sieanr said:
What you wrote could not be farther from the truth. Seriously. It was widely suspected that the GS was removed since the EE/GS was one chip. However, this is not the case. The GS was simply kept by itself and moved to a slightly different location. Articles proving I'm not full of shit; http://www.beyond3d.com/content/news/151 http://ps3.qj.net/SCEI-comments-on-Euro-PS3-s-BC-issues/pg/49/aid/84182 http://linuxps3.net/articles/technology/european-ps3-introduces-new-hardware-revision.html http://ps3.ign.com/articles/767/767810p1.html
Regarding the RSX, it could not take over the GS's job. Your analogy about 5500 v 7900 is a very bad one, especially since they are not direct descendants by any means. Getting the RSX to take over the GS task would be impracticle since true software emulation can do it far easier, and likely with better results. Basically, the GS does some really screwy stuff, especially with how it works with memory that would be very difficult to emulate. Thus they decided to keep the GS, or a variant therof, in the PS3 to make emulation much easier and gain better compatibility. Then again, it looks as though they may integrate the GS in the RSX. So you were right, but not in the sense you intended. According to a couple of reports, Sony has pretty much quite working on the software BC beyond bugfixes and the like. This likely means that the GS will never be fully emulated and later integrated into the RSX. |
Ah, I guess I was wrong. Last I read, nobody new what the CXD2972GB chip was on the far side of the board. When I read about it it was estimated that it was a hardware scaler chip. I still don't buy the idea that the RSX couldn't emulate the GS, but I assume they had a reason for keeping it and that seems logical enough.
It seems the mods need help with this forum. I have zero tolerance for trolling, platform criticism (Rule 4), and poster bad-mouthing (Rule 3.4) and you will be reported.
Review before posting: http://vgchartz.com/forum/rules.php