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

Forums - Sony Discussion - [EurogamerDF] Orbis Unmasked: what to expect from the next-gen PlayStation

ethomaz said:

Scoobes said:

That was actually a really informative post. Thanks!

Thanks... here a ilustrative picture of a 300mm wafer with 94 GT200 chips... you can see the borders are not complete chips and of these 94 just a percentage is usable "good chip".

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2549

Any idea why they make them this way?  It would seem to me it would be beneficial to make them in a square or rectangle, so you don't have only partial ones on the ends.



Around the Network

Check



thismeintiel said:
ethomaz said:

Scoobes said:

That was actually a really informative post. Thanks!

Thanks... here a ilustrative picture of a 300mm wafer with 94 GT200 chips... you can see the borders are not complete chips and of these 94 just a percentage is usable "good chip".

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2549

Any idea why they make them this way?  It would seem to me it would be beneficial to make them in a square or rectangle, so you don't have only partial ones on the ends.

that's because the 99.9999% pure silicon monocrystal looks like this:

and to get a wafer they simply slice off a thin layer of that



Lafiel said:
thismeintiel said:

Any idea why they make them this way?  It would seem to me it would be beneficial to make them in a square or rectangle, so you don't have only partial ones on the ends.

that's because the 99.9999% pure silicon is manufactured like this:

and to get a wafer they simply slice off a thin layer of that

Cool, thanks.  That's pretty wild looking.



thismeintiel said:

Cool, thanks.  That's pretty wild looking.

afaik there are methods to produce a square one, but it seems those weren't used for massproduction - probably because they consume even more energy



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:
MaulerX said:
I don't know. If next Gen lasts 10 years then I can honestly see how in the long run, 8 gigs of slower RAM is going to prevail against 4 gigs of faster RAM. Also, while I'm not sure I believe the Durangos 3 gigs reserved for the OS, but when compared to the alleged 512MB reserved for the Orbis OS, it sends a message that Microsoft wants to make the Durango a multitasking & multimedia powerhouse. I'm also interested to see what's the Durango's "secret sauce" as this article admits they really don't know much about.

Truth is we no longer live in a world where a purely gaming console might not cut it for the masses. We might see a situation where the PS4 finally gets cross game chat, buy the 720 goes ahead with cross game video chat while simultaneously recording your favorite tv show in the background and fast app switching. (just my speculation based on how much RAM and how much RAM is reserved for respective OS's).


This would be more convincing if it wasn't for the fact that the most popular gaming console of this generation was the one that was purley gaming focused.

I mean hell, Wii didn't even have competant online.



That's the thing. Can we honestly say that the Wii was purely gaming focused? Maybe casual gaming focused. You just admitted it didn't have competent online. I'd wager that the masses bought it mostly for the uniqeness that motion controls introduced at the time. I think there was also one year where the Wii was the device most used to watch Netflix (eventually supplanted by the PS3).



These details are good in that they make it sound like the increase in power and graphical quality won't be minor for either console which is what I was hoping for.



XBL Gamertag: ckmlb, PSN ID: ckmlb

Nsanity said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
VGKing said:
Why do people keep saying next Xbox will be more powerful than Playstation? From what I understand, NextBox is more focused on Apps/multitasking...etc while PS4 is made primarily for gaming. PS4 would have an edge in most games, but the real deciding factor is the ram. 8gig DDR3 for Xbox and 4gigGDDR5 for PS4.


Mainly because two users over at gaf (proelite and aegis) are saying so or at least trying to push that mentality. One of them still work for MS and the other used work for MS and is currently working for polygon which iirc has MS's backing (not sure about this one tbh so feel free to correct me)  so yeah

 

the one they call Mr. Accurate..a dev under NDA said both are pretty much equal :) just strengths in different areas. 

 

I'm 100% sure that he works for Ubisfoft.

"In my opinion both machines will be very close, with some details in favor for each one, but I think we will have a ps360 situation again with 2 machines very close.

And some details in the articles are simply wrong"

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=46551080&postcount=274

 

Ubisoft eh? Nice. Ubi is one of those third party devs who support all console makers equally so I think we can trust his words even better. I love the idea ..two solid powerful consoles with strengths in different areas..awesome



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

honestly it looks like the ps4 will more powerful, very disappointed in microsoft, looks like i'm going with sony nextgen.



ethomaz said:

disolitude said:

7970m for 100 bucks? I want what youre smoking... 7970m is a 200 dollar upgrade on most laptops over 7800 series gpu.

Do you know how is the cost of a single gpu or cpu chip? $200 dollars is the retail price for us consumers... even so the same chip is used for other models so a $100 chip is used for $200 - $500 products... all depends the potential of clock.

I will tried do explain to you how much a single chip cost to be manufactured...

1. You need to know there is no cost for manufature a single gpu/cpu chip... the cost is to manufacture one wafer of chips.... the price of a single wafer 300mm 28nm today manufactured by TSMC is ~ $5000... that's fixed for any chip complex or not.

2. What define the final cost of a single chips is how much "good" chip can be made in this wafer... so if the chip is simple and small the wafer can have more chips but if it is complex and big the wafer have less chip... eg. a 300mm 65nm wafer can have 94 NVIDIA GT200 and a 300mm 45nm wafer can have 2500 Atom processors... of couse that is the max number of chip that fit the size of these wafers but you need to remember the "bad" chip no used for nothing... in a simple chip the lost with "bad" chips is low (less than 10% of the chip manufactured in a wafer) but if a chip is complex and the prodcution is not that good yet you have a lot of "bad" chips like the GT200 or Cell (near 50% of the manufactured chips in a wafer was lost).

The NIVIDA GT200 was a big and complex chip that cost to be make ~$112 per chip... of the 94 chips near 40 was lost... so the wafer give you just 50 chips in the end... the GT200 equiped two retail products the GTX 280 ($600) e GTX 270 ($300)... in this case NVIDIA choose to use the chips with at least 480 SPs usable because less than 10% of the chips have the full 512SPs usables... a wafer with 90% of the chips bad is impossible to make money with it... so at least 60% of the chips have 480SPs usables... so NVIDIA never used the full GT200 power.

I give that example because the GT200 was the first chip to cost more than $100... it size was 500-600mm² (a monster). So any chip with less than 500mm² make in 55nm was chepear than the GT200 (< $100).

That $100 for GT200 is based in a 55nm process with a wafer cost of $8000... the wafer cost for a 28nm is $5000... so cheaper... so the same chip cost is below $50 in 28nm.

3. Now talking about PS4... the estimated size for the 7970M GPU is 212 mm² in 28nm... a 300mm wafer can have ~300 200mm² chips (all depends how is the chip... square, rectangular, etc)... so a $5000 wafer can have ~300... now all depends how much chips are good for use:

* 90% of the chips are good: $5000 / 270 chips = $19 per chip
* 70% of the chips are good: $5000 / 210 chips = $24 per chip
* 50% of the chips are good: $5000 / 150 chips = $34 per chip

That's the price of a single 7970M chip... not the full video card or the retail price for consumers.

4. PS4 yet and how Sony can buy or manufacture the 7970M chip... eg with 70% of the chips good.

+ Sony can buy the project and manufacture itself (like Microsoft did with R500): ~$25 per chip
+ Sony can ask to AMD manufacture they: ~$40-45 per chip (AMD uses GlobalFoundries... so ~$10 for each company per chip)
+ Sony can buy the project and manufacture in TSMC: ~$35-40 per chip (Sony need just to pay to TSMC)
+ Sony can ask to AMD manufacture in TSMC: ~$45-50 per chip (same than AMD plus GlobalFoundries but I think the TSMC a little more expensive)

In any case it's impossible a 212 mm² in 28nm using 300mm wafer costs to Sony over $50 per chip... it is just impossible... unless all the chips less than 30% are good and usable.

So what am I smoking??? I think the guys here knows nothig about how much a CPU/GPU chip costs.

 

Said that... I think the full chip CPU + APU + GPU together will be a 400mm²... bigger, more complex, less chips per wafer are good... so I think a cost for Sony from $60 to $80 per chip with a ~50% of good chips... I put in my estimate to you $200... it's a overcost with all needed to put this chip woking in the console motherboard... even the components to stay it cool and below the critical temperatures.

 

And yes... AMD e Intel sells the same $50 chips in CPU models from $200 to $999 (the highest potetial clock chips equipcs the top $999 cpus).

 

This post and the other you made after it are amazing, very informative. You should create a thread for this, specially with the prices per chip you posted.