted airflow path.

Absolutely agreed and understood. My point was that we need to consider the impact of a case because the case can affect flow into and out of the case (naturally) and thus can directly impact the amount of noise created (your so called "smart" and "dumb designs").

Just take a simple fan example. A smaller fan has to work harder to move the same volume of air as a larger fan and as a result will produce more noise. You cannot get any more SIMPLE than this.

Yes, see next quote.

Because bigger fans can move the same amount of air with fewer RPMs of the motor, which decreases motor noise.

In a vacuum you could negate stuff like friction, but this is the realworld wherre you have to take everything into account.

Including the case.

And as jvd and I stated before, that's not the point. Efficiency becomes very important as that allows even more efficiency.

Wow, we've broken the first law of Thermodynamics.

Maybe you should go back and reread everything that has been posted because this is getting really tiring not to mention redundant.

Seems to me you are repeating what I wrote earlier - see the above quote from me. If you are getting tired, then you needn't bother to reply - I certainly don't mean to tire you out.

Frankly I think Entropy said it best and first, that the Revolution is likely a cut down version of the X360 where the extra performance is less likely to be noticed.

Nobody is claiming Nintendo's goal is to beat the competing consoles on raw theoretical power.

Where in the preceeding quote did I mention that anyone was thinking Nintendo is trying to beat either MS or Sony?

The only claim was that they could come really close in a smaller package if they so choose because all technology is there for the asking.

Well actually the only quote that came close to this (but it does NOT state that Nintendo is trying to beat MS or Sony) was the following:

Oh and for all of the people that keep saying you cannot make a console as small as the Revolution one year after Xbox 360 and be as powerful, you haven't looked at all the factors.

The above quote only equates the 3 consoles.

 

[V3]

Nintendo releasing 6+ months after X360, could have easily design something that double the processing performance of X360. Especially if they have 65nm available to them. And not having HardDisk and DVD playback out of the box, some of that budget can go elsewhere.

But really Nintendo should price match MS and Sony, and not try to undercut them.

 

[archie4oz]

Nintendo releasing 6+ months after X360, could have easily design something that double the processing performance of X360. Especially if they have 65nm available to them. And not having HardDisk and DVD playback out of the box, some of that budget can go elsewhere.

But really Nintendo should price match MS and Sony, and not try to undercut them.

Nintendo could release a system with twice the CPU performance tomorrow if they *wanted* to... Doesn't mean they're going to, have the need to, or even the desire to... And 65nm doesn't guarantee any double performance...

 

[V3]

Nintendo releasing 6+ months after X360, could have easily design something that double the processing performance of X360. Especially if they have 65nm available to them. And not having HardDisk and DVD playback out of the box, some of that budget can go elsewhere.

But really Nintendo should price match MS and Sony, and not try to undercut them.

Nintendo could release a system with twice the CPU performance tomorrow if they *wanted* to... Doesn't mean they're going to, have the need to, or even the desire to... And 65nm doesn't guarantee any double performance...

Well not tomorrow anyway, but in 12+ months from today, who knows. Especially if X360 is a run away hit.

65nm doesn't guarantee it for sure, its just make it slightly more feasible.

 

[jvd]

well 65 nm makes it more believable for such a small case

I personaly think we will get the power lvls of the x360 and ps3 from nintendo mabye slightly less but in a smaller case with some interesting add ons

 

[Ty]

well 65 nm makes it more believable for such a small case

I personaly think we will get the power lvls of the x360 and ps3 from nintendo mabye slightly less but in a smaller case with some interesting add ons

And I agree with you with one slight clarification.

Slightly less noticeable power. Theoretical peak performance may be quite less but I doubt it will matter where it could be noticed. I.e. real world metrics will be very close.

 

[jvd]

yea Ty i've been saying for the last year that with all 3 launching with in a year of each other or so the diffrence in power will be hardly noticable .

THe x360 will be at least 90% of what the ps3 will put on the screen and the rev should be around the smae in regards to the ps3 . The diffrences may be even less

 

[randycat99]

So we went from a Rev that was less powerful, but more "efficient" (kind of a throwaway term these days) than PS3/XB2, to a Rev that is 2x as powerful as the "wondertwins", but still only consumes the "lesser" wattage of the aforementioned Rev (being that it allegedly will be quieter AND in a smaller case, to boot), with the added premise that 6nm manufacturing will make this happen? So Rev is somehow going to enjoy 3-4x the processing bang for its thermal buck over its competitors?

Isn't the trend fairly obvious by now that the falling nm processing is really only allowing more transistors for a given die size with improvements in power consumption rapidly topping out, due to leakage and such? We just cannot assume that dropping the gate index is going to drastically drop thermal consumptions like it did when the index was in the 20's and teens.

So we are left with some more plausible outcomes- Rev comes in with considerably less processing power than PS3/XB2 and thusly can be used in a smaller/quieter case, Rev comes in at comparable processing might and thusly needs to be in a like-size case with like-noise, or Rev somehow pulls off 2x more power and thusly needs to be in a larger case (to house the large heatsink, naturally) or a like-size case with considerably more noise. We shall see...

 

[PC-Engine]

It's better than assuming drag goes to zero which is obviously unrealistic.

Uh no it is not better since you're assuming the designers are dumb which they're not. If you design smart then the drag can be pretty much negated since it is very close to zero anyway.

What I am really assuming is that within both Case A & B the OUTflow is the limiting factor (i.e. the pressure build up in BOTH Cases are equal). Or I am assuming that ambient pressure within the case is what drives the outflow.

The outflow depends on the size of the outlet relative to the inlet, negating obstacles inbetween which we safely can in a smart design.

Yes, I believe this can/will occur if the outlet is relatively smaller to the inlet.

Yes.

It's quite possible and likely imo that the pressure within a case never builds up to this point though.

The pressure or "back pressure" will only build up if the inlet is forcing in air at a higher rate than the outlet exhaust rate.

Scenario
Two Cases with different sized inlets but have the same CFM flowing through them. Pressure within each Case normalizes to the same millibars. Same sized OUTlets. Would the OUTflow be the same?

That will depend on the size of the outlet. If the outlet is equal to or bigger than the bigger of the two inlets then the OUTflow will be the same assuming the fans are moving the same CFM. However the case with the smaller fan will be louder.

I didn't say they would be the same case. I surmised that IF the INflow and OUTflow was the same for both Case A and B, then the noise level from either case would be roughly the same.

No the noise level would be higher in the case that has the smaller fan, see the above example.

It's not as if you could just add the largest possible fan and automatically that it would be better than a smaller one. It's all about tradeoffs and finding a balanced solution.

Of course that's where my smart vs dumb designs come into play which we both agree on.

Yes but Ohm's law even states that the 3 are inter-related.

Yes they are, and everything that I've talked about doesn't contradict this.

Absolutely agreed and understood. My point was that we need to consider the impact of a case because the case can affect flow into and out of the case (naturally) and thus can directly impact the amount of noise created (your so called "smart" and "dumb designs").

Well the case itself isn't the main factor with respect to unobstructed airflow. The main factor in this situation would be airflow routing.

Including the case

Not necessarily. As I mentioned about it's about airflow routing not the casing itself. I'll also repeat what I said above. If you design smart (unrestricted airflow routing) then the drag can be pretty much negated since it is very close to zero anyway.

Wow, we've broken the first law of Thermodynamics

No law has been broken. As jvd and I have already pointed out, the more efficient water and liquid metal cooling methods allow better routing and placement which not only allows better CPU/GPU cooling efficiency but also allows better overall global cooling efficiency. This has nothing to do with planet earth btw.

The above quote only equates the 3 consoles.

What I meant there was that IMO Nintendo could design Revolution to be as powerful as Xbox 360 in a smaller package since there are other factors that can be considered like the 1 yr time factor that would allow using 65nm process technology. Again whether or not Nintendo wants to do this is entirely up to them, I'm just pointing out that the technology is there if they want to use it.

 

[PC-Engine]

So we are left with some more plausible outcomes- Rev comes in with considerably less processing power than PS3/XB2 and thusly can be used in a smaller/quieter case, Rev comes in at comparable processing might and thusly needs to be in a like-size case with like-noise, or Rev somehow pulls off 2x more power and thusly needs to be in a larger case (to house the large heatsink, naturally) or a like-size case with considerably more noise. We shall see...

You forgot the other option, you know the one that's been debated for the last two pages, ie equal to Xbox 360 processing capability in a smaller quieter package.

 

[randycat99]

Not necessarily. As I mentioned about it's about airflow routing not the casing itself. I'll also repeat what I said above. If you design smart (unrestricted airflow routing) then the drag can be pretty much negated since it is very close to zero anyway.

The mere fact that you need fan(s) that will need finite electrical input to drive the desired flowrate, would seem to disagree that "drag" is negligible. Otherwise, you could power the fans to speed once, and then cut the power, as the "perpetual motion flow" continues forever and ever...which we most certainly know will not be the case, "smart" design or not. "Drag" or pressure loss is an inherent effect from very low air velocities to high velocities, as well as simply being exponentially related. Fans aren't exactly "positive displacement" kind of devices, either. So they, indeed, do need to work to overcome even mild pressure losses in the overal flowpath, "smart" design or not. It's not like these are superchargers that could blow the intake manifold off an engine block.

Wow, we've broken the first law of Thermodynamics

No law has been broken. As jvd and I have already pointed out, the more efficient water and liquid metal cooling methods allow better routing and placement which not only allows better CPU/GPU cooling efficiency but also allows better overall global cooling efficiency. This has nothing to do with planet earth btw.

The above quote only equates the 3 consoles.

Indeed, you are implying breaking the 1st law, when you suggest that the cooling demands will be fundamentally less than the heat input, just because the flow management is "smarter". Inherently, 100 W of heat created will need to be 100 W of heat dissipated. Dissipating 100 W would most certainly be more difficult in a poor flow management style setup, but you shouldn't be comparing "worst of" to "best of" in the first place. Once you've normalized the "best of" for 2 setups, the only thing that is left is 100 W of dissipation for either system. It doesn't spontaneously become 80/60/40 W for one system, just because you think one way is "more efficient" (...just a hint, but the "more efficient" forced-convection heatsink won't be the one with the slow, quiet flow, anyway...).

What I meant there was that IMO Nintendo could design Revolution to be as powerful as Xbox 360 in a smaller package since there are other factors that can be considered like the 1 yr time factor that would allow using 65nm process technology. Again whether or not Nintendo wants to do this is entirely up to them, I'm just pointing out that the technology is there if they want to use it.

So there is the "smartly" designed system, the "dumb" system, and this just in...the "fantasy/mythical" designed system.