3DS uses DMP's PICA(R)200 chip

[zarx]

.jayderyu said:

PhalanxCO said:

The key here is the Maestro Shader Extensions.  From what I hear, these are standard shader functions used by most developers.  The difference is that on current gen GPUs, these are programmed by the developers and then sent to the GPU.  The PICA200 has these functions as part of the hardware.  So while it's still a fixed function GPU (OpenGLES 1.1 confirms this), it is still capable of all the shader effects of a modern GPU.

That's why developers were saying it was more powerful than the Wii and had the abilities of the HD consoles (that didn't mean power, just capabilities).  They never learned how to write their own shaders for the Wii's TEV unit and since the 3DS uses a chip with those shaders built in, they assume it's more powerful.

This post and Werekitten///////  should really be listened too.

The image recently displayed is the Pica not the Pica200. The Pica200 is not the Pica. The 200 at the end is clearly the representation of the mhz.

I've been saying all of this before E3 already. When developers claim capable. That does not mean raw power. It's means ability in regards to effects. I don't understand why when Nintendo is a conservative hardware company why people are jumping onto the more expensive tech. This is not Sony who know how to squeeze expensive tech cheap. This is Nintendo who knows how to squeeze power out of cheap technology.

The DS uses a CPU Graphics Core. Which form what I understand is a lookup table not a processing unit. That's why the DS is really good for 3D graphics.

And why is GAF more listened too than say me or other people on this forum. I've gone to GAF and they really don't seem any smarter than the folks here.

Look at it this way. Don't expect power. Expect capability.

well if you look at the official press release http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http://www.dmprof.com/release/20100621_3DS.html you will see it is clearly the Pica200 core that is licensed, and if you look at the leaflet it clearly mentions the Pica 200's scalability as one of it's advantages   http://www.dmprof.com/release/leaflet_PICA200_en.pdf.

 http://www.dmprof.com/en/en_product_graphicsipcore.html 

If you look at DMP's product list you will see they offer 3 different Pica200's one (the Pica200 FPGA model) is clocked 50Mhz and the Pica200 Light can be clocked from 50-166Mhz. So as you can see the 200 does not actually mean that it's clocked at 200Mhz, I think it's a model number much like the GF400 series.