By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Sony to use Nvidia Tegra for PSP2; explains delay

jarrod on 16 July 2010
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
Soleron said:
joeorc said:
makingmusic476 said:
...

no it's still @ 550


On Nvidia forums =/= "straight from Nvidia". Anyone can post there.

Doing a few searches, it looks pretty even split between 550 and 500MHz. The 550 number was posted first but then it was news that it was downclocked to 500. I haven't seen technical evidence either way; spec sheets don't count as they could be pre-downclock.

since the spec's were finalized on the 90 nm scale as 550 Mhz,the PS3's production when it's finalized is and was 550 Mhz. that rumor that the clock speed was reduced to 500 Mhz was just that a rumor. while Nvidia has alway's stated it wasat 550 Mhz. Nvidia publicaly stated it was @ 550 Mhz

It wasn't a rumor, Sony said it themselves (albeit 'privately' to development partners) around TGS 2006 and Game Watch leaked the story (which western media basically ignored in favor of old spec sheets).  VRAM speed also got a downclock from 700 MHz to 650 MHz and there may have also been a reduction in pixel shaders (from 32 to 24).  Neither Sony nor Nvidia made any direct statements after the TGS leak afaik?

http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/20060925/3d_tgs.htm

no that's in ref. to the dev. kit..not the PS3

the dev. kit's GPU was 500 MHz!

That... doesn't actually make sense.  You can't have a slower clocked devkit (especially with memory speeds).  If anything, most devkits actually use upclocked RAM (and more of it) for prototyping.

remember at the time very few dev. kit's were released at that time because sony was not able to ramp up production of more kit's at the time.

28 pixel shaders (4 redundant, 24 active) at 550Mhz

also: you can use a slightly slower GPU to make game's just as you can with a faster speed GPU..remember the processor in the PSP mip's were released @222 Mhz, but they were 333MHz cores?

so developer's could use the faster speed, but it was not until later ! developer's programmed as if the PSP was at 222 MHz for their game's even though the PSP's 2 processor's were clocked @ 333 MHz

Okay, I replied before your edit.

1) The Game Watch article in question actually doesn't refer to devkits.  It actually specifies the RSX/VRAM was downclocked, even machine translated it's pretty clear.

2) Your PSP comparison is entirely incompatible.  The PSP spec was actually downlocked it's first few years, for battery drain preservation.  That had zero to do with it's devkit, which was clocked identically.



Around the Network
joeorc on 16 July 2010
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
Soleron said:
joeorc said:
makingmusic476 said:
...

no it's still @ 550


On Nvidia forums =/= "straight from Nvidia". Anyone can post there.

Doing a few searches, it looks pretty even split between 550 and 500MHz. The 550 number was posted first but then it was news that it was downclocked to 500. I haven't seen technical evidence either way; spec sheets don't count as they could be pre-downclock.

since the spec's were finalized on the 90 nm scale as 550 Mhz,the PS3's production when it's finalized is and was 550 Mhz. that rumor that the clock speed was reduced to 500 Mhz was just that a rumor. while Nvidia has alway's stated it wasat 550 Mhz. Nvidia publicaly stated it was @ 550 Mhz

It wasn't a rumor, Sony said it themselves (albeit 'privately' to development partners) around TGS 2006 and Game Watch leaked the story (which western media basically ignored in favor of old spec sheets).  VRAM speed also got a downclock from 700 MHz to 650 MHz and there may have also been a reduction in pixel shaders (from 32 to 24).  Neither Sony nor Nvidia made any direct statements after the TGS leak afaik?

http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/20060925/3d_tgs.htm

no that's in ref. to the dev. kit..not the PS3

the dev. kit's GPU was 500 MHz!

That... doesn't actually make sense.  You can't have a slower clocked devkit (especially with memory speeds).  If anything, most devkits actually use upclocked RAM (and more of it) for prototyping.

28 pixel shaders (4 redundant, 24 active) at 550Mhz

Actual developers seem to say otherwise.  Repeatedly.

what developer's...for Microsoft?..lol

that formum in many case are just making a guess ...i know i visit that forum quite a bit.

come on now it's a forum..just like this one!

you know as well as i do that you can over clock just about any chip right?

the fact that just because a chip is rated at 550 Mhz does not mean you have to use it at that speed, as a matter of fact that the less speed you use the over all cooler the system will run!

where have we seen Sony do this before..o'l yea the PSP! i just gave you an example

their DEV kit's was rated at 500 MHz because that's what sony Had in the Kit's!

like the PSPGo's processor was increased over the PSP, but yet the game's are still coded to the PSP slim and older model's.



I AM BOLO

100% lover "nothing else matter's" after that...

ps:

Proud psOne/2/3/p owner.  I survived Aplcalyps3 and all I got was this lousy Signature.

irstupid on 16 July 2010
twistedcellz said:
Soleron said:
Christian973 said:
twistedcellz said:
...


The GPU specs says otherwise. That's where we are getting all of our speculation. The GPU is capable of a lot more visuals than those 2 games offered .

We don't know which variant of the Pica200 it is. The very earliest ones have only a quarter of the capability of the latest, and there are different models and process nodes. Nintendo may also have customised the chip.

The best information we have is the game demos from E3. And I think it could handle Mario Sunshine at a stretch.

That would be crazy cuz Sunshine graphics still looks better than most of Wii games,I hope the 3ds could do that but Nintendo usually show top graphics game for their launch consoles (Mario 64,Sunshine,Galaxy) but Kid Icarus didnt look much like GC game.I still think the 3DS can do better cuz MGS did look a little better than the ps2 one,I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Either way I dont really care about graphics cuz a Paper Mario and Resident Evil was enough to me to consider buying it but with a remake of Starfox 64,show me some footage and Ill be sold for sure.

you do realize that kid icarus was a 420x240 game being blown up on a theatre sized screen right?

have you ever watched videos of ds/psp games (gameplay, not some cg trailer GOW style) on the internet and then played them yourselves.  They look a billion times better than watching a handheld games on "FULL SCREEN"



jarrod on 16 July 2010
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
Soleron said:
joeorc said:
makingmusic476 said:
...

no it's still @ 550


On Nvidia forums =/= "straight from Nvidia". Anyone can post there.

Doing a few searches, it looks pretty even split between 550 and 500MHz. The 550 number was posted first but then it was news that it was downclocked to 500. I haven't seen technical evidence either way; spec sheets don't count as they could be pre-downclock.

since the spec's were finalized on the 90 nm scale as 550 Mhz,the PS3's production when it's finalized is and was 550 Mhz. that rumor that the clock speed was reduced to 500 Mhz was just that a rumor. while Nvidia has alway's stated it wasat 550 Mhz. Nvidia publicaly stated it was @ 550 Mhz

It wasn't a rumor, Sony said it themselves (albeit 'privately' to development partners) around TGS 2006 and Game Watch leaked the story (which western media basically ignored in favor of old spec sheets).  VRAM speed also got a downclock from 700 MHz to 650 MHz and there may have also been a reduction in pixel shaders (from 32 to 24).  Neither Sony nor Nvidia made any direct statements after the TGS leak afaik?

http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/20060925/3d_tgs.htm

no that's in ref. to the dev. kit..not the PS3

the dev. kit's GPU was 500 MHz!

That... doesn't actually make sense.  You can't have a slower clocked devkit (especially with memory speeds).  If anything, most devkits actually use upclocked RAM (and more of it) for prototyping.

28 pixel shaders (4 redundant, 24 active) at 550Mhz

Actual developers seem to say otherwise.  Repeatedly.

what developer's...for Microsoft?..lol

that formum in many case are just making a guess ...i know i visit that forum quite a bit.

come on now it's a forum..just like this one!

you know as well as i do that you can over clock just about any chip right?

the fact that just because a chip is rated at 550 Mhz does not mean you have to use it at that speed, as a matter of fact that the less speed you use the over all cooler the system will run!

where have we seen Sony do this before..o'l yea the PSP! i just gave you an example

their DEV kit's was rated at 500 MHz because that's what sony Had in the Kit's!

like the PSPGo's processor was increased over the PSP, but yet the game's are still coded to the PSP slim and older model's.

It's just a forum that had developer leaks.  Can you point to any dev leaks indicating a 550MHz RSX/700 MHz VRAM clock?  And do you really need me to explain why using slower clocked memory in devkits would be, well problematic to say the least?

And there's pretty much zero indication of a PSP like scenario here (for which the downlock was widely publicized and confirmed temporary), and zero reasoning for it (50MHz isn't going to matter much towards heat dissipation with chips running these speeds).  Even if they're producing 550MHz clocked RSXs now (can you source something recent and not 3rd/4th hand or obviously referring to the 2005 spec sheets SCE still keeps on their sites?) they weren't in 2006, and they have the spec locked at 500MHz regardless.



joeorc on 16 July 2010
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
Soleron said:
joeorc said:
makingmusic476 said:
...

no it's still @ 550


On Nvidia forums =/= "straight from Nvidia". Anyone can post there.

Doing a few searches, it looks pretty even split between 550 and 500MHz. The 550 number was posted first but then it was news that it was downclocked to 500. I haven't seen technical evidence either way; spec sheets don't count as they could be pre-downclock.

since the spec's were finalized on the 90 nm scale as 550 Mhz,the PS3's production when it's finalized is and was 550 Mhz. that rumor that the clock speed was reduced to 500 Mhz was just that a rumor. while Nvidia has alway's stated it wasat 550 Mhz. Nvidia publicaly stated it was @ 550 Mhz

It wasn't a rumor, Sony said it themselves (albeit 'privately' to development partners) around TGS 2006 and Game Watch leaked the story (which western media basically ignored in favor of old spec sheets).  VRAM speed also got a downclock from 700 MHz to 650 MHz and there may have also been a reduction in pixel shaders (from 32 to 24).  Neither Sony nor Nvidia made any direct statements after the TGS leak afaik?

http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/20060925/3d_tgs.htm

no that's in ref. to the dev. kit..not the PS3

the dev. kit's GPU was 500 MHz!

That... doesn't actually make sense.  You can't have a slower clocked devkit (especially with memory speeds).  If anything, most devkits actually use upclocked RAM (and more of it) for prototyping.

remember at the time very few dev. kit's were released at that time because sony was not able to ramp up production of more kit's at the time.

28 pixel shaders (4 redundant, 24 active) at 550Mhz

also: you can use a slightly slower GPU to make game's just as you can with a faster speed GPU..remember the processor in the PSP mip's were released @222 Mhz, but they were 333MHz cores?

so developer's could use the faster speed, but it was not until later ! developer's programmed as if the PSP was at 222 MHz for their game's even though the PSP's 2 processor's were clocked @ 333 MHz

Okay, I replied before your edit.

1) The Game Watch article in question actually doesn't refer to devkits.  It actually specifies the RSX/VRAM was downclocked, even machine translated it's pretty clear.

2) Your PSP comparison is entirely incompatible.  The PSP spec was actually downlocked it's first few years, for battery drain preservation.  That had zero to do with it's devkit, which was clocked identically.

and you know how well interviews in japan never get missed quoted at all right..?

here let me show you something even though you will ignore it:

also:

Wow! Someone at B3D speculates RSX might be at 500 Mhz but Nvidia already stated the Clock rate at production was 550 Mhz but forum goer's speculate a drop in MHz but you take a forum's word over the company that built's the chip..gotcha



I AM BOLO

100% lover "nothing else matter's" after that...

ps:

Proud psOne/2/3/p owner.  I survived Aplcalyps3 and all I got was this lousy Signature.

Around the Network
jarrod on 16 July 2010
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
Soleron said:
joeorc said:
makingmusic476 said:
...

no it's still @ 550


On Nvidia forums =/= "straight from Nvidia". Anyone can post there.

Doing a few searches, it looks pretty even split between 550 and 500MHz. The 550 number was posted first but then it was news that it was downclocked to 500. I haven't seen technical evidence either way; spec sheets don't count as they could be pre-downclock.

since the spec's were finalized on the 90 nm scale as 550 Mhz,the PS3's production when it's finalized is and was 550 Mhz. that rumor that the clock speed was reduced to 500 Mhz was just that a rumor. while Nvidia has alway's stated it wasat 550 Mhz. Nvidia publicaly stated it was @ 550 Mhz

It wasn't a rumor, Sony said it themselves (albeit 'privately' to development partners) around TGS 2006 and Game Watch leaked the story (which western media basically ignored in favor of old spec sheets).  VRAM speed also got a downclock from 700 MHz to 650 MHz and there may have also been a reduction in pixel shaders (from 32 to 24).  Neither Sony nor Nvidia made any direct statements after the TGS leak afaik?

http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/20060925/3d_tgs.htm

no that's in ref. to the dev. kit..not the PS3

the dev. kit's GPU was 500 MHz!

That... doesn't actually make sense.  You can't have a slower clocked devkit (especially with memory speeds).  If anything, most devkits actually use upclocked RAM (and more of it) for prototyping.

remember at the time very few dev. kit's were released at that time because sony was not able to ramp up production of more kit's at the time.

28 pixel shaders (4 redundant, 24 active) at 550Mhz

also: you can use a slightly slower GPU to make game's just as you can with a faster speed GPU..remember the processor in the PSP mip's were released @222 Mhz, but they were 333MHz cores?

so developer's could use the faster speed, but it was not until later ! developer's programmed as if the PSP was at 222 MHz for their game's even though the PSP's 2 processor's were clocked @ 333 MHz

Okay, I replied before your edit.

1) The Game Watch article in question actually doesn't refer to devkits.  It actually specifies the RSX/VRAM was downclocked, even machine translated it's pretty clear.

2) Your PSP comparison is entirely incompatible.  The PSP spec was actually downlocked it's first few years, for battery drain preservation.  That had zero to do with it's devkit, which was clocked identically.

and you know how well interviews in japan never get missed quoted at all right..?

here let me show you something even though you will ignore it:

also:

Wow! Someone at B3D speculates RSX might be at 500 Mhz but Nvidia already stated the Clock rate at production was 550 Mhz but forum goer's speculate a drop in MHz but you take a forum's word over the company that built's the chip..gotcha

How can I ignore something that isn't there?  Wait, oh, you crafty minx you! ;)

Assuming mistranslation, like assuming a reference to a devkit, is still assumption.  Stop assuming and bring something more legitimate to the table.

Also, did you actually read the B3D thread?  There wasn't speculation, there was a confirmed dev leak for 500MHz/650MHz, with Sony apologists/fanboys throwing up so much outdated sourcing in response a moderator had to step in and shut down any RSX clockspeed discourse (taking the Sonyboys to task at the same time).



joeorc on 16 July 2010

The first Nvidia G70 review has been posted, with information provided directly from Nvidia.

Keep in mind that the chart also has a Xenos/Xbox 360 comparison, with the numbers provided by Nvidia. I wouldn't draw any conclusions comparing Xenos with RSX based on a chart like that. In fact, the Xenos numbers are actually outright wrong and were based on early information Nvidia had when all they knew was Xenos had 48 ALUs with vec4 scalar.

The key piece of information here is that the G70 is on the 110nm process @ 430MHz, and RSX is on the 90nm process @ 550MHz

also:

 This rumor started from speculation at Beyond3d. Where it was caught by TeamXbox 360 which then fed into other sites. On the same web site you can see other types of speculation. Also there were articles lately that even developers don't know the final RSX specs (thats why one developer was not developing a game). So again speculation and nothing offical.



I AM BOLO

100% lover "nothing else matter's" after that...

ps:

Proud psOne/2/3/p owner.  I survived Aplcalyps3 and all I got was this lousy Signature.

joeorc on 16 July 2010
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
jarrod said:
joeorc said:
Soleron said:
joeorc said:
makingmusic476 said:
...

no it's still @ 550


On Nvidia forums =/= "straight from Nvidia". Anyone can post there.

Doing a few searches, it looks pretty even split between 550 and 500MHz. The 550 number was posted first but then it was news that it was downclocked to 500. I haven't seen technical evidence either way; spec sheets don't count as they could be pre-downclock.

since the spec's were finalized on the 90 nm scale as 550 Mhz,the PS3's production when it's finalized is and was 550 Mhz. that rumor that the clock speed was reduced to 500 Mhz was just that a rumor. while Nvidia has alway's stated it wasat 550 Mhz. Nvidia publicaly stated it was @ 550 Mhz

It wasn't a rumor, Sony said it themselves (albeit 'privately' to development partners) around TGS 2006 and Game Watch leaked the story (which western media basically ignored in favor of old spec sheets).  VRAM speed also got a downclock from 700 MHz to 650 MHz and there may have also been a reduction in pixel shaders (from 32 to 24).  Neither Sony nor Nvidia made any direct statements after the TGS leak afaik?

http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/20060925/3d_tgs.htm

no that's in ref. to the dev. kit..not the PS3

the dev. kit's GPU was 500 MHz!

That... doesn't actually make sense.  You can't have a slower clocked devkit (especially with memory speeds).  If anything, most devkits actually use upclocked RAM (and more of it) for prototyping.

remember at the time very few dev. kit's were released at that time because sony was not able to ramp up production of more kit's at the time.

28 pixel shaders (4 redundant, 24 active) at 550Mhz

also: you can use a slightly slower GPU to make game's just as you can with a faster speed GPU..remember the processor in the PSP mip's were released @222 Mhz, but they were 333MHz cores?

so developer's could use the faster speed, but it was not until later ! developer's programmed as if the PSP was at 222 MHz for their game's even though the PSP's 2 processor's were clocked @ 333 MHz

Okay, I replied before your edit.

1) The Game Watch article in question actually doesn't refer to devkits.  It actually specifies the RSX/VRAM was downclocked, even machine translated it's pretty clear.

2) Your PSP comparison is entirely incompatible.  The PSP spec was actually downlocked it's first few years, for battery drain preservation.  That had zero to do with it's devkit, which was clocked identically.

and you know how well interviews in japan never get missed quoted at all right..?

here let me show you something even though you will ignore it:

also:

Wow! Someone at B3D speculates RSX might be at 500 Mhz but Nvidia already stated the Clock rate at production was 550 Mhz but forum goer's speculate a drop in MHz but you take a forum's word over the company that built's the chip..gotcha

How can I ignore something that isn't there?  Wait, oh, you crafty minx you! ;)

Assuming mistranslation, like assuming a reference to a devkit, is still assumption.  Stop assuming and bring something more legitimate to the table.

Also, did you actually read the B3D thread?  There wasn't speculation, there was a confirmed dev leak for 500MHz/650MHz, with Sony apologists/fanboys throwing up so much outdated sourcing in response a moderator had to step in and shut down any RSX clockspeed discourse (taking the Sonyboys to task at the same time).

no it was not:

Nothing official at all. This rumor started from speculation at Beyond3d. Where it was caught by TeamXbox 360 which then fed into other sites. On the same web site you can see other types of speculation. Also there were articles lately that even developers don't know the final RSX specs (thats why one developer was not developing a game). So again speculation and nothing offical.

even answer's.com list the PS3's GPU @550 Mhz

http://www.answers.com/topic/playstation-1



I AM BOLO

100% lover "nothing else matter's" after that...

ps:

Proud psOne/2/3/p owner.  I survived Aplcalyps3 and all I got was this lousy Signature.

dharh on 16 July 2010

Good lord will you people manage your quotes of quotes better?



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of their first breath to the moment of their last.
Grimes on 16 July 2010

Really, do people really need to include the last 10 messages in their post?

If you want people to read your messages, don't make them 10 pages long.



Anyone can guess. It takes no effort to throw out lots of predictions and have some of them be correct. You are not and wiser or better for having your guesses be right. Even a blind man can hit the bullseye.