Domination
07-07-2005, 07:30 PM
YOU ALL KNOW that Sony wanted to makes its complete console based on Cell marchitecture. It eventually did it partially, as the CPU is Cell based but it learned that Cell is not that good for graphic.
It had to pull some emergency strings and Nvidia was the perfect choice. It already made the Xbox graphics chip, had experience with consoles and knew all it had to know about graphics. The only bad thing was that Sony approached Nvidia very late, and didn’t leave this talented company much time to do a proper job for a Sony Playstation 3.
Nvidia did make a good chip design based on 90 nanometre marchitecture but it didn’t design the chip from scratch. We were told more than once that RSX is 90 nanometre G70 adjusted to fit into a console and to do whatever it has to do.
We wrote before that Sony will do those chips in its own factories so Nvidia doesn’t have to worry about yields, TSMC marchitecture and stuff like that as Sony is supposed to make everything work. Nvidia still has to tape out its RSX chip but it should happen very soon now.
ATI, on the other hand, had two whole years to finish its R500 chip. We learned that it should be just enough time to make the chip design and to have it ready. Therefore, in some ways, ATI might have a slight advantage over Nvidia at least in consoles, while Nvidia is picking up fast in the discrete business. The tables are turning one more time. We don’t want to jump to any conclusions about which is better - ATI's R500 and Xbox 360 or Nvidia's RSX in Playstation 3 - as both consoles and chips have their own audiences who will be more than happy to get one of them. Xbox 360 is coming first, while Playstation 3 coming later should be backward compatible with older games. Xbox 360 will be backward compatible but not for all titles.
Source (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24445)
If this is true, then i guess it would make it a rushed job. But seeing how the author goes into direct details as to how it could be true, I'm just not quite understanding his point and logic. His reason for the RSX being a tweaked GPU is Sony mentioning that one of their ideas was to use a second Cell as GPU just before they chose nVidia for the job. Ok, check. Then he continues by mentioning the amount of time ATI had been buliding on the custom graphics card for the 360, which seems to be two years. Check. But when Sony mentioned their alliance with nVidia, one of the first things they made clear was the amount of time the two had been working on the RSX, which was 18 months at the time it was announce, which will now make that alliance more than two years, especially since we know it'll be launching much later.
My question and point is, if you can get a custom R500 in two years, why not a custom RSX?
It had to pull some emergency strings and Nvidia was the perfect choice. It already made the Xbox graphics chip, had experience with consoles and knew all it had to know about graphics. The only bad thing was that Sony approached Nvidia very late, and didn’t leave this talented company much time to do a proper job for a Sony Playstation 3.
Nvidia did make a good chip design based on 90 nanometre marchitecture but it didn’t design the chip from scratch. We were told more than once that RSX is 90 nanometre G70 adjusted to fit into a console and to do whatever it has to do.
We wrote before that Sony will do those chips in its own factories so Nvidia doesn’t have to worry about yields, TSMC marchitecture and stuff like that as Sony is supposed to make everything work. Nvidia still has to tape out its RSX chip but it should happen very soon now.
ATI, on the other hand, had two whole years to finish its R500 chip. We learned that it should be just enough time to make the chip design and to have it ready. Therefore, in some ways, ATI might have a slight advantage over Nvidia at least in consoles, while Nvidia is picking up fast in the discrete business. The tables are turning one more time. We don’t want to jump to any conclusions about which is better - ATI's R500 and Xbox 360 or Nvidia's RSX in Playstation 3 - as both consoles and chips have their own audiences who will be more than happy to get one of them. Xbox 360 is coming first, while Playstation 3 coming later should be backward compatible with older games. Xbox 360 will be backward compatible but not for all titles.
Source (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24445)
If this is true, then i guess it would make it a rushed job. But seeing how the author goes into direct details as to how it could be true, I'm just not quite understanding his point and logic. His reason for the RSX being a tweaked GPU is Sony mentioning that one of their ideas was to use a second Cell as GPU just before they chose nVidia for the job. Ok, check. Then he continues by mentioning the amount of time ATI had been buliding on the custom graphics card for the 360, which seems to be two years. Check. But when Sony mentioned their alliance with nVidia, one of the first things they made clear was the amount of time the two had been working on the RSX, which was 18 months at the time it was announce, which will now make that alliance more than two years, especially since we know it'll be launching much later.
My question and point is, if you can get a custom R500 in two years, why not a custom RSX?