Confirmed: nVidia to help with PS3's graphics chip

LookingFor

Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. and NVIDIA Announce Joint GPU Development for SCEI's Next-Generation Computer Entertainment System
Tuesday December 7, 3:11 am ET


TOKYO and SANTA CLARA, Calif., Dec. 7 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. (SCEI) and NVIDIA Corporation (Nasdaq: NVDA - News) today announced that the companies have been collaborating on bringing advanced graphics technology and computer entertainment technology to SCEI's highly anticipated next-generation computer entertainment system. Both companies are jointly developing a custom graphics processing unit (GPU) incorporating NVIDIA's next-generation GeForce(TM) and SCEI's system solutions for next-generation computer entertainment systems featuring the Cell* processor.
(Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20020613/NVDALOGO http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20041207/SFTU096 )
This collaboration is made under a broad, multi-year, royalty-bearing agreement. The powerful custom GPU will be the graphics and image processing foundation for a broad range of applications from computer entertainment to broadband applications. The agreement will encompass future Sony digital consumer electronics products.

"In the future, the experience of computer entertainment systems and broadband-ready PCs will be fused together to generate and transfer multi-streams of rich content simultaneously. In this sense, we have found the best way to integrate the state-of-the-art technologies from NVIDIA and SCEI," said Ken Kutaragi, executive deputy president and COO, Sony Corporation, and president and Group CEO, Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. "Our collaboration includes not only the chip development but also a variety of graphics development tools and middleware, essential for efficient content creation."

"We are thrilled to partner with Sony Computer Entertainment to build what will certainly be one of the most important computer entertainment and digital media platforms of the twenty-first century," added Jen-Hsun Huang, president and CEO, NVIDIA. "Over the past two years NVIDIA has worked closely with Sony Computer Entertainment on their next-generation computer entertainment system. In parallel, we have been designing our next-generation GeForce GPU. The combination of the revolutionary Cell processor and NVIDIA's graphics technologies will enable the creation of breathtaking imagery that will surprise and captivate consumers."

The custom GPU will be manufactured at Sony Group's Nagasaki Fab2 as well as OTSS (joint fabrication facility of Toshiba and Sony).


Additional tidbit:

They expect to finish development on the chip between July and September of next year (for comparison, Xbox2's GPU development has already wrapped up).

jesus_thats_gre

So all the hype we are hearing about the Cell is pretty much irrelevent if they they don't release the PS3 with a powerful enough Graphics Processor..

I can't help but think the next Xbox is going to have at least a 12 month headstart in the west and about 6 months in Japan over the PS3. Microsoft are going to make fewer mistakes this time too and the titles they release in Japan should be very orientated towards their tastes..

Not only that, buts it going to pack a punch too.. Which is better, the P4 or the A64? Who cares, get a 6800 or X800 and you won't notice the difference.

LookingFor

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

So all the hype we are hearing about the Cell is pretty much irrelevent if they they don't release the PS3 with a powerful enough Graphics Processor..

I can't help but think the next Xbox is going to have at least a 12 month headstart in the west and about 6 months in Japan over the PS3. Microsoft are going to make fewer mistakes this time too and the titles they release in Japan should be very orientated towards their tastes..

Not only that, buts it going to pack a punch too.. Which is better, the P4 or the A64? Who cares, get a 6800 or X800 and you won't notice the difference.

I'd say they'll launch at about the same time in Japan. I don't think we'll see simultaneous US & Japanese Xbox2 launches.

Your comparison to the situation with P4 and A64 is a bit misleading..it's a very different situation here.

Also consider that work has wrapped up on Xbox2's GPU (or apparently has), whereas Sony/nVidia don't expect to finish work on PS3's GPU till Jul-Sep 2005. That's 6-8 more months they can use..look at the difference such a timeframe can make in PC graphics cards.

No doubt in my mind now that PS3 will be clearly more powerful than Xbox2, at least on paper.

jesus_thats_gre

Ok let me just clarify what I said, without trying to be a smart ass this time..


Of course the P4 and AMD64 processors use totally different architectures to that of IBM's cell processor or IBM's PowerPc processors use.. The reason I used these two is that these two processors are involved in a similar battle today where you have end users arguing which is better and both their arguments being pretty much negated because a massive part of it boils down to what GPU they have.. The difference in processors will probably make about 5% difference in performance levels at max. While 5% obviously shouldnt be dismissed, it isnt really a big deal..

The hype surrounding IBM's Cell processor is pretty much pointless, for 1, all it is hype for the moment. Considering IBM designed the processor I have no doubt in my mind that is losely based on their already very powerful PowerPC architecture, I also read a report recently confirming this (links anyone?). Don't think for a moment that Sony had much of a hand in the design as it is IBM's business and don't think that what they learned during the design of the Cell processor hasn't been used as input into the dual core PowerPc setup being implemented in the next Xbox.

So to my point, the choice of processor by either Microsoft or Sony will pretty much be just as irrelevent as it is when choosing between a P4 or AMD64 processor. No doubt one will be better than the other, but not enough to make a big difference.


Now to the graphics card announcement. ATI has already stated that their GPU for the new Xbox has been signed off. It is also common knowledge that this GPU is based on their next generation PC chipset. I have a distinct feeling the the Nvidea chipset that will be used in the PS3 will based on the their next generation PC chipset also. The main difference in time could be attributed to a later start date (ATI started nearly a year ago) and refining it performance with the Cell processors architecture. I very much doubt that Nvidea are going to develop and totally new Graphics chipset for 2 reasons, 1) they used the geforce 2 for the Xbox (pattern anyone) and 2) the xbox venture made a loss so I doubt they will commit even more financially this time.



Apologies also, am quite cynical today.

mayordenis

LookingFor wrote:

No doubt in my mind now that PS3 will be clearly more powerful than Xbox2, at least on paper.

wrong sorry but sony dont know how to make a good computer they know how to market a poor computer however. if you looked at the early "on paper" specs before the current generation of consoles the PS2 would of been streets ahead and the thing is its not.

Vyse

Agreed. I think Sony promised the world with the PS2. Statements like "Graphics so real you would think that you were in the cinema" are absolutely laughable now. Basically what you got was a machine releasing games that, in many cases, were comparable to Dreamcast games at the time (back in 2000).

The only area Sony are experts in is brand marketing.

BKtje

The difference in processors will probably make about 5% difference in performance levels at max.

Tbh this is impossible to say. AMD's vs INtels flagship? clock for clock? or price vs price?
Overclocking in there? What you using it for? etc etc

Its impossible to come to a statement like that tbh. (im not gonna say which one i think is better as that doesnt really matter here).

Its hard to really use a like for like in this case and in any case it will be a guess atm which will be better (performance and games wise). The answer is we can speculate a bit but no one will really know till much closer the time

Peteee

At least sony dont release a pc and have the audacity to call it a console. (joking, am buying a box next year)

As i see it, both the systems will have whatever is beyond the x800/6800 series???

Therefore its gonna come down to processor power, as the GPU's will be comparable (unless nvidia pull a geforce FX )

I'd say the PS3 will end up being more powerful then the xbox2 because, if sony find out whats going into the xbox2, and see that X number of cell processors isnt gonna match up, all they have to do is bung in a couple more processors to even it up!!

Anyway it'll be for moot, it all comes down to games in the end

LookingFor

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

The hype surrounding IBM's Cell processor is pretty much pointless, for 1, all it is hype for the moment. Considering IBM designed the processor I have no doubt in my mind that is losely based on their already very powerful PowerPC architecture, I also read a report recently confirming this (links anyone?). Don't think for a moment that Sony had much of a hand in the design as it is IBM's business and don't think that what they learned during the design of the Cell processor hasn't been used as input into the dual core PowerPc setup being implemented in the next Xbox.

The Power core is one part of the Cell architecture. And in fact, it plays a bit part. The key part of the Cell architecture is the APUs, and the integration of networked processing. It's very different from what's going into Xbox2.

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

Now to the graphics card announcement. ATI has already stated that their GPU for the new Xbox has been signed off. It is also common knowledge that this GPU is based on their next generation PC chipset. I have a distinct feeling the the Nvidea chipset that will be used in the PS3 will based on the their next generation PC chipset also. The main difference in time could be attributed to a later start date (ATI started nearly a year ago) and refining it performance with the Cell processors architecture. I very much doubt that Nvidea are going to develop and totally new Graphics chipset for 2 reasons, 1) they used the geforce 2 for the Xbox (pattern anyone) and 2) the xbox venture made a loss so I doubt they will commit even more financially this time..

They put a Geforce3 in Xbox, not a Geforce2. And they profitted handsomely from it, even if Microsoft is making losses on Xbox (one of the reasons is the amount of money they're giving to Nvidia!). Even if you're right, and Nvidia aren't making something totally new for PS3, it is going to be using their next-gen Geforce tech, and it won't be finished until Jul-Sep 2005. Which means their tech will be 6-8 months newer than the tech going into Xbox2. Look at the difference 6-8 months makes in PC graphics cards.

if you looked at the early "on paper" specs before the current generation of consoles the PS2 would of been streets ahead and the thing is its not.

Have a second look at those first PS2 specs. They were accurate. Misinformed journalists blew it out of proportion, and took Sony's obligatory "cinematic graphics!" references as gospel. Console makers always talk about "cinematic" graphics - Nintendo did it with the N64 ("Jurrassic park-style effects!") and graphics card makers continue to do it to this day. If you look at the figures and data released, and the demoes initially shown, they were all accurate. Sony said: 75m polys/sec peak (GS can draw 75m polys/sec in isolation), 16-20m polys/sec with effects turned on. PS2 games have got into that ballpark, and many PS2 games today look as good as, if not better than, those initial PS2 demos.

Perhaps you should have a look at Microsoft's first Xbox specs. It started off as 300m polys/sec, then those polygons became "micropolygons", then that 300m figure became 150m polys/sec, which even still is nowhere like the actual achievable performance in games. Not to mention their ludicrous fillrate numbers.

jesus_thats_gre

B-K-DzR wrote:

Tbh this is impossible to say. AMD's vs INtels flagship? clock for clock? or price vs price?
Overclocking in there? What you using it for? etc etc

Its impossible to come to a statement like that tbh. (im not gonna say which one i think is better as that doesnt really matter here).

Its hard to really use a like for like in this case and in any case it will be a guess atm which will be better (performance and games wise). The answer is we can speculate a bit but no one will really know till much closer the time

I know AMD are slightly better. You also know you cannot compare them clock for clock..

But what I said basically stands, the processors are both going to be incredibly powerful and perform within 5 or 10% of each other to the extent where it is not going to matter..

steviec

I don't think there'll be a significant difference in hardware, obviously under the cover there is but nothing too noticeable to the user. There rarely is with same generation consoles, the X-Box was an exception to the rule because it came out about a full half-generation after the PS2.
So it's hard to tell which will be more powerful, but I really don't think it matters. The games will be the difference maker. Being out a bit earlier could give Microsoft the advantage, but then again that never worked to Sega's advantage so it's all about how you market it. Launch titles are the most important 'spec' to me tbh.

LookingFor

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

But what I said basically stands, the processors are both going to be incredibly powerful and perform within 5 or 10% of each other to the extent where it is not going to matter..

The difference in floating point performance will be more than 5-10%. If Sony are conservative and stick 4 APUs onto a Power core and clock it at 4Ghz (first samples have been clocked up to 4.6Ghz), then it'll have a performance of 128GFlops. A standard PowerPC 970 core achieves nowhere near that (although MS won't use a "standard" I'm sure..but I don't think they'll close the gap with their custom versions either, or anything like it).

It's likely Sony will go with at least one Power core with 8 APUs (i.e. 256GFlops).

All imo, of course.

projectmayhem

first off, ibm aren't alone here. this was a sony/ibm/toshiba project (on the chip), and ibm alone have gotten 4.6ghz out of it. but the ps3 probably wont be pushing those limits, it's rumoured to have 4.0-4.2ghz..

secondly, xbox2's line-up isn't setting japan alight. the press over there is very sceptical. there's a whole "the americans are coming" vibe. no doubt, xbox2 will sell far more consoles in asia then the xbox did, but the ps3 will still dominate. and the fact that the ps3 is coming out so late compared to the xbox means whatever xbox2 has, ps3 can potentially top.

/sony fanboy moment

jesus_thats_gre

TBH I am looking at this from a ball park view.. I have read alot of reports on the Cell processor and they all seem to suggest that it is going to blow the competition totally out of the water.. I don't want to go into the technical differences between the two architecture as I just dont have time. I understand that the workings of the number cell processors together is very different but do you really think IBM are going to sell MS a system that cannot compete with the Cell.

I can't see this happening and I can't see Microsoft being too far behind performance in terms of processing power..

As for the graphics chipset announcement. ATI and Nvidea basically run on the same cycle. When one release something, the other release something to compete with it.. The Nvidea chipset may be 6 to 9 months behind but that does not mean they will be more powerful. It could mean that Sony want to use a 6 months old chipset because they know it will be cheaper to produce, thus being able to release the PS3 at a similar price to the Xbox Next 6-9 months after its release.. I dont think it will be a new generation chipset anyway.

jesus_thats_gre

LookingFor wrote:

The difference in floating point performance will be more than 5-10%. If Sony are conservative and stick 4 APUs onto a Power core and clock it at 4Ghz (first samples have been clocked up to 4.6Ghz), then it'll have a performance of 128GFlops. A standard PowerPC 970 core achieves nowhere near that (although MS won't use a "standard" I'm sure..but I don't think they'll close the gap with their custom versions either, or anything like it).

It's likely Sony will go with at least one Power core with 8 APUs (i.e. 256GFlops).

All imo, of course.

Do you know what the Dual Core set up for the next Xbox is capable off?

LookingFor

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

Do you know what the Dual Core set up for the next Xbox is capable off?

It's actually supposed to be a tri-core. At least according to the most recent rumours/leaked docs etc. Apparently such a setup would yield 80GFlops, although that's probably based on "standard" powerpc 5 chips. Microsoft has apparently made customisations, which may boost that figure. But I doubt MS will catch Sony if they go with a 256GFlop+ setup.

jesus_thats_gre

It will be interesting to see what happens..

po0k

One thing's for sure, they'll both be noisy boxes in the end.

Deadwing

I heard itll have this awesome new gadgetry called the 'emotion engine'. Apparrently its going to set the world of gaming alight with revolutionary photo relaistic graphics, and games will actually have real emotion now. Sony will win all the console wars and even make high end geforce 2 PC's (capable of playing quake 3 in 800x600 @ high detail!) redundant.

Oh wait, this is 1999, right??

jesus_thats_gre

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1736886,00.asp

This morning's press release indicated that Sony and nVidia "…are jointly developing a custom graphics processing unit (GPU) incorporating NVIDIA's next-generation GeForce and SCEI's system solutions for next-generation computer entertainment systems featuring the Cell processor." By "next-generation GeForce," this implies something based on the NV50 architecture, which to date we've heard little about, even in the rumor mills. Extrapolating a bit, one common theme we've been hearing is that the distinction between vertex and pixel shader units may effectively go away in next-generation GPUs such as the NV50 and ATI's R500.

Note the R500 is ATi's next generation graphics chipset that the new Xbox chipset is based on.

Peteee

For all the bashing that the emotion engine recieves, ive yet to see ANYTHING (well maybe HL2) that looks as good as Gran Turismo 3.

Toca race driver 2 for the pc comes quite close but, that was only released this year.

kaimera

GT3 doesn't look all that special tbh.

PGR2 on the xbox is better looking imo.

irldavem

What a bunch of nerds. Complain bout everything.

Why not build and market your own console if you think you know so much about what makes a crap one and what would make a good one.

Peteee

if i had a couple of billion dollars to research a new chip specifically to but in my microendy gameboxstation, get a deal with ATi technologies for teh graphics, have a multi million dollar advertising campaign, buy bungie, rockstar and konami games to make me exclusive games i would, but i dont

so i have to rely on sony, microsoft and nintendo for my gaming needs.

Also, i dont see many people complaining on this thread, look out for all the PSP threads for a good, boring DS Vs PSP

irldavem

Peteee wrote:

if i had a couple of billion dollars

Damn.
Almost had you building a new console for us all! :rolleyes:

Guess I'll have to wait and rant on bout the specs of new consoles like everyone else.

Retr0gamer

The PS2 architecture seems like a bit of a programming nightmare.

The xbox 2 will more than likely flop in Japan but for the rest of the world it will be a different story imo. Microsoft have done a great job of making the xbox a household name comparable with the Playstation name. It might not have the games but that never stopped the PS2 from selling in its first year.

irldavem

Retr0gamer wrote:

The xbox 2 will more than likely flop in Japan but for the rest of the world it will be a different story imo.

I agree. They'll probably go for something more efficient and is local rather than something less efficient, twice the size and foreign.

Peteee

Retr0gamer wrote:

Microsoft have done a great job of making the xbox a household name comparable with the Playstation name. It might not have the games but that never stopped the PS2 from selling in its first year.

Wouldnt say so, if a person comes into your room while your playing your xbox, who dosent play games, they will remark that you are 'playing you're PlayStation'

Its become a generic term, like hoover, ipod or googling

Agreed though, those japanses want wacky, and they get their jollies from ninty and sony, japanese companies.

Take a look at the japanses top 10


1 Momotarou Dentetsu USA, a Table game (cards, casino, mahjong) developed by Hudson for the PS2, with 121,841 copies sold on that period, and 121,841 sold copies in total.

2 Naruto: Gekitou Ninja Taisen 3,a Fighting Game developed by Tomy for the GameCube, with 116,964 copies sold on theat period, and a total of 116,96 copies sold.

3 Mario Party 6, developed by Nintendo for the GameCube with 98,747 copies sold on that period, and a total of 98,747 copies sold.

4 Dragon Ball: Advance Adventure an action game developed by Banpresto for the GBA, with 48,122 copies sold on that period, and a total of 48,122 copies sold.

5 J. League Winning Eleven 8 Asia Championship, a sports game developed by Konami for the PS2, wirh 42,134 copies sold on that period, and a total of 42,134 copies sold.

6 Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories a Action-RPG developed by Square Enix for the GBA, with 35,768 copies sold on that period, and a total of 35,768 copies sold.

7 Magna Carta, a RPG developed by Banpresto for the PS2, with 30,356 copies dold on that period, and a total of 152,302 copies sold.

8 Pop n' Music 10, a musical game developed by Konami for the PS2, with 14,846 copies sold on that period, and a total of 14,846 copies sold.

9 Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap, a Action-RPG developed by Nintendo for GBA, with 14,352 copies sold, and a total of 142,431 copies sold.

10 Mario Tennis GCa sports game developed by Nintendo for the GameCube, with 12,953 copies sold on that period, and a total of 265,057 copies sold.

Source:The Magic Box

Your not gonna find them on the xbox. Which is a big disadvantage, because lots of game developers are based in japan

po0k

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1736886,00.asp

This morning's press release indicated that Sony and nVidia "…are jointly developing a custom graphics processing unit (GPU) incorporating NVIDIA's next-generation GeForce and SCEI's system solutions for next-generation computer entertainment systems featuring the Cell processor." By "next-generation GeForce," this implies something based on the NV50 architecture, which to date we've heard little about, even in the rumor mills. Extrapolating a bit, one common theme we've been hearing is that the distinction between vertex and pixel shader units may effectively go away in next-generation GPUs such as the NV50 and ATI's R500.

Note the R500 is ATi's next generation graphics chipset that the new Xbox chipset is based on.

NV50 & NV48 Canned

jesus_thats_gre

So they have canned what was meant to be their next generation chipsets...

They are going to back to the drawing board and develop a new chipset.. This would explain why the PS3 one if going to take between 6 and 9 months to develop as well. One can only assume both chipsets for the PC and PS3 will be quiet similar.

I wonder why they canned it though.. They made great progress with their current line up and gave ATI a good run of their money this time..

I wonder if they caught wind of something ATI were doing and in order to match this they had to start afresh.

Or I wonder is it because Sony stepped in very late and the NV50 couldnt be integrated into the already decided up on PS3 architecture. So in order to work with Sony, they would have to develop something new that will work with the PS3. This would have meant the manufacturing of 2 distinct chipsets side by side which would have meant increased costs and not being able to take advantage of economies of scale.. This gave them the chance to scrap the whole lot and develop something totally new.

Ave

LookingFor wrote:

Look at the difference 6-8 months makes in PC graphics cards.

9700pro -> 9800pro

x800xt pe -> x850xt pe.


6-8 months is barely discernible in performance, it's at least double that for the next major product.

jesus_thats_gre

The 9800 was only a small evolution of the 9700...

The X800 was a massive step while still being based on a similar platform.

You would get away with every 18 months quite easily.