PS3 VS GC2

[ps3man]

We all know some speculation about the ps3 now if 'sthe GC2 turn this should raise some eyebrows

GameCube Next Analysis:

CPU: It's been rumored for a while that an IBM CPU would grace GameCube Next, and there is no better chip coming out of that firm than the PPC 970 in this editor's humble opinion. For anyone who doesn't know - this is the core of the G5 towers from Apple. It's a sweet chip - very well designed - with efficient use of power, less heat created than a Pentium 4, 64-bit registers, and a component of one of the top 5 fastest computers in the world (the Virginia Tech G5 cluster).

Currently this chip goes as fast as 2.4Ghz (although these have yet to ship), but most of them run at 2.0Ghz - which makes the 2.7Ghz figure kind of surprising. However, Steve Jobs has promised 3Ghz from the chip by the end of this year. On this front we'll just have to see.

As for their clockspeed - please don't jump into comparisons with the Pentium 4's being at 3.4Ghz and whatnot. At 2Ghz, the G5 is about as fast as a 3.4Ghz Pentium 4 (perhaps a little slower.) At 2.7Ghz, or dual 1.8Ghz CPUs, the G5 screams.

Interesting how this article suggests they are considering a dual processor system and a single processor system. My gut says that the single chip solution would be better. After all, single threaded programming is much easier to do and 2.7Ghz of power is no slouch when it comes to the crunch. The dual 1.8Ghz setup would be a very good performer and makes a lot more sense for games on a console than dual CPUs do for PC gaming. Still: two separate CPUs presents a challenge for programmers trying to code in low level languages. The single processor setup would yield better performance for most people, and thus would be the better choice. However, the dual 1.8Ghz design would be theoretically more powerful and it would be much cheaper to make. By the time the 2.7Ghz parts come out, IBM will be on a 90nm manufacturing process, and a 1.8Ghz CPU would be easier and cheaper to produce.

Both choices are good ones and would certainly give X-Box and the PS3 a run for their money. This is probably the best chip on the market right now (maybe not the fastest, but just generally best clock for clock) - and sticking to the Power PC instruction set from the GameCube would make for a very nice transition into the next generation for current developers.

GPU: This is exciting.

First of all, ATI is just about to debut their line of chips to be for sale early this summer (perhaps slightly before.) The specs on these chips are 12 "pipes" at 500Mhz and 16 "pipes" at 600Mhz. Both of these chips are actually identical, but because of yielding issues the chips that don't work to the high-end spec can have parts disabled and slowed down to work at the slower spec so they can still be sold and not thrown away. This is what companies do when they are using a new manufacturing process (in this case, 130nm.)

These GPU's supposedly have six shader units which perform the vertex "shading" operations that we all hear so much about. Now the 600Mhz, 16 pipe part is a beast. The GameCube has a 4 pipe part at 167Mhz. Unlike regular CPUs, you can calculate very precisely the theoretical performance of GPUs using how many "pipes" they have by their clockspeed (a pipe, by the way, is the simultaneous pixels that can be rendered and textured.) To understand exactly how much of a leap these chips are, consider that if you go to the store right now and plop down roughly $450 for the fastest card on the market, the ATI 9800XT, you get 8 pipes at 412Mhz, giving you a fillrate of about 3.3 Giga pixels per second. The new R420, with 16 pipes and 600Mhz provides a theoretical max fillrate of 9.6 Gpixels. This is a fillrate jump that is leaps and bounds over just about anything before. NVidia has a similar card that was just unveiled and will hit the stores pretty soon (400Mhz and 16 pipes.) This is an incredible jump forward - in the case of ATI, literally trippling performance (imagine going from a 3Ghz to a 9Ghz Pentium - maybe not quite so drastic, but you get the picture.)

So, all that rambling was about the cards that ATI just put out this month, that have similar specs to what was posted here - with one exception (and this is what excites me.) Normally, transistor counts aren't really that important. Really it's a meaningless figure that only points to chip complexity, and when compared to previous incarnations of the same chip, can give you an idea of heat/power requirements), but in this case we have two chips which are seemingly identical except for their transistor count. The R420, the 600Mhz, 6 shader unit, 16 pipe beast mentioned above uses 160 - 180 million transistors.

This is significant. This means there's something extra aboard that chip. Given the specs (500Mhz or 600Mhz and probably 16 pipes on both counts) this could mean one of a couple things that I will speculate on. First, it could mean more shader units. This is always a plus - the more shader units, the more powerful effects that can be performed in-game. The other has to do with something similar, but relates to a slightly different element. Right now, there's somewhat of a complaint about a supposed weak point in ATI's seemingly jack-of-all-trades GPU. It is limited with 24-bit precision in pixel shading, as opposed to the 32-bit precision of the GeForce. What these extra transistors could account for is the extra 8-bits in register size.

Basically, this new GPU would be great. Going from 0.67 Gpixels/s and no vertex shading on the GameCube to a 9.6 Gpixels/s Vertex shading beast would be superb. As for the 128MB of GDDR3 RAM - this stuff is fast and essential. The upcoming R420 uses it, and it has a 1200Mhz memory bus providing something along the lines of 35-40 GB/s of bandwidth. Crazy, isn't it?

Blue laser disc format: This, too, is quite tasty news. A blue laser has a narrower wavelength than a red laser, the type used in current DVD players – and a narrower wavelength allows for higher data density on the surface of an optical disc, thus providing more storage space. We know that this means we’ll have a very large storage capacity for the next system (assuming this rumor holds true). What we don’t know is exactly how large, or what format will be used. There are two major blue-laser formats being developed: the popular Blue-ray format, and HD DVD.

Both of these are propositioned as the replacement for the current DVD format, allowing high definition content to be stored, and both of them provide more storage space (Blu-ray with 27GB per layer, and HD DVD with 15GB per layer – with current DVDs storing 4.7GB per layer). Due to Nintendo's relationship with Matsushita, it is my opinion that if Nintendo went with a blue laser format, it would go with the Matsushita backed Blu-ray standard. Of course, knowing Nintendo, it’s entirely possible they are using some other format, or even one they made up on their own (perhaps 5GB GCN sized discs?).

Another exciting aspect of this is that the Blu-ray format is inherently re-writeable, the possibilities of which are enticing. As for DVD playback – this isn’t exactly consistent with the blue-laser spec. Of course, there could certainly be an additional laser packed in there (lots of DVD players do this to play Audio CDs). That tidbit could, however, lead one to believe that perhaps the new Nintendo system will playback DVDs in the Blu-ray format - meaning, high definition. All of this seems a little doubtful, simply because Blu-ray won’t really be accessible to the average American consumer till about 2006 when it’s expected the technology will be cheap enough for adoption, but if Matsushita is retained as a partner, perhaps this is more realistic than one would expect. We’ll just have to see.

RAM: If we presume that this article is indeed legitimate then the 512 MB configuration would be ideal. Of course, it may come down to going with 512MB of slower RAM or 256MB of the faster (Nintendo always seems very cost conscious.) I have no idea what they'd be looking at with the RAM issue, but my guess would be something along the lines of PC4200. I wonder if 1T SRAM is still on the plate?

As for those audio specs, if they are going for 196Khz, then they'll most certainly need the dedicated 64MB. This number indicates the sampling rate. The highest sampling rate for the DVD-A format is 192Khz (Dolby Digital DVD movies tap out at 96Khz.) Sample rate isn't the frequency range, but rather the frequency of samples done on the specific audio channel, comprising the resolution of the channel if you will. I'm really curious about this spec, mostly because of bandwidth issues. The DVD-A spec calls for a sample rate of 192 Khz for 2 channels (stereo), and 96Khz for 6 channels - these conditions require about 9.6Mbps of bandwidth and an entire DVD disc for about two hours of this (this is DVD Audio mind you, there’s no movie on here, just music.) This means either a) this spec is wrong, b) this spec only refers to 2 channel sound, and is reduced for the proposed 7 channel operation, or c) the N5 has one huge optical media format (something like Blu-Ray.) Even taking into account compression, this is a very hefty spec and would require lots of storage and lots of RAM, which they seem to be supplying. This spec on its own could possibly make or break the validity of the entire document.

Hard Drive: I'm not really surprised. Remember the whole debacle about sports saves sucking and Nintendo execs commenting that they'd fix this problem? Hard drive is the cheapest way. 15GB is way small though - I don't see much in the way of downloaded content. 30GB, in my opinion, would have been a sweeter spot. However, it's little things like a small hard drive that might point to this document being true. The fact that not everything on the spec list is top of the line is actually a good sign, as a 300 dollar machine can not contain all top-of-the-line components.

http://www.n-sider.com/articleview.php?articleid=296

[ultimategamer2004]

Doubt it will come anywhere near 9GHZ i would say 4 and a 15GB hard drive is not a very good idea i would sat 80-129GB would be reasonable.

[jaxmkii]

:lol: your comparing the G5 to the cell? dont get me wrong the G5 is the second nicest chip *currently* avalable AMDs 64 FX51 pulls a solid 50% more flops but compared to the IBMs target for the cell its well... so 2003.

and other than that the big N has already stated that they cant compete with the jugronots of sony and m$. Thay clamied "we are going to let sony and microsoft destroy each other in the technolgy war." :lol: :lol: says CEO of Nintendo all i have to say is sounds like thay have given up trying to keep up in the tech end. the CEO says "the next GC will simply be a updated version of the current system and they will concentrate of quality software" i guess thay learned no mater how many pink fuzzy memorycards and clear plastic cupholding pads and other ussless gimicks they pushout if the games suck so dose the system. sorry fanboys nintendo has steped aside officaly and let the big dogs go at it

[megadrive]

PS3man, those Gamecube Next specs are probably only for early development kits using off-the shelf components so that developers can get started building games for the console now.

the actual silicon going into GCNext will be most custom, or highly modified off the shelf (which kinda makes it custom anyway).

the VPU will be much stronger than the new R420

the CPU should be a multi-core PowerPC like Xbox 2's CPU.

memory should be in the 256~512 range.

In that article, I wish they had mentioned GCNext will be using graphics hardware that is stronger than 2004-level VPUs.

[jaxmkii]

well you can give me fanboy specs all day long but the fact remains nintendo has all ready backed down out of this race stating that dont have the multibillion $ to reserch another state of the art system.

simply put it takes a multifaceted megacorperations like sony/M$ to develop the cuting edge tech now adays the R&D is just to expencive the "CELL" will be used in more than just a game system to pay for its delelopment. M$ will just use whatever PC hardware they can scrape up just like the Xbox

i hate to say it but nintendo the last living releck of the gaming only corperation. they just cant compete and will go the way of the doodoo sony got it right build a vastly superor system that should cost three times as much but make it cheap buy overproducing its componets and using its surplus parts in other aplications TVs handhelds PDAs. IBM will use some parts in its servers and toshiba has made arangements with fuji heavy ingustrys and GMC to use CELL in engine control units (ECU). thats right your 2006 WRX STi and ZO6 Corvette will have CELL chips under the hood!!

M$ and the big N just dont have this industral flexibuility

[Omega Blue]

LMAO, i dont know where you got an analyst whose full of shit from but, someoen owes me 10 minutes of my life back 5 for reading it, and 5 for laughing at it. a PPC chip used in the G5 even when clocked at 2.4GHz is noway is compariable to a P4 3.4 64-bit version, the whole G5 system is barely in the top 5 fastest CPU's out you got the AMD FX 53, the AMD FX51, and the P4 3.4 EE, not to mention the only 64-bit CPU Intel has out is the Itanium, and the highest it clocks at is 1.8GHz, and the reason it does not clock high is because you can put 4 Itanium CPU's on one Motherboard. and Steve Jobs talks out of his ass just as much as Microsoft.

as for memory, Nintendo likes making a profit on their consoles from the get go, more or less we'll see 128 to 256 MBs of Decent RAM, not slow, but not the fastest thing on earth.

as for VRAM, i can't give you an estimation on that, i mean the GC had how much? 3 MBs of RAM? make your own educated guess.

as for Him thinking it will use Blu-Ray, i dont know how hard some of these thick head analyst try to stop from recieving brain function, but last time i check it was Sony's "Blu-Ray Devision" who came up with Blu-Ray, meaning if Nintendo wants to use Blu-Ray either way they going to be paying Sony to use it in there console, which i have no problem with. i mean it only means Sony is making money off not only the Ps3, but also the next Nintendo console,

GPU:

i know Nintendo will use an ATI GPU, and im guessing it will be a modified R420 or R480 core GPU. but i highly doubt its going to be anything Fancy.

milk almost came out my nose when he got all excited about the 40 GB/s data transfer, and i wasn't drinking milk :lol: . i guess hes oblivious to the 48 GB/s data transfer the Ps2 is doing huh?

[Ibanez32]

.milk almost came out my nose when he got all excited about the 40 GB/s data transfer, and i wasn't drinking milk :lol: . i guess hes oblivious to the 48 GB/s data transfer the Ps2 is doing huh?
LOL :lol:

If they did go for a new disc format its most likely gonna be HD DVD. But as Omega said they are out to make a profit so they want to keep production costs down. And if they do want to hold onto there somewhat dedicated fan base won't it have to be backwards compatible, preventing it from having a standard sized drive. Or possibly more than one but i doulbt that.

[KlawHammer]

Currently this chip goes as fast as 2.4Ghz (although these have yet to ship), but most of them run at 2.0Ghz - which makes the 2.7Ghz figure kind of surprising. However, Steve Jobs has promised 3Ghz from the chip by the end of this year. On this front we'll just have to see.

You are right Omega, Steve Jobs does talk out his arse.


As for their clockspeed - please don't jump into comparisons with the Pentium 4's being at 3.4Ghz and whatnot. At 2Ghz, the G5 is about as fast as a 3.4Ghz Pentium 4 (perhaps a little slower.) At 2.7Ghz, or dual 1.8Ghz CPUs, the G5 screams.

If you're referring to the 32 bit version of the P4 than it would be almost foolish to make comparisons as the G5 is a 64 bit CPU. Yea right the G5 screams, compare that to the AMD Athlon 64 bit and drool.


Both choices are good ones and would certainly give X-Box and the PS3 a run for their money. This is probably the best chip on the market right now (maybe not the fastest, but just generally best clock for clock) - and sticking to the Power PC instruction set from the GameCube would make for a very nice transition into the next generation for current developers.

CPU clockspeed doesnt matter much in consoles. MHz is a fallicy. Flops are a more accurate way of telling performance. Look at Sony CPU compared to the P3 hybrid in Xbox.


The upcoming R420 uses it, and it has a 1200Mhz memory bus providing something along the lines of 35-40 GB/s of bandwidth. Crazy, isn't it?

Again the PS2 comes into play. 48GB/s bandwidth my friend.


Bottom point is - this article is from n-sider.com - they ramble all the time.

[BigPapaSmurf]

well guys we can be all bashing nintendo and hyping up sony but the truth is we dont know absolutely anything about the upcoming system. we dont know what the end products will be. i will hold my comments on nintendo till i see what the have to offer next gen.

[Makaveli_786]

well guys we can be all bashing nintendo and hyping up sony but the truth is we dont know absolutely anything about the upcoming system. we dont know what the end products will be. i will hold my comments on nintendo till i see what the have to offer next gen.

LOL, yeah Mr. Hamauchi is one of the richest men on the planet, if hes generous hell be able to take the N5 somewhere.

[imported_The_One]

Doubt it will come anywhere near 9GHZ i would say 4 and a 15GB hard drive is not a very good idea i would sat 80-129GB would be reasonable.
First of all, your downloading EXTRAs like MAPS or PATCHES, that does NOT need multibillion Gigs of HDD. 15GB is actually enough (considering how the actual GAME is going to be extremely small... if they stick with they're own small optical disc format that is). 80GB is overkill and it'd cost YOU. A 80GB HDD is around 60 bucks if I'm not mistaken, so if the N5 had a 80GB HDD, then you're paying 60 bucks just for the HDD, then probably another 200 for the console, RIP OFF. I ain't gonna be buying the N5 if they do that.

well guys we can be all bashing nintendo and hyping up sony but the truth is we dont know absolutely anything about the upcoming system. we dont know what the end products will be. i will hold my comments on nintendo till i see what the have to offer next gen. Agreed, I'm gonna see what big N has up it's sleeves before I start commenting...

[High Lander]

We all know some speculation about the ps3 now if 'sthe GC2 turn this should raise some eyebrows

GameCube Next Analysis:

CPU: It's been rumored for a while that an IBM CPU would grace GameCube Next, and there is no better chip coming out of that firm than the PPC 970 in this editor's humble opinion. For anyone who doesn't know - this is the core of the G5 towers from Apple.

... and would certainly give X-Box and the PS3 a run for their money.

http://www.n-sider.com/articleview.php?articleid=296


Do you have any idea of what you are talking about ????

Do you know MICROSOFT has already given the info that XBOX2 will use this CPU ?? And may be THREE of them ???

Peak Scalar GFLOPs for PPC970 (1.8GHz) = 7.2 (you can find this anywhere)

So, for each 1.8GHz, you can pull 7.2GFLOPs

PS3 will have at least 256GFLOPs, but SONY still promisses 1T

Let´s just count on 256GFLOPs

And also let´s suppose Micosoft and Nintendo use a Hyper 3.6GHZ PPC (I doubt that... $$$). This one would have 14.4 GFLOP (peak)

256/14.4 = 17,7

SO, if they want to match the "worst case scenario" for PS3, they will have to use 18 PPC 9970 , at 3.6GHz each.

Do you believe they´ll do that ?

No.
They will use ONE PPC at a high clock, like 3GHz, or 2 or 3 at a lower clock, like 1.8GHz

So, in the best case for Nintendo and Micosoft (lets say 3 CPUs), and worst case for Sony, PS3 will be AT LEAST 12 times faster that CUBE2 or XBOX2

If they use just 1 processor at 3GHz, PS3 will be, in the worst case, 21 times faster

And If we believe in 1TFLOP, this goes 4x higher... 84 times faster.

SO, PS3 will be from 12 to 84 times faster than the others.

Let´s get the number 12.
YES, PS3it will be able to emulate the other ones. 12 times faster is the worst case, and it´s still TOOOOOO MUCH FASTER !!!!!

I already believed in this a year ago, when I thought Microsoft would keep the Intel processors, thay changed to PPC, but it´s not a huge step, although it´s not the same. It´s better, but is still too much far from Cell. Good for Sony.

[SunDevil]

Good Bye

[Domination]

Well said.

[High Lander]

The Xbox Next CPU (atleast the theoretical one) is NOT based on the macintosh G5, it is based on the Power5, it is COMPLETELY different. One is a consumer level CPU, the other is an Enterprise class supercomputer and server CPU. This has been stated over and over and over again. There is a huge difference in performance.

The performance diference is VERY small, in case you do not know. it´s just better to create huge clusters of thousands of processors, for supercomputers.

G5 = Consumer Level = 7.2GFLOPS
Power5 = Enterprise Supershit = 8GFLOPS (you can find this everywhere too... for example, the ASCI Purple guys are together with IBM, creating a 100TFLOP supercomputer, built of 12544 Power5. Do the math.

CELL still crushes a Power5 out of the water. Much much much far faster.
MUCH FASTER, got it ?

:wink:

[SunDevil]

Good Bye

[imported_The_One]

I'm just saying that is will not be a slouch, and that it will not even be close to a MAC G5. Yes, this obviously won't be a slouch, it actually may be a fair match... Although FLOp/s wise, it's still greatly out-powered.

[Makaveli_786]

The Cube and Xbox 2 CPU's will OBVIOUSLY not be on par with the cell, its not even a worthy argument and thats how simple it really is, even if the cell is a twentieth as powerful as 1 t/flop we still have something several times more powerful than a PPC 5.

[Omega Blue]

1/20 of the Cell power is 50GFLOPs, 3 PPC's could easily compete with this let alone if the PPC's are dual core like speculated to be used in the XB2. more along the lines of 1/10 of the Cells power (100GFLOPs) and the R500 should have around 250 GFLOPS power. the R420 has about 140-150 GFLOPs. so roughly the XB2 should have roughly 350 to 400 GFLOPs

[Makaveli_786]

Yeah but think about it this way, the cell is built on a fabrication line, it doesnt cost much to make a cell in essense, now if it costs 10 dollars to make a cell Sony can put in two cells and it only costs them 20 dollars but itll make them a few million back in money, if the cell chips are cheap enough to manufacture this will give Sony the option of virtually adding as many cell chips as they want which gives them a HUGE advantage over MS.

[Omega Blue]

true, plus given the low 65-nm surface area, that means 12-inch sheets of silicon go a loooooong way. i wonder the price to build one Cell is now? in retro-spec the Cell should be kind of large. roughly 2 1/2"x2 1/2". dammit now im gonna be wondering this all day :(

[Makaveli_786]

Yeah but just think about how many cells they can put into this thing if theyr so damn cheap to make... it really makes u wonder :shock:

[Omega Blue]

well the small 65nm design show us that they can make alot of cells quick. so production wont be slow unless they run out of silicon. which they can also go to porn stars house a borrow some.

[Makaveli_786]

LOL, if they start making PS3's out of titties they will really knock the final nail in MS's coffin

[Omega Blue]

i can picture the catch lines now, "Buy a Ps3 today and take home a little piece of your favorite porn star home."

or "Want fake titties and Video games? well get a Ps3!"

[ainsley]

Blah, this makes my brains bleed, we have no clue what any of these next gen machines are capable of, there's literally half a million hardware variables to consider, so why are we bashing any one of them.
Next, what the hell?! The Xbox Next CPU (atleast the theoretical one) is NOT based on the macintosh G5, it is based on the Power5, it is COMPLETELY different. One is a consumer level CPU, the other is an Enterprise class supercomputer and server CPU. This has been stated over and over and over again. There is a huge difference in performance.

er...i thought the apple mac g5 is a COMPUTER not a CPU. The IBM POWER5 processor is used in the apple mac g5 computer. Apple make computers not processors. a bit like dell, but imagine if dell also made there own OS for thier computers, i think apples is called mac os x.

[Makaveli_786]

i can picture the catch lines now, "Buy a Ps3 today and take home a little piece of your favorite porn star home."

or "Want fake titties and Video games? well get a Ps3!"

LMAO, thats pretty sick :P

[KlawHammer]

It is indeed the Mac OS X. A soemtimes BETTER alternative to Windows XP.
I was unaware Dell made their own OS whats its name? WinDells?

[stanDarsh]

It is indeed the Mac OS X. A soemtimes BETTER alternative to Windows XP.
I was unaware Dell made their own OS whats its name? WinDells?

He didnt say Dell made their own OS, he said "imagine if"

[KlawHammer]

Oops, my bad.

[KlawHammer]

Oops, my bad. Sorry about the duoble-post, i didnt know.

[imported_The_One]

Oops, my bad. Klaw... You know better then to double post!!

[Ress Cor]

Uh Oh! Someone mentioned G5's and Macs.....Matt will recall he already locked two posts where I was giving Macs a run for their life, but I won't do that again, here, enjoy the slaughter

http://www.mac-sucks.com/
(reload the main page a couple of times, it will keep you rolling on the floor)

[gaming ultima]

PPC 970's are based of power 4's not 5's
the power 5 completly outperforms the power 4 and the PPC 970

[Makaveli_786]

Well lets say it doubles the power of the P4, still doesnt compete with a cell right?

[ainsley]

we can all speculate about cells performance but 1 fact that we know is that its gonna be manufactured using a 65nm(nano micron) fabrication, thats highly impressive. Current PC processors use 0.11m and in the future probly at the time of ps3s launch, will be using 95nm frabrication process. So the cell in the ps3 will probly be more advanced than the most advanced home computers (mac, pc) availible at the time of launch. A smaller frabrication process means more transitors (more performance potential), less heat becuase less power is required and smaller production costs because more processors can be manufactured at once.

Speculation: If a 64bit 11m (athlon64) can reech around 2.4ghz, the cell @ 65mn should easily reech 3ghz even with low profile cooling. but then again we're comparing two totally different architectures, the cell may be more sensitive to heat therefor lower clock, but the cell will probly have higher performance clock for clock than the athlon64, so even at 2ghz, only say a athlonFX 3ghz would be able to touch.

Anyway to cut the babble short, the cell in the PS3 will easily be able match the performance of a top end PC processor at the time of its launch. But the cpu doesnt count alone count for total system multimedia performance, wot about the visual processor? Thats wots really bothering me.

[KlawHammer]

But the cell will most likely only match high-end PCs of 2005-2006 for a few months before Moores Law kicks in...

[Omega Blue]

we can all speculate about cells performance but 1 fact that we know is that its gonna be manufactured using a 65nm(nano micron) fabrication, thats highly impressive. Current PC processors use 0.11m and in the future probly at the time of ps3s launch, will be using 95nm frabrication process.

you mean 45nm technology, CPU Silicon surface area gets smaller as it gets more advance, not bigger. :wink:

[ainsley]

we can all speculate about cells performance but 1 fact that we know is that its gonna be manufactured using a 65nm(nano micron) fabrication, thats highly impressive. Current PC processors use 0.11m and in the future probly at the time of ps3s launch, will be using 95nm frabrication process.

you mean 45nm technology, CPU Silicon surface area gets smaller as it gets more advance, not bigger. :wink:

i said PC processors will go from 0.11m to 95nm in 1-2 years time, around ps3s launch. 95nm(nano-micron) is smaller than 0.11m(micron) and 65nm(cell) is smaller than 95nm. where did u get 45nm from? i know ibm are working on this, but the cell in the ps3 is gonna be manufactured using a 65nm process.

[ainsley]

But the cell will most likely only match high-end PCs of 2005-2006 for a few months before Moores Law kicks in...

agreed. though as i said, top end pc cpus will be 95nm compared to ps3s smaller and better cell at 65nm. so the cell will be more advanced but pc cpus will be bigger physically due to higher transistor count and have slightly better cooling.

[Makaveli_786]

I think what were forgetting is the PS3 isnt a PC its a console, clock speed doesnt matter too much in a console flops do and the PS3 will be kicking more flops than computers for years to come.

[Mr.Slik]

Yes i'm back and will be gone again.

Ps3 isn't a console nor is it a Pc. It's quite both now. Look at the features of this system. You are able to go on the internet and it's starting to have PC components.

[Omega Blue]

we can all speculate about cells performance but 1 fact that we know is that its gonna be manufactured using a 65nm(nano micron) fabrication, thats highly impressive. Current PC processors use 0.11m and in the future probly at the time of ps3s launch, will be using 95nm frabrication process.

you mean 45nm technology, CPU Silicon surface area gets smaller as it gets more advance, not bigger. :wink:

i said PC processors will go from 0.11m to 95nm in 1-2 years time, around ps3s launch. 95nm(nano-micron) is smaller than 0.11m(micron) and 65nm(cell) is smaller than 95nm. where did u get 45nm from? i know ibm are working on this, but the cell in the ps3 is gonna be manufactured using a 65nm process.

PC's CPU uses 90nm now, at least Intel does. there next step will be 65nm about a year or 2 after the Ps3.

and stop double posting plz :)

[ainsley]

ahh the new prescot core p4 uses a 90nm fabrication manufacturing process right? Its cos i follow amd more than intel, but i think amd is gonna move to the new 90nm process in about a couple of months time along with thier new socket 939 for their athlon64s.

[Omega Blue]

but i think amd is gonna move to the new 90nm process in about a couple of months time along with thier new socket 939 for their athlon64s.

this would be the smart thing for them to do.

[ultimategamer2004]

Yes i'm back and will be gone again.

Ps3 isn't a console nor is it a Pc. It's quite both now. Look at the features of this system. You are able to go on the internet and it's starting to have PC components.

Thats ok as long as it is not 1 of them i wouldent like it to be a pc in a consoles skin..

Although i would say the pc internet function is a very good idea.

[imported_The_One]

but i think amd is gonna move to the new 90nm process in about a couple of months time along with thier new socket 939 for their athlon64s.

this would be the smart thing for them to do. Well, of course. If their competition Intel is using 90nm wafers, it'd be only logical for them to do so also.

where did u get 45nm from? i know ibm are working on this, but the cell in the ps3 is gonna be manufactured using a 65nm process. He probably got them from rumours floating around in the air. There's been some rumours a while back about the Cell using a 45nm wafer instead of an 65nm... But I think that's pure BS. It's going to use a 65nm wafer, not 45nm.

But the cell will most likely only match high-end PCs of 2005-2006 for a few months before Moores Law kicks in... Well, that doesn't matter. Think of it this way, if the PS2 was as powerful as a computer when it was made, then we'd all be in heaven (Processor-wise, not GPU. 'Cause we all know that the PS2 was MUCH more powerful then any other graphic card out there at the time). So we should actually be happy that the PS3 can top any PC in 2006 for even a few months :lol:.

[ainsley]

Well, that doesn't matter. Think of it this way, if the PS2 was as powerful as a computer when it was made, then we'd all be in heaven (Processor-wise, not GPU. 'Cause we all know that the PS2 was MUCH more powerful then any other graphic card out there at the time). So we should actually be happy that the PS3 can top any PC in 2006 for even a few months :lol:.

well actually im sure the geforce 3 card came out the same time as the PS2 and you cant say a g3 is weaker than a ps2 because it was even used to show off early stages of the FARCRY engine.

[Omega Blue]

Toshiba stated that it would hit 45nm by 2007 or 2008. i remember reading this on a few websites. i believe they have started work on it and many people speculated the Cell will move down to 45nm a few years after its released in the Ps3. kind of how the Ps2 went from 130nm to 90nm in the PSX.

[Makaveli_786]

Geforce came out in Mid-2000 I think, several months after the PS2 was developed.

[imported_The_One]

Toshiba stated that it would hit 45nm by 2007 or 2008. i remember reading this on a few websites. i believe they have started work on it and many people speculated the Cell will move down to 45nm a few years after its released in the Ps3. kind of how the Ps2 went from 130nm to 90nm in the PSX.I highly doubt console changing spec's in the middle of it's life time. Since no developer would take advantage of it fearing that it may not work on older consoles. Consoles were made so that the player don't need to worry about system specs... but imaging if on the back of a PS3 game box, it said: "Minimum Spec: Cell processor, 45nm wafer". That'd be scary . :lol:

If you wanna worry about specs, go with PC :mrgreen:

well actually im sure the geforce 3 card came out the same time as the PS2 and you cant say a g3 is weaker than a ps2 because it was even used to show off early stages of the FARCRY engine. No... I don't think so, I thought it was GeForce or GeForce 2.. not 3 :?. But I'm not too sure.

[Omega Blue]

Toshiba stated that it would hit 45nm by 2007 or 2008. i remember reading this on a few websites. i believe they have started work on it and many people speculated the Cell will move down to 45nm a few years after its released in the Ps3. kind of how the Ps2 went from 130nm to 90nm in the PSX.I highly doubt console changing spec's in the middle of it's life time. Since no developer would take advantage of it fearing that it may not work on older consoles. Consoles were made so that the player don't need to worry about system specs... but imaging if on the back of a PS3 game box, it said: "Minimum Spec: Cell processor, 45nm wafer". That'd be scary . :lol:
LMAO!!! im sorry i usually respect you but this comment had my side aching, from laughing so hard. the only thing having a smaller waffer does is make the chip size, which in turn makes it easier to cool with less surface area having to be cooled, and how much power consumption lower. nothing woud change except a more effiecient chip, but i could completely see how Sony wouldn't want there Ps3 to be more effiecient later on in its life :roll:. the specs would not change, they'd stay the same. the PsTwo would probly be using the smaller EE that uses 90nm tech. which would be essential in making the power consumption lower meaning a smaller PSU and smaller fan to cool it since the EE using 90nm tech would be smaller with less area to be cooled. nothing other then better effieciency would change.

[Makaveli_786]

A bigger wafer is also cheaper but as time goes on technology progesses so a 130 nm wafer will cost the same as a 90nm wafer as time progresses so it doesnt cost them much later in the PS2's life.

[imported_The_One]

LMAO!!! im sorry i usually respect you but this comment had my side aching, from laughing so hard. the only thing having a smaller waffer does is make the chip size, which in turn makes it easier to cool with less surface area having to be cooled, and how much power consumption lower. nothing woud change except a more effiecient chip, but i could completely see how Sony wouldn't want there Ps3 to be more effiecient later on in its life :roll:. the specs would not change, they'd stay the same. the PsTwo would probly be using the smaller EE that uses 90nm tech. which would be essential in making the power consumption lower meaning a smaller PSU and smaller fan to cool it since the EE using 90nm tech would be smaller with less area to be cooled. nothing other then better effieciency would change. But if the wafer is smaller, then they can put more transitors on it can't they? Which means more processor power... But I guess they won't do that if they want to keep games compatible before the newer and older consoles I guess.

[Omega Blue]

exactly, they can change this, but if its just a move towards better working and more stable chips its good. they dont need to change the transistor count. all they will do it makes it more effecient, sames with the Presscott cores that Intel has, the P4's were 130nm but with the Presscott they moved to core down to 90nm but didn't change the transistor count or clock speed. you can if you wanted to make a more powerful chip but dont have to.

[imported_The_One]

exactly, they can change this, but if its just a move towards better working and more stable chips its good. they dont need to change the transistor count. all they will do it makes it more effecient, sames with the Presscott cores that Intel has, the P4's were 130nm but with the Presscott they moved to core down to 90nm but didn't change the transistor count or clock speed. you can if you wanted to make a more powerful chip but dont have to. Ah, yes, of course! When I posted that post, I kept on thinking: smaller wafer = more transistors... But of course, you don't HAVE to have more transisitors, so I guess you're right (which you mostly are anyways, lol :lol:).

[Omega Blue]

dont feed the ego it torments me :(

[imported_The_One]

dont feed the ego it torments me :( Lol, okeys :lol:.

[KlawHammer]

Well, that doesn't matter. Think of it this way, if the PS2 was as powerful as a computer when it was made, then we'd all be in heaven (Processor-wise, not GPU. 'Cause we all know that the PS2 was MUCH more powerful then any other graphic card out there at the time). So we should actually be happy that the PS3 can top any PC in 2006 for even a few months :lol:.

well actually im sure the geforce 3 card came out the same time as the PS2 and you cant say a g3 is weaker than a ps2 because it was even used to show off early stages of the FARCRY engine.

To be honest with you mate, the GeForce 3 is a meazly card. Im sure the PS2 can outperform the GeForce 3 in certain areas....

[imported_The_One]

To be honest with you mate, the GeForce 3 is a meazly card. Im sure the PS2 can outperform the GeForce 3 in certain areas.... Most likely, but not in all areas (remember, the XBox GPU is based on the geforce 3, and the XBox cGPU is obviously more superior then the PS2 GPU in most areas).

[Infant Finite]

The PS2 GPU has 4MB of embedded memory....48GB/sec peak bandwidth.

[Infant Finite]

Compare that to Xbox's 3.2GB/sec memory bandwidth

[Infant Finite]

It would actually be much less than 3.2GB/sec since it's shared with everything else

[KlawHammer]

What the hell is wrong with you? Stop triple-posting. If you want to add something else please click the EDIT button..... :x :x

As for the earlier post posted by The_One regarding my GeForce 3 rantings, thats why i said in certain areas.

[Infant Finite]

Ohhh....sorry

[brownbeaner2]

actually the posts were all at different times which by my knowledge is acceptable.

but yeah it sounds like your talking to yourself - finite

[Infant Finite]

oh....ok

[imported_The_One]

As for the earlier post posted by The_One regarding my GeForce 3 rantings, thats why i said in certain areas. Yes... I noticed... I was just being stupid and redundant... Sorry :P.

[sub1zero]

Hey guys wasn't this topic based on the "PS3 vs Gamecube2".I'm sorry if I sound like a mod :P but all of the posts about G3 and Wafers is really making my head spin. :lol:

[Infant Finite]

mmmm....wafer cookies

[Seto]

G5, PS3
doesnt matter to me, as long as Microsoft dies and leaves the VG industry, I would rather have it back the way it was when Sony and Nintendo fought in the consoles, it has got nothing but worse since Bill Gates steped in with his Xbox.

[Makaveli_786]

Yeah that idiot made the market something it isnt, theres no innovation on MS's part theyve basically taken a PC and called it an Xbox.

With Nintendo and Sony theyr making anything apart from a PC so we get to look forward to something unique each and every time.

[Seto]

Yeah that idiot made the market something it isnt, theres no innovation on MS's part theyve basically taken a PC and called it an Xbox.

With Nintendo and Sony theyr making anything apart from a PC so we get to look forward to something unique each and every time.

finaly someone who thinks the same way I do. Microsoft tries to use its Power gained from outside the VG industry and use its money to gain control of the VG industry and monopolise it like they did with Windows. Microsoft may have made a more powerful system, but Playstation and Nintendo know what Videogameing is about, Microsoft doesnt.

I hate it when people buy Xboxes and Microsoft stuff just because it is American. I am not saying American companies are bad, just Microsoft. American still havent shown that they can make VGs and untill they do I am sticking to Japanese systems. I like to buy American stuff, and would always chose an american car over a japanese one, but Microsoft sux.

[Makaveli_786]

An American car over a Japanese car.

Ohh bro you dont know what your missing, American cars are the worst designed and worst-running cars on the planet while Japanese supercars are the most prestigious and reliable cars on the planet.

Fact is a lot of American companies try to monopolize everything, look at Ford, they make crap uninnovative and unrealiable cars put they delve in every market for supercars to supercrapcars, same with Chrysler.

You can step in the ring with Tyson and if your lucky get a punch in but you cant expect to knock him out, MS tried it with Sony and it wasnt happening, thats why MS is crying now.

[Seto]

An American car over a Japanese car.

Ohh bro you dont know what your missing, American cars are the worst designed and worst-running cars on the planet while Japanese supercars are the most prestigious and reliable cars on the planet.

Fact is a lot of American companies try to monopolize everything, look at Ford, they make crap uninnovative and unrealiable cars put they delve in every market for supercars to supercrapcars, same with Chrysler.

You can step in the ring with Tyson and if your lucky get a punch in but you cant expect to knock him out, MS tried it with Sony and it wasnt happening, thats why MS is crying now.

Actualy, I own a German car, lol

well, Microsoft is going down and fast. I don't think they will stand a chance agianst the mighty power of Sony or even Nintendo. They are takeing away the Hard Drive and are rushing to release it befor Son releases the PS3. Sony has already had almost 2 more years to work on theres, but they still want to get theres out first. Xbox 2 will be a flop.

Im not exactly sure what to expect from Nintendo, but I hope it will be as good as when they still had the N64. Nintendo has been around forever and they know what they are doing, lets just hope it isnt dissapointing like the GC, the GC just didnt have the dominating games that the N64 had.

[Loc]

I actually live a few miles from Redmond, Microsoft's headquarters. Have any of you seen the movie "Pirates of silcon valley"? The movie basically shows how Apple and Microsoft get their start from stealing ideas. Microsoft got their start from stealing Apple's stuff.

[KlawHammer]

Apple then got their start by tealing Linux ideas...hence Mac OS.

[Makaveli_786]

LOL, Apple were innovative but they did take ideas from Linux.

MS just stole the ideas and didnt make a single change to any of it.

[*C-STARZ*PUSHA]

I feel bad for the cube :x :x

[imported_The_One]

I feel bad for the cube :x :x
I feel bad for Nintendo in general :P.
I kinda miss the good 'ol days of the SNES and NES... when 3 player co-op games were kick azz and 5 player bomberman could keep you and 4 of your friends occupied for hours during weekend afternoons.... *sigh*.

[KlawHammer]

Nintendo do have good multiplayer though - always been their strong point - melee games.