new Nvidia G80 specs - too bad Sony didn't use this GPU architecture

[AirRaid]

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33576&page=33


these aren't official specs, but beyond3d guys are on top of things better than anyone at GAF or OA so.



8800GTX

* 575MHz Core Clock
* 900MHz Mem Clock
* 768MB GDDR3 memory
* 384-bit memory interface (86GB/s)
* 128 unified shaders clocked at 1350 MHz
* 38.4 billion pixels per second theoretical texture fill-rate
* 450W PSU Recommended
* Hard launch in second week of November


8800GTS

* 500MHz Core Clock
* 900MHz Mem Clock
* 640MB GDDR3 memory
* 320-bit memory interface (64GB/s)
* 96 unified shaders clocked at 1200 MHz
* ?? billion pixels per second theoretical texture fill-rate
* 400W PSU Recommended
* Hard launch in second week of November



That's certainly a more interesting specification than nvidia has released for a long time, I guess not surprising though at this time of the new Microsoft requirements.



It seems to me that the G80 is really just a collection of mini-GPUs. Each has a 64-bit memory bus, 16 processors and an unknown number of TMUs and ROPs (my guess is 6 and 2). I suppose they're really taking this SLI thing to the max. Although, I imagine there is an elaborate inter-GPU communication and caching system ala CELL too.



the original source for the specs is DailyTech

http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4441


NVIDIA "G80" Retail Details Unveiled

DirectX 10 compliant GeForce 8800GTX and 8800GTS headed your way

DailyTech's hands-on with the GeForce 8800 series continues with more information about the GPU and the retail boards. The new NVIDIA graphics architecture will be fully compatible with Microsoft’s upcoming DirectX 10 API with support for shader model 4.0, and represents the company's 8th generation GPU in the GeForce family.

NVIDIA has code-named G80 based products as the GeForce 8800 series. While the 7900 and 7800 series launched with GT and GTX suffixes, G80 will do away with the GT suffix. Instead, NVIDIA has revived the GTS suffix for its second fastest graphics product—a suffix that hasn’t been used since the GeForce 2 days.

NVIDIA’s GeForce 8800GTX will be the flagship product. The core clock will be factory clocked at 575 MHz. All GeForce 8800GTX cards will be equipped with 768MB of GDDR3 memory, to be clocked at 900 MHz. The GeForce 8800GTX will also have a 384-bit memory interface and deliver 86GB/second of memory bandwidth. GeForce 8800GTX graphics cards are equipped with 128 unified shaders clocked at 1350 MHz. The theoretical texture fill-rate is around 38.4 billion pixels per second.

Slotted right below the GeForce 8800GTX is the slightly cut-down GeForce 8800GTS. These graphics cards will have a G80 GPU clocked at a slower 500 MHz. The memory configuration for GeForce 8800GTS cards slightly differ from the GeForce 8800GTX. GeForce 8800GTS cards will be equipped with 640MB of GDDR3 graphics memory clocked at 900 MHz. The memory interface is reduced to 320-bit and overall memory bandwidth is 64GB/second. There will be fewer unified shaders with GeForce 8800GTS graphics cards. 96 unified shaders clocked at 1200 MHz are available on GeForce 8800GTS graphics cards.

Additionally GeForce 8800GTX and 8800GTS products are HDCP compliant with support for dual dual-link DVI, VIVO and HDTV outputs. All cards will have dual-slot coolers too. Expect GeForce 8800GTX and 8800GTS products to launch the second week of November 2006. This will be a hard launch as most manufacturers should have boards ready now.




thanks SCEI, for putting in a 2.5 year old Nv4x GPU architecture into PS3. SCEI is using a lowend refresh of NV40, a GPU called RSX which is a downgraded version of the NV47. it's old whether you count it as being 1.5 years old or 2.5 years old.

the G80 is the NV50, a GPU architecture Nvidia has been working on since 2002, but it is new. this is the architecture (not the exact GPU but the overall architecture) that Sony should've used in PS3. if Sony used say, a midrange G80, it would've been ahead of Xenos in most areas. if Sony & Nvidia had developed a custom midrange G80 with EDRAM it would've been ahead of Xenos in every way.

but noooooooo. they had to used a miserably outdated architecture and not even the highest-end version of it.

PS3 is going to rely mostly on CELL to do *anything* good. the RSX is just there to offload some rendering chores.

CELL better turn out to be so good over the next 6 years that it's worth it for game-developers and game-players. otherwise, the heck with you SCEI.

the reason i'm kinda pissed is, I used to be a fan of Sony and Playstation. I favored the PS1 over the Saturn and the N64. I favored the PS2 over the Xbox1, while also supporting Dreamcast & Gamecube.

Sony deserves to lose half their (~70%) marketshare. they deserve to be cut down into the 30s with Microsoft and Nintendo cleaning up.

my attitude toward PS3 may brighten up once Ace Combat 6 is announced, but I cannot help but to think that Sony messed up on PS3 by not "future-proofing" the graphics. a Shader Model 4, G80-based GPU would've made it so that PS3 graphics would still look reasonably good 6-7 years from now, instead of horribly outdated.

[Fazares]

in before the lock???

[Pumpkin Head]

WOW sound like a angry ex-sony fanboy gone postal...

[Applefiend]

Damn Sony and their lies, damn them to hell! :)

p.s. Old News.

[liver_kick]

I can't tell if he's being serious but...

PS3 is going to rely mostly on CELL to do *anything* good. the RSX is just there to offload some rendering chores.

RSX will be doing the majority of "rendering chores" for every game until production ends. The horror!

[Crossbar]

thanks SCEI, for putting in a 2.5 year old Nv4x GPU architecture into PS3. SCEI is using a lowend refresh of NV40, a GPU called RSX which is a downgraded version of the NV47. it's old whether you count it as being 1.5 years old or 2.5 years old.

the G80 is the NV50, a GPU architecture Nvidia has been working on since 2002, but it is new. this is the architecture (not the exact GPU but the overall architecture) that Sony should've used in PS3. if Sony used say, a midrange G80, it would've been ahead of Xenos in most areas. if Sony & Nvidia had developed a custom midrange G80 with EDRAM it would've been ahead of Xenos in every way.

but noooooooo. they had to used a miserably outdated architecture and not even the highest-end version of it.

PS3 is going to rely mostly on CELL to do *anything* good. the RSX is just there to offload some rendering chores.
...
Man, you are really out of touch with reality.

Any idea how many transistors that chip is? Probably about twice the number of the RSX.

NV47 is an architecture at the peak of it´s life time. It´s the choice for anyone who wants max performance/transistor.

Sony knows what they are doing, some fancy SM4 instructions means jack shit when the programmers can get down and dirty on the silicon level with the RSX.

RSX will rock no doubts about, we´ve already seen it and there is more where that came from, just ask any developer.

And please save us from more of this G80 nonsense, just compare the price tag of that card and the PS3 and try to get real for gods sake!!!!!

[Coded-Dude]

blah blah blah - I am glad Sony used what they did

[xbdestroya]

I'm not sure if the purpose of this thread is to make us crave a G80 or make us upset that Sony used an NV47-based architecture. I *know* it must be the later, but I'm just not sure why anyone would get upset... it's what we've known forever (in spite of BS rumors I constantly have to deal with).

[PUNK em 733]

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33576&page=33


these aren't official specs, but beyond3d guys are on top of things better than anyone at GAF or OA so.












the original source for the specs is DailyTech

http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4441






thanks SCEI, for putting in a 2.5 year old Nv4x GPU architecture into PS3. SCEI is using a lowend refresh of NV40, a GPU called RSX which is a downgraded version of the NV47. it's old whether you count it as being 1.5 years old or 2.5 years old.

the G80 is the NV50, a GPU architecture Nvidia has been working on since 2002, but it is new. this is the architecture (not the exact GPU but the overall architecture) that Sony should've used in PS3. if Sony used say, a midrange G80, it would've been ahead of Xenos in most areas. if Sony & Nvidia had developed a custom midrange G80 with EDRAM it would've been ahead of Xenos in every way.

but noooooooo. they had to used a miserably outdated architecture and not even the highest-end version of it.

PS3 is going to rely mostly on CELL to do *anything* good. the RSX is just there to offload some rendering chores.

CELL better turn out to be so good over the next 6 years that it's worth it for game-developers and game-players. otherwise, the heck with you SCEI.

the reason i'm kinda pissed is, I used to be a fan of Sony and Playstation. I favored the PS1 over the Saturn and the N64. I favored the PS2 over the Xbox1, while also supporting Dreamcast & Gamecube.

Sony deserves to lose half their (~70%) marketshare. they deserve to be cut down into the 30s with Microsoft and Nintendo cleaning up.

my attitude toward PS3 may brighten up once Ace Combat 6 is announced, but I cannot help but to think that Sony messed up on PS3 by not "future-proofing" the graphics. a Shader Model 4, G80-based GPU would've made it so that PS3 graphics would still look reasonably good 6-7 years from now, instead of horribly outdated.


*SHAKES HEAD*

[xbdestroya]

PS - The fact that AirRaid said that 'the guys at B3D are on top of things more than the guys at GAF or OA' makes me weep for the future. Was there a question as to whether this would be the case or not?

Jesus to think anyone actually *reads* what's posted at Opa-Ages, a forum who's claim to fame is providing safe harbor for Deadmeat and bigots and hotheads who have been banned from everywhere else on the net.

Would you have prefered if OA was 'on top of it' AirRaid, rather than B3D? :smoke:

[RavenFox]

thanks SCEI, for putting in a 2.5 year old Nv4x GPU architecture into PS3
Are you 5? Seriously go away.

[VG Aficionado]

______________________:locked:_______:locked::lock ed::locked:__ :locked::locked:_·:locked:__1·:locked:
______________________:locked:_______:locked:____· :locked:__:locked:______·:locked::locked:
______________________:locked:_______:locked:____· :locked:__:locked:______·:locked::locked:
______________________:locked::locked:__·:locked:: locked::locked:_ ·:locked::locked:__:locked:___·:locked:

[jako]

How much is going to cost that beast ?
Anyway there is no way it can be in a PS3, it will be too expensive. I remember reading that RSX will cost 90$ to sony.

[Pumpkin Head]

I see airraid went too ps3 forum to spread this false mess...

[xbdestroya]

No, I'm not going to lock this, beause really there should be no reason this should cause any drama. It's just... what it is.

If you ignore the messenger in all this (and the way he presents his warped message), it just becomes another random RSX thread. Might as well have it start now rather than later.

The fact also that he'll hold out for Ace Combat 6 also highlights the absurdity that is the fact that he himself will end up owning the console anyway. Why knock the PS3 if you're going to be getting it for the games anyway?

And that's what it's about - the games, not the tech going inside.

[Red_Eyes]

thanks SCEI, for putting in a 2.5 year old Nv4x GPU architecture into PS3. SCEI is using a lowend refresh of NV40, a GPU called RSX which is a downgraded version of the NV47. it's old whether you count it as being 1.5 years old or 2.5 years old.

the G80 is the NV50, a GPU architecture Nvidia has been working on since 2002, but it is new. this is the architecture (not the exact GPU but the overall architecture) that Sony should've used in PS3. if Sony used say, a midrange G80, it would've been ahead of Xenos in most areas. if Sony & Nvidia had developed a custom midrange G80 with EDRAM it would've been ahead of Xenos in every way.

but noooooooo. they had to used a miserably outdated architecture and not even the highest-end version of it.

PS3 is going to rely mostly on CELL to do *anything* good. the RSX is just there to offload some rendering chores.

CELL better turn out to be so good over the next 6 years that it's worth it for game-developers and game-players. otherwise, the heck with you SCEI.

the reason i'm kinda pissed is, I used to be a fan of Sony and Playstation. I favored the PS1 over the Saturn and the N64. I favored the PS2 over the Xbox1, while also supporting Dreamcast & Gamecube.

Sony deserves to lose half their (~70%) marketshare. they deserve to be cut down into the 30s with Microsoft and Nintendo cleaning up.

my attitude toward PS3 may brighten up once Ace Combat 6 is announced, but I cannot help but to think that Sony messed up on PS3 by not "future-proofing" the graphics. a Shader Model 4, G80-based GPU would've made it so that PS3 graphics would still look reasonably good 6-7 years from now, instead of horribly outdated.

Lol. Xenos can't even do 1080P. So how is the RSX inferior to a GPU that can't even do 1080P? Not only that, most games on the 360 struggle to run at 30 fps at 720P. All games on the PS3 runs at 60 fps, and most at 1080P. RSX > Xenos in every way.

And with computer GPU, a new one comes out every 3 to 6 months. There is no way Sony will be able to stay on top of that and get the latest GPU for the PS3 and still be able to launch in time. What you're asking is just impossible. So stop your whining.

[Coded-Dude]

too bad Sony didn't use this GPU architecture
would have been good enough reason to me(to lock this). Besides it has nothing to do with Sony.
Its Nvidia's new specs and should subsequently be properly titled and re-located into the Tech Forums
(but thats just my two cents)

putting it in here makes the "messengers" message clear.

[Goki]

Well to make this thread more constructive, do u think Sony, if was able too afford it, would have had enough time to put the G80 onto the PS3 with a November launch ?

[jako]

CP said that the RSX is close to 7900GT wich is more than enough power for a close system.
Can someone recall what is the PS2 GPU and the XBOX1 GPU ? so that everyone know what you can do with "very dated" GPU (GT4, God of War,...)

A 7900GT is really amasing in the PS3.

I remember 2 years ago we (on the forum) didn't even believe that the PS3 could run Half life 2 properly , lol.

[Applefiend]

Well I wouldn't go too far with the Xbox GPU thing, nVidia basically gave Microsoft a GPU that was half a generation ahead of their current Geforce 2(People used to call it a Geforce 2.5). Clearly if G80 is out in November, PS3 is getting a GPU that's one generation behind nVidia's latest card.

But it's down to 6 month delays due to Blu Ray, timing of G80, all that. Don't bother me none!

Yes I'd like a G80 in PS3, I'd also like it to cost 5 cents, vaccum my house and take out my trash.

RSX is all about the money I think. Sony are looking for a cost effective yet powerful GPU. They want something that'll sell 100 million. That's what PS2 had, cost effective yet powerful. Mostly cost effective.

RSX in PS3 = cost effective, powerful.

G80 in PS3 = very un cost effective, too powerful.

[VG Aficionado]

Honestly, a lot of people are really underestimating PS3 and the RSX even before we see a number of finished first generation games. The truth is that there are several PS3 games that look and feel like next generation games which run at 1080p and/or 60fps already, and resolution & frame rate aren't exactly the only things they excel at. I've got yet to see another system on the market which surpasses PS3 at this stage of development.

[archy121]

This is an EXACT copy n paste that he has already put out on PS3forums.
No need to feed the same thread on two different forums.

:locked:

[xbdestroya]

Well to make this thread more constructive, do u think Sony, if was able too afford it, would have had enough time to put the G80 onto the PS3 with a November launch ?

Yes, let's discuss this seriously... because frankly I have my own views on this as well.

It seems from Kutaragi's after-the-fact statements, that at one point or another Sony truly *was* aiming for a March '06 launch. If this was the case, it would certainly explain why RSX is what it is. Had they targeted November '06 from the start, would they have been able to use the extra six months of time to come up with a more G80-derived architecture? I'd like to think 'maybe.' And as such it's unfortunate what happened, though really it's too hard to divine through the red-tape of the Sony/NVidia agreement to see what would even have been possible, and when it would have needed to be put into motion.

But I want to say that Cell's role should not be downplayed. RSX may not be the 'dream chip' some people hoped for, but there's plenty of reason to believe that PS3 as a system achieves more of a 'DX10' environment than the Xenos - an architecturally similar chip to the R600 - does, in terms of geometry generation and otherwise.

[xbdestroya]

This is an EXACT copy n paste that he has already put out on PS3forums.
No need to feed the same thread on two different forums.

:locked:

Wait a minute, now what do the PS3forums have to do with anything? The only reason anyone here would know that is if they're a member of that forum as well - which I strongly advise against anyway. :smoke:

[Coded-Dude]

A 7900GT is really amasing in the PS3.
I've said it once and I'll say it again:

I own the 7900GT and I can't even begine to imagine what kind of power devs are going to be able to tap out of it.......ESPECIALLY with the CELL being its CPU.

My AMD 64 2.2GHz(overclocked to 2.4) + 7900GT can do some amazing thigs, and I can't wait to see what CELL +7900GT(variant) will accomplish.

Anybody who doubts the power of this hardware is merely whining for the sake of whining.

[curryking1]

^Dude, I agree, it's going to be able to do much better things in a closed and specific environment than it could ever do in a general and open PC environment. I have an X1900GT, does amazing things as well, on the board it is the same as a 7900GT basically, can't wait for what the PS3 can max out of a card like it.

EDIT:

xbdestroya, maybe you would also like to know that he posted this in the OCD of TXB, just a heads up.

[xbdestroya]

xbdestroya, maybe you would also like to know that he posted this in the OCD of TXB, just a heads up.

Well, I already replied there anyway... :smoke:

[curryking1]

Lol ya I just noticed xbdestroya, you're on top of things for sure lol, your post is right after mine lol. I really want to see some 1 GB video cards lol.

[frosty]

Funny thing about this pointless rant, as a certain dev pointed out before, there isn't a PC title out there that "maxes out" the 7900. We haven't even seen it working at full power in a PC, so as you can see in a closed environment... It will own. Hands down. And it will do so for $500. HDD, RAM, state of the art CPU, etc. included. Not $500 just for RSX, unlike G80.

[Hrama]

Why is this even in the PS3 section? Besides his rant, there was nothing to mention about the PS3 at all in those articles that I saw. Shouldn't this be in the computer tech section?

[Coded-Dude]

Why is this even in the PS3 section?
QFT

[Yo MaMa84]

Rant rant....ramble ramble....
You guys never seem to amaze me....everything is a problem...

[edofall]

I use a 7800GS and that thing is even a beast and i got it around the beginning of the year. so a 7900GT is fine by me. i was also thinkin about these specs for the 8800, and it seems to me that this card was created to save more money in the long run for devs. If a home pc is equipped with this thing it IS over kill, but look at the 7 series using 2 cards in SLI with power supplies in the 800 to 1000W. put the 8800 in a pc and get the power of 2 cards with half the watts.

[msantti]

thanks SCEI, for putting in a 2.5 year old Nv4x GPU architecture into PS3. SCEI is using a lowend refresh of NV40, a GPU called RSX which is a downgraded version of the NV47. it's old whether you count it as being 1.5 years old or 2.5 years old.

the G80 is the NV50, a GPU architecture Nvidia has been working on since 2002, but it is new. this is the architecture (not the exact GPU but the overall architecture) that Sony should've used in PS3. if Sony used say, a midrange G80, it would've been ahead of Xenos in most areas. if Sony & Nvidia had developed a custom midrange G80 with EDRAM it would've been ahead of Xenos in every way.

but noooooooo. they had to used a miserably outdated architecture and not even the highest-end version of it.

PS3 is going to rely mostly on CELL to do *anything* good. the RSX is just there to offload some rendering chores.

CELL better turn out to be so good over the next 6 years that it's worth it for game-developers and game-players. otherwise, the heck with you SCEI.

the reason i'm kinda pissed is, I used to be a fan of Sony and Playstation. I favored the PS1 over the Saturn and the N64. I favored the PS2 over the Xbox1, while also supporting Dreamcast & Gamecube.

Sony deserves to lose half their (~70%) marketshare. they deserve to be cut down into the 30s with Microsoft and Nintendo cleaning up.

my attitude toward PS3 may brighten up once Ace Combat 6 is announced, but I cannot help but to think that Sony messed up on PS3 by not "future-proofing" the graphics. a Shader Model 4, G80-based GPU would've made it so that PS3 graphics would still look reasonably good 6-7 years from now, instead of horribly outdated.

Oh calm down.

We do not even know the final specs of the PS3. Yeah, its not this powerful but just how much WERE you planning to spend on a PS3?

The high end of this card will probably be close to 600 bucks.

Makes a PS3 look like the deal of the century.

[-gin-]

jesus christ that card sucks up more energy then my entire psu> 400watts

[PhYmon]

Why dont we close this thread shall we?? :locked:

[GodMachine_Iridius_Dio]

Yeah, too bad SONY didn't use this GPU instead of RSX. I was looking forward to PS3 launching fall 2007 for around 750$ American.

There's honestly no reason for a thread like this to start at all. If the above were the scenario, people would bitch ten times more than they already do about inordinate prices and how the G90 is coming right over the next ridge. At some point, specs have to be settled on, price has to be settled on, and cost of production has to be settled on, so somewhere development on the hardware has to stop. SO WHAT?! This is not the PC arena, where there's a new best-in-class every four to eight weeks. If it were, you'd never see a new console, or you'd have to pay a few hundred bills to upgrade it every six months if you wanted to play a new game. Lay off.

If this were simply a thread with the intention of posting the specifications of the new G80 chips, that'd be great, but using it to disguise a tirade about your personal, uninformed distaste for a specific hardware is uncalled for. And for the reccord, AirRaid - why are you still buying into DM's crap? You're smarter than that.


Dio

[archy121]

....It seems from Kutaragi's after-the-fact statements, that at one point or another Sony truly *was* aiming for a March '06 launch. If this was the case, it would certainly explain why RSX is what it is. Had they targeted November '06 from the start, would they have been able to use the extra six months of time to come up with a more G80-derived architecture? I'd like to think 'maybe.' And as such it's unfortunate what happened, though really it's too hard to divine through the red-tape of the Sony/NVidia agreement to see what would even have been possible, and when it would have needed to be put into motion.

That makes logical sense & I can agree with it.

I guess the biggest reason we have seen so many speculative RSX threads & disappointed fans is because of Sony’s tight lip on the matter of specifications.
Had they continued to openly discuss the RSX spec's as originally aired back in E3 2005 none of this chaos would have existed.

Sony was wise to let the price news out early at E3 & let the air clear.. Maybe something similar should have been done regards to RSX & it would have avoided this whole RSX conspiracy* hunger across every console forum on the internet. After all Mr Harrison has said he surf's various forums so he should have had an idea of the fans expectancy in RSX & done something through Sony to quash over expectancy from fans. They have had plenty of opportunity to reconfirm the RSX spec’s in some gentle manner.

*Hand Up - I fuelled RSX=G80 derivative

Personally I also found it difficult that Sony could be so off target from the original set release date of Spring 06. Hardware as well as development was so far off.. I remember the Kikizo article back in Jan 06(?) leaking how incomplete the PS3 was with little time before its release date. I didn’t believe any of it at the time as I found it too hard to accept Sony could be so far off target. Looking back I can't think of a single game would have been ready for the spring release even if the hardware got miraculously completed. It later made me think Fall 06 or even Spring 07 was always the more realistic date set in Sony's mind.

As things stand today, the games have proved to all that whatever the RSX is, its doing a great job in the PS3. It looks like the PS3 will be a great console in all areas & meet most set expectancies for the fans. But I still can't help thinking its a shame Sony has missed the chance to make a 'Truly Nextgen' console as they promised. Delivering late & still equipping the PS3 with a GPU that was considered formidable back in Spring 06 has made the PS3 not so quite Nextgen to the technical minded.
Sure the RSX seems to be doing a great job, but the point is its no longer the Nextgen GPU it was in Spring 06. You can argue that the RSX is in a closed environment so it still is very powerful compared to PC counterpart – but than we could say same about the older 6800 in similar environment. I’m sure it was said back in E3 2005 that the RSX would be the most powerful GPU out when it was released in the PS3. This is what we were sold & our expectancies set upon. G80 is clearly going to be the GPU king when PS3 is out. RSX as we know it will have been overtaken by a very large margin – a generation leap. So I can understand some fans reasons to be disappointed even when pointed to the facts that First Gen games are looking great today & RSX is in a closed environment which will allow lot more to be squeezed out of it.

If Sony really does value its fans as much as it has declared openly than it should have done some things differently to keep its market share in the console generation following the PS3.

If the current release dates are the result of genuine delays than I feel Sony should have come forth & fully realigned fans expectations on the specifications by now. If the dates were always meant to be fall06/spring07 than Sony should be delivering an upgraded RSX** if they are to remain true to what they said they would deliver.


:cowboy:

** EDIT
For sake of clarification: Upgraded does not imply fully blown 700M transistor G80. It could be same solution built around 7800 with more enhancements in areas such as memory, extra cache sizes & possibly some latest technology borrowed from G80. Or possibly a different GPU altogther like an 8600 type which would be a cut down version of the 8800 like the 7600 was from the from 7900.

[Nameless]

^ I just find it interesting how expectations change so quickly... When did we start expecting gaming consoles to contain the most powerful CPU and GPU on the market at a reasonable price? If this high level of expectations remain for the next consoles I can only imagine the price point... Considering the closed enviornment of consoles, I would think people would be asking for more RAM instead of more GPU power... Peace

[thelastword]

Hi everyone, It's amazing how unfair some people can be towards Sony. I mean what do some people want? What?

PS3 at the moment, even before launch, has a consistent number of titles that overshadow the best of 360 efforts, at twice the pixel count and at twice the framerate. Even multiplats are already running ahead in that regard, so what more can anyone ask of Sony. More complicated hardware you say, that's the Sony machine for you, this is what will keep the PS3 stretching it's performance lead, over the coming years. The combination of the RSX and the CELL is already overkill for anything out there IMO and for crying out loud, let's never ever forget that it's all about the games. Sony has been delivering in that space for ten+ years now. I mean who are these guys? downplaying the longevity of the PS3, it's clearly more powerful than it's competitors and if I can use the PS2 as a measuring stick of what is to come on playstation3, then I'm all good and spiffy. Okami is an amazing looking and playing game on a soon to be seven year old PS2, GOTY in my book. Yakuza and the soon coming FF12 are great markups as well, but people just seem to care about specs disregarding what's relevant, what's real and what's in their face.

[woundingchaney]

PS3 at the moment, even before launch, has a consistent number of titles that overshadow the best of 360 efforts at twice the pixel count and at twice the framerate. .
So just what are these titles, when do they release, and how do you know just how many pixels they have. Also, reports are differing on which titles look better on which systems and the 360 has some stellar titles coming to its library that are above the PS3s counterparts of the same genre (although the same could be said about the PS3, and the world continues to turn).



But anyways has there been an announced cost of the Nvid. card (preferably the GTX one) as well as any rumblings over the supposed release date of ATI DX10 card.

Thanks for the info AirRaid.

[Applefiend]

Popped onto Opa Age today and owned Deadmeat for old times sake. Used to do it daily for yukes. He posted this in December.

Blu-Ray Rev 0 : Caddy disk. RAM disc only.
Blu-Ray Rev 1 : 1 layer 25 GB. MPEG2
Blu-Ray Rev 2 : 2 layer 50 GB. BR-Java, H264 and VC-1.

All three are incompatible with each other. Only Rev 2 players can read Rev 1 discs. PSX3 is a Rev 1 player.

Launch date

Blu-Ray Rev 0 : 2003
Blu-Ray Rev 1 : November 2006
Blu-Ray Rev 2 : Unknown

No, 90% of PSX3 games will be on DVD.

So looks like BR-ROM camp is going to make the April/May launch with Rev 1 spec to coincide with PSX3 launch in Japan. They know full Rev 2 spec will take years to perfect so they are forced to make the launch with a crippled version instead.

That message of his is wrong in 6 ways I can count, how about you guys. :)

It's easy and pointless to own Deadmeat, he just relays anything negative about Sony, and not all negative things about Sony come true, actually most of them don't. He also spins anything positive as negative. He's been going it since about 1995 or before. Started on Usenet.

God knows why, maybe KK shot his dog.

[xbdestroya]

Yeah but Applefiend like you said, that's from December. :)

Since then we already have this awesomeness:

http://www.sonydefenseforce.com/volume2.jpg

[Nameless]

Hi everyone, it's amazing how unfair some people can be towards Sony. I mean what do some people want? What?

PS3 at the moment, even before launch, has a consistent number of titles that overshadow the best of 360 efforts at twice the pixel count and at twice the framerate. Even multiplats are already running ahead in that regard, so what more can anyone ask of Sony. More complicated hardware you say, that's the Sony machine for you, this is what will keep the PS3 stretching it's performance lead, over the coming years. The combination of the RSX and the CELL is already overkill for anything out there IMO and for crying out loud, let's never ever forget that it's all about the games, Sony has been delivering in that space for ten+ years now. I mean who are these guys downplaying the longevity of the PS3, it's clearly more powerful than it's competitors and if I can use the PS2 as a measuring stick of what is to come on playstation3, then I'm all good and spiffy. Okami is an amazing looking and playing game on a soon to be seven year old PS2, GOTY in my book. Yakuza and the soon coming FF12 are great markups as well, but people just seem to care about specs disregarding what's relevant, what's real and what's in their face.
QFT (+Rep)
Also, consider this; if the G80 was used in the PS3 how would this impact the overall system cost. The G80 will more than likely retail for $550 - $600 USD, the cost of a PS3 console... Once you consider the cost of the CPU, HDD & BD Drive you are talking about an extremely pricey console. I would estimate the cost in the $799 to $899 range or higher... Also, why stop with the GPU we could be upset that Sony decided to use a 2X BD drive instead of 4X drive, any hardware development cycle reaches a point where you have to stop upgrading and bring the product to market.

The PS3 is the most powerful home gaming console created and the complaints are pointless and petty IMHO. :nono:

[archy121]

^ I just find it interesting how expectations change so quickly... When did we start expecting gaming consoles to contain the most powerful CPU and GPU on the market at a reasonable price? If this high level of expectations remain for the next consoles I can only imagine the price point... Considering the closed enviornment of consoles, I would think people would be asking for more RAM instead of more GPU power... Peace

As consumers we should always expect to get much as possible for our money so i feel nothing wrong with having high expectations.

Anyhow as i said clearly, Sony set the expectations in this particular issue & not the other way round.


:smoke:

[SevenDesigns]

They only said 'Spring 06' to see what kind of move MS would pull with their console. I thought that was known?

Of course that's probably not 100% true. But I mean, lets be realistic here.

[xbdestroya]

Anyhow as i said clearly, Sony set the expectations in this particular issue & not the other way round.

:smoke:

Exactly, and athey've met those expectations, only 50MHz slower. Where all this G80 talk has stemmed from these last six months, when Sony has given no indication of such, is not on Sony... rather it's on certain starey-eyed posters. ;)

[Pistolero]

Three points to adress :

1) RSX IS very powerful on its own : The games you see are mostly relying on the PPE and the GPU to render things on screen. If the games that have been shown and the promises of what to come mean anything tangible to you, you should definitely put this kind of rubbish threads to rest.
2) You want the G80 ? Ok...delay the launch for another 6 months or more. Get an external power supply of 100 KG. Add 100 dollars to the price. Would it be good enough ? Yeah ! Until nVidia announces a more powerful piece of s**** right before the PS3 ships. Guh ! Seems we would need to drop the initial plan, get the next iteration of the card in the box...add another 6 months or so...
3) If Ariraid is the Airraid of teamxbox (the worst forum hell's servants could vomit...these guys live on another planet), then there is no need for you to nurture his thread. I know that Xbdestroyer is a very flexible moderator (Congratulations on the fantastic job you do, on the contributions you make...and I'm sincere), but the poster is simply a troll who spends his afternoons writing pamphlets against the RSX' where the only element that rival his mediocre style is his deep ignorance on technological matters. It might flatter his ego to come blowing his natural disappointement on our faces, simulating some deception ; but knowing the kind of posts he's been commited to (lololol...Xenos edram unified shaders that have not been used yet...RSX = G70, severly downgraded...lololol), I recommand you just ignore him.

[Pistolero]

Yeah but Applefiend like you said, that's from December. :)

Since then we already have this awesomeness:

http://www.sonydefenseforce.com/volume2.jpg


LOL !

[Nameless]

Exactly, and athey've met those expectations, only 50MHz slower. Where all this G80 talk has stemmed from these last six months, when Sony has given no indication of such, is not on Sony... rather it's on certain starey-eyed posters. ;)
It's good to see some people actually pay attention to threads and info listed on the forums... :clapping:

[Applefiend]

Yeah, he's devoting all his energies to saying PS3, sorry, PSX3 can't decode Blu Ray. Not MPEG2, certainly not H264 or VC-1.

Smartest words a man ever said, don't feed the trolls.

p.s. turns out BD50 didn't take years to perfect..

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Disc_Announcements/Sony/Sony_Ready_to_Unveil_First_BD-50_Blu-ray_Titles/283

It's out Tuesday. :)

[xbdestroya]

3) If Ariraid is the Airraid of teamxbox (the worst forum hell's servants could vomit...these guys live on another planet), then there is no need for you to nurture his thread. I know that Xbdestroyer is a very flexible moderator (Congratulations on the fantastic job you do, on the contributions you make...and I'm sincere), but the poster is simply a troll who spends his afternoons writing pamphlets against the RSX' where the only element that rival his mediocre style is his deep ignorance on technological matters. It might flatter his ego to come blowing his natural disappointement on our faces, simulating some deception ; but knowing the kind of posts he's been commited to (lololol...Xenos edram unified shaders that have not been used yet...RSX = G70, severly downgraded...lololol), I recommand you just ignore him.

LOL, well... I'm on the TXB forums (now and again) so I think I'm good to say that those are definitely not the worst forums out there. Note: the aforementioned Opa-Ages as one example. :)
(Applefiend why in the world are you going there willingly?)

Anyway, yeah I'm familiar with AirRaid's severely misguided post-style on TXB concerning RSX, but frankly when it comes to FUD, I just rather let the threads play out so any visitors realize *why* it's false, not just that it's false. I'd like to think that in all situations where it's PSINext vs FUD, PSINext wins. There's too many forums on the net where a thread like this would get immediately locked, and plenty of members (and visitors) would be left wondering 'what if it's true?'

[archy121]

Exactly, and athey've met those expectations, only 50MHz slower. Where all this G80 talk has stemmed from these last six months, when Sony has given no indication of such, is not on Sony... rather it's on certain starey-eyed posters. ;)


Not quite.

I was refferring to Sony barraging fans with things like "NextGen begins when we say so", "Truely NextGen Console to last 10 years" ..etc & also (i cant recall if it was Sony or Nvidia):


I’m sure it was said back in E3 2005 that the RSX would be the most powerful GPU out when it was released in the PS3. This is what we were sold & our expectancies set upon.

This could have been the case if spring06 release had happened.

I came to think RSX was possibly related to G80 with good logical reasoning that you & others had a chance to refute in the thread i created a while back. And the poll for G80 did get a decent % vote so what i was saying did make sense to many.

I don't think i was being starey-eyed in the matter. In fact i still feel my logic for my arguments still holds but whether Sony follow that path is about straight forward as the butterfly effect. Who could have predicted with all the logic in the world for PS3 to get motion a controller ? Lose the rumble ? Get HDMI back on standard PS3 ? Have HD as standard ? etc..


:smoke:

[Pistolero]

LOL, well... I'm on the TXB forums (now and again) so I think I'm good to say that those are definitely not the worst forums out there. Note: the aforementioned Opa-Ages as one example. :)
(Applefiend why in the world are you going there willingly?)

Anyway, yeah I'm familiar with AirRaid's severely misguided post-style on TXB concerning RSX, but frankly when it comes to FUD, I just rather let the threads play out so any visitors realize *why* it's false, not just that it's false. I'd like to think that in all situations where it's PSINext vs FUD, PSINext wins. There's too many forums on the net where a thread like this would get immediately locked, and plenty of members (and visitors) would be left wondering 'what if it's true?'


Original conception...Sir, I'm convinced. Talking of which (impartial status of the moderator), I've been in forums (French ones to be precise) where the moderators joined force with the crowd to bash a console. Man that was a blast !

[archy121]

I personally don't have a problem with what the RSX is as the games have lived up to expectations. I was just trying to explain why some fans might be annoyed with RSX being just a humble 7800.

My only problem is the WAIT till March 07 at the earliest for me in UK.

Oh & yes I will get very pissed if they screw up the Linux part.. which they have failed to mention for a long while.

:smoke:

[Garfunkel]

my 7800GTX is yet to meet it's match (without AA that is) although it is slightly more powerful than a 7900gt it is in the same league as the RSX. The RSX will do fine as it is. coupled with Cell and you have something that cannot be beat in the consumer space and will not be for ~a year after its release.

BTW i already posted this in the tech control section!

[Applefiend]

(Applefiend why in the world are you going there willingly?)

Stress relief, spent the whole trying to catch stray cats. :)

[thelastword]

QFT (+Rep)
Also, consider this; if the G80 was used in the PS3 how would this impact the overall system cost. The G80 will more than likely retail for $550 - $600 USD, the cost of a PS3 console... Once you consider the cost of the CPU, HDD & BD Drive you are talking about an extremely pricey console. I would estimate the cost in the $799 to $899 range or higher... Also, why stop with the GPU we could be upset that Sony decided to use a 2X BD drive instead of 4X drive, any hardware development cycle reaches a point where you have to stop upgrading and bring the product to market.

The PS3 is the most powerful home gaming console created and the complaints are pointless and petty IMHO. :nono: Thanks, there's no doubt that the cost factor is another variable in this would be routine. The fact of the matter is that the performance of the PS3 is already head and shoulders above the 360, and that was substantiated so effortlessly at the TGS. The final spec of the machine is irrelevant as a result, it will be good when we know it, but there's one thing we do know, and it's clear; whatever is in there is uber powerful and will be the best in the next console round space.

For all those who wants a G80, let it be known that the CELL and RSX are working together to deliver the PS3's visuals and atmosphere. There's no doubt that such a combination will equal if not surpass A G80's performance in a closed box. So a 7900 + CELL is a serious force no matter how you slice it.

[thelastword]

So just what are these titles, when do they release, and how do you know just how many pixels they have. Also, reports are differing on which titles look better on which systems and the 360 has some stellar titles coming to its library that are above the PS3s counterparts of the same genre (although the same could be said about the PS3, and the world continues to turn).


Well there's no doubt that the 360 has some good looking games coming up, personally I'm more impressed with Lost Planet at the moment, but let's go by consensus, most people are looking at Gears as that game (the best looking). The closest game I can compare gears to is resistance and it's too simple to see that resistance is handling much more than gears. The enemies in resistance are much more detailed than in gears, all that I see in GEOW are lower poly characters with extreme texture detail, does that make it a better game technically? No. I think after all is said and done when people actually play these two games they will really take notice of resistance visuals, the scope of the game, the mayhem involved, the atmospheric levels, the physics in play and of course the fluidity of play will all contribute to how impressive this game is. Gears is impressive, screenshots wars, it will win hands down, but playing a game is where impressions are sealed.

[Nameless]

^ I will write up a review for each game come November...
I will definately own both titles! ;)

[LaLiLuLeLo]

So..... what's the point of this thread besides jack and shit?

[chrismt]

So what is RSX closest to in chip architecture? 7900GS or 7800GTX?

[xbdestroya]

So what is RSX closest to in chip architecture? 7900GS or 7800GTX?

The RSX has the rough architecture of a 7900GT, essentially...

'Normal' bus-width (and ROP-count) is compromised to 7600GT levels, but the access to XDR helps to bring it back up some. The FlexIO to XDR is also a big part of what allows Cell to play a role in the graphics sub-system.

[Voidler]

Can you imagine how expensive PS3 would be with that monster?

[CrumCon]

8800GTX

* 575MHz Core Clock
* 900MHz Mem Clock
* 768MB GDDR3 memory
* 384-bit memory interface (86GB/s)
* 128 unified shaders clocked at 1350 MHz
* 38.4 billion pixels per second theoretical texture fill-rate
* 450W PSU Recommended
* Hard launch in second week of November


Unified Shader is a good thing after all. it is a superior over the normal shader RSXi ung rgh? if it isnt suprior to the one RSX is using, Nvidia wouldnt use it in G80, their next-gen GPU.

[xbdestroya]

Unified Shader is a good thing after all. it is a superior over the normal shader RSXi ung rgh? if it isnt suprior to the one RSX is using, Nvidia wouldnt use it in G80, their next-gen GPU.

Unified shaders don't have anything to do with anything here. Let's put it like this - the ways in which Xenos is better than RSX have nothing to do with the fact that it's shaders are unified. As is often mentioned, RSX has more ALU capacity to bring to bare on pixel shading at any/every moment in time than the Xenos does even when the entirety of it's shaders are dedicated to the task. NVidia went this route with G80 because essentially, they have to at some point anyway with the direction PC graphics APIs are headed. If RSX had 96 'unified shaders,' then yes that would be better than their present ALU spread. But it simply wasn't an option, for reasons prior discussed here.

[mario25]

Unified Shader is a good thing after all. it is a superior over the normal shader RSXi ung rgh? if it isnt suprior to the one RSX is using, Nvidia wouldnt use it in G80, their next-gen GPU.

Thank microsoft for that......manufacturers (nvidia) don't actually have a choice now

[Garfunkel]

microsoft thinks they are a government department and that they have the right to set standards, down with microshaft! up with Linux!

[xbdestroya]

Well, DirectX *is* their creation. Everyone could use OpenGL instead, not like they're forced to make games with DirectX.

[makeitlookreal]

I am disapointed that the PS3 will not have a top of the line GPU when it's launched, but at the same time the way things are going at Sony we are lucky to see a PS3 at all. They are in major debt, borrowing money, being hit by the gigantic battery re-call, are having a tough time getting blu-ray diodes, etc.

However, even if they could scrounge up or borrow the extra money to put a better GPU in their system if their going to launch in November they don't have time to change so many things. It's theoretically possible, but highly unlikely.

But I'm trying to look at it this way. No one has a G80 right now and PS3 games are looking clearly amazing with only a modified 7800/7900. It would have been great to get a G80 and I think Sony should have planned all along to go with the G80. But we have a console with games that look amazingly better than anything last gen and at least moderately better than ANYTHING the 360 has to offer so far.

And that is with the PS3 console not even launched!

I have wanted the absolute best hardware for so long that it got etched into me. However, now that I finally realize the PS3 is not going to have anything (except the CELL processor) astonishing about it I'm learning to accept that we just need to enjoy the games that the system does put out. Yes, I would have loved to play MGS4 with a G80 rather than a 7800/7900. But that's not going to happen and there is no use making a fuss about it any longer.

[agentorange]

Holy sh%&t computers evolve so fast. I though Ps3 and xbox 360 will be hard to surpass but every month it is being stomped by newer graphic cards. Also processors also evolve so fast. Imagine thers dual core already which is more powwerfull than any console but now there is quadcore. Damn. show me ps4 and xbox 720

[chrismt]

A 7900 is top-of-the-line, sort of...I mean it's not like we could get dual or quad setups on GPUs, so with Nvidia, the top three are either new card, 7950, or 7900. Man, such a step up from the GS. I was getting used to the lack of some graphical features of the PS2, and now this.

[makeitlookreal]

The problem is if you strive to only have the top of the line items you are going to be constantly disapointed because there is always going to be something even better arriving.

I'm just going to appreciate my PS3 for what it can do and forget the rest of the gaming world exists.

[chrismt]

Holy sh%&t computers evolve so fast. I though Ps3 and xbox 360 will be hard to surpass but every month it is being stomped by newer graphic cards. Also processors also evolve so fast. Imagine thers dual core already which is more powwerfull than any console but now there is quadcore. Damn. show me ps4 and xbox 720

Um, the 360 has three processors and Cell basically has 8 cores. If you're referring to dual core GPUs, then yeah it's not like we're going to be seeing that in a console but PS3 titles could potentially outperform the majority of PC titles for a little while, that is until DX10 hits and the PC titles bump up everything graphically.

[frosty]

^Actually 360 has one processor, 3 cores. And GPU's are kinda multi-core by nature already.

[chrismt]

I wasn't sure at the time, but yeah Xenon has 3 cores. The GPU setup I was particularly referring to though was multiple GPUs, not multicore GPUs. Read my postwhenyou're a little tipsy and maybe you can make sense of it :shrug:

[Fazares]

The RSX has the rough architecture of a 7900GT, essentially...

'Normal' bus-width (and ROP-count) is compromised to 7600GT levels, but the access to XDR helps to bring it back up some. The FlexIO to XDR is also a big part of what allows Cell to play a role in the graphics sub-system.
dont forget the rsx is clocked higher...
btw ,why people arent happy about the rsx being a derivative 7900gt...?
its a very expensive and powerful gpu...
also consider the ps3 is cell+rsx+blu ray drive+flexIO to xdr...
without forgetting we get a standard hdd,so devs can use it without worrying about people not owning it...a very excellent architecture isnt it...?
the upcoming games are a good proof...and dont forget what the ps2,with a crappy gpu,was capable of....

[MasaC]

There are two big things and two enormous things in the PS3 and those are the RSX, the HDD, Cell and Blu Ray respectively. Together with the hard work of the developers they are responsible for the awesomeness we're already seeing in the first games.

Alone the RSX is nothing that special but together with Cell and the BD storage format and of course the standard HDD it will excel.

On top of all this there's also the new controller with the six axis motion sensor which bring a whole new way to control the games.

There's no denying it, PS3 = pure awesomness!

[LiquidEagle]

So what's the possibility of Intel really buying nVidia in you guys' opinions?

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=14017

What would this mean for the RSX?

[chrismt]

Jack squat?

And what would happen if Microsoft bought Intel and AMD?

[Yo MaMa84]

So what's the possibility of Intel really buying nVidia in you guys' opinions?

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=14017

What would this mean for the RSX?


It means the RSX will be in the PS3....... :shifty:

[jaxmkii]

Holy sh%&t computers evolve so fast. I though Ps3 and xbox 360 will be hard to surpass but every month it is being stomped by newer graphic cards. Also processors also evolve so fast. Imagine thers dual core already which is more powwerfull than any console but now there is quadcore. Damn. show me ps4 and xbox 720 wow nvidia makes a new card everymonth?!:huh:

wheres the flopcounts on thouse eh?

[makeitlookreal]

A pentium 4 from what I understand only produces 20 or so gigaflops of performance.

Lets scale that up to even a quad core. That's 80 Gigaflops. Then lets say Intel increased the performance of each core. That's a total of lets say 100 gigaflops.

The truth is even a quad core CPU is not as powerful as the CELL processor in the PS3.

[woundingchaney]

A pentium 4 from what I understand only produces 20 or so gigaflops of performance.

Lets scale that up to even a quad core. That's 80 Gigaflops. Then lets say Intel increased the performance of each core. That's a total of lets say 100 gigaflops.

The truth is even a quad core CPU is not as powerful as the CELL processor in the PS3.
Not necessarily. But given the nature of the processor and its purposes for general computation, I would have to agree. There are several areas where these processors are a head above the Cell and Xenon.

[PUNK em 733]

There are several areas where these processors are a head above the Cell and Xenon.


That's okay, I won't be doing spreadsheets on my PS3...;)