IBM continues Cell development

[Kynes]

joeorc said:

Kynes said:

joeorc said:

RAZurrection said:
Looks like Gabe Newall was right when he said Cells architecture wasn't going to lead anywhere.

Good work Gabe!

right, so AMD and Intel with all their wisdom are also not going on an making Hybrid CPU/GPU chip's in order to compete with Nvidia and ATI yup Gabe was right all right..lol/sarcasm

First of all, AMD bought ATI some time ago, so they aren't going to compete with themselves. AMD and Intel aren't going to make an Hybrid CPU/GPU chip in order to compete with nVidia. They are doing it because it makes a lot of sense in the low-mid sector, where low cost is mandatory. It makes a lot of sense for laptops, too, to have the CPU and the GPU in the same chip. With smaller technologies, and the excessive power dissipation that a high frequency gives, the CPU manufacturers have to provide something new to keep selling those chips, and an integrated GPU is the new mantra.

 

About your comment of the heritage of RSX, the own David Kirk from nVidia said that "The two products share the same heritage, the same technology." He even said that RSX was going to be faster, but it was before the final specs were disclosed, and with lower frequencies, the same number of active units, and a 128 bit bus, it's very rare that it could be faster. It's probably a PR stunt.

http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2005/07/11/nvidia_rsx_interview/2

I don't know where you got the impression that RSX had anything to do with G9x, a Direct3D 10 chip, with an unified shader architecture. Please revise your "facts" before posting misinformation.

yea AMD own's ATI it does not mean their product's do not compete with their own on the market. just like the PS2 compete's with the PS3

AND THAT IS SHARE'S DOES NOT MAKE IT EXACTLY THE SAME, LOWER FREQ.?

ARE YOU SAYING THAT the RSX WAS REDUCED TO 500 Mhz?

because if you are that's not true at all that was a rumor.

the RSX is and has alway's been AT 550 Mhz

and you mean this David kirk PHD..

HIS QUOTE :

"The two products share the same heritage, the same technology. But RSX is faster," said Kirk.

That is in no way shape or form say's its a G7x, for one you can have the same core technology in chip's but the chip will not be the exact same because the the d@mn RSX chip is faster than (2) 6800 ultra's combined.

many people have speculated what the core technology of the RSX is , outside of Nvidia no one know's, its just a guess, and Nvidia has not released the full spec's of the RSX so it's become rumor after rumor on the internet what the RSX is 

the only thing Nvidia has released is that the RSX

is :

550 Mhz

based on N47 chip technology

and that it's faster than (2) 6800 ultra's combined

which put's it better than the 7800, so it's not just a Gx7 chip.  they share the same technology does not mean it's the same chip.

 

 

So, a 24 PS 8 VS, 128 bits memory bus, 700 MHz GDDR3, 550 MHz is faster than a 24 PS 8 VS, 256 bits memory bus, 850 MHz GDDR3, 550 MHz. ¿Do you know that the Nv47 (there is no N47) is a codename of the G70, the chip that the 7800 GTX uses? Faster than 2 6800 ultra's combined is a PR Stunt, I can't believe you make assumptions of a chip's performance based in so vague information. Read the specifications, and tell me how in the hell can it be faster than a 7800 GTX, and how can it have more in common with G92, being G92 a Dx10 chip, than with G70, as you said 3 posts ago.


You are really misinformed, you don't know how to read specifications, or you are simply spreading misinformation consciously.