| R500 Xenon 2005-05-09, 8:33 pm |
|
<a_noether_theorem@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1115577403.041550.50890@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>
quote:
> "So I wonder if I'm the only person who is jazzed about the prospect of
> a PC-derived graphics chip in the PS3. People turn their noses up at
> the PC heritage of the XBox, but face it, there are a handful of
> excellent PC games produced every year, and it's given MS a leg up.
> They're basically freebies for the XBox. If PS3 could get these as
> well (in addition to exclusive content), that would be nothing but
> good."
no you're not the only one. I'm another :}
I'm 'jazzed' about that prospect for a number of reasons. probably I won't
remember them all for this post, but, I'll try.
1.) this marks the first time that Sony has sought any significant outside
help (not counting Toshiba maybe) for building a graphics chip for a
Playstation. Sony has done all of their own graphics chips in the
past--for
PS-X/Playstation/PSOne, for Playstation2, and for PSP/PlayStation Portable.
2.) It seems that the Nvidia GPU for PS3 is going to be relatively new and
modern for the time-- the time that its host platform (PS3) is launching
(2006), especially compared to the graphics chip in PS2. The Nvidia GPU
for PS3 is still being constructed from what I understand--development isn't
expected to end until later this year. quite a contrast to the graphics
chip (Graphics Synthesizer) in PS2. the PS2 came out in March 2000 in
Japan, Oct 2000 in the U.S., but do you know how old the design of GS is?
the design features were locked down in 1997, and the chip was complete in
1998. PS2 technology was unveiled in early 1999, and then it sat around
until the Japan March 2000 release (which was supposed to be Dec 1999 btw).
So by the time PS2 reached the western world in late 2000, its graphics were
VERY outdated. not as far as performance (it had gobs of it) but as far as
quality. features. functions. etc.
3.) the Nvidia-GPU for PS3 should have a tremendous amount of heritige in
it - what I mean is, the technological roots will be in exellent graphics
companies -- most notably, Silicon Graphics. (as well as others like E&S).
because Nvidia is only Nvidia because of all of the great engineering talent
and graphics technology that Nvidia has, comes from SGI and other graphics
companies. 3Dfx and GigaPixel which have been part of Nvidia since late
2000, were originally SGI offshoots as well. Sony could not have hoped to
come even remotely close with its own limited graphics engineering talent
and graphics technologies. there is no way that Sony, on its own, could
match the ATI graphics technology (again, rooted in SGI and other companies)
going into Xbox 360 from a quality and functional standpoint. but with
Nvidia, Sony is basicly equal (more or less) to ATI/MS in graphics
capability, through engineering talent, and technology that Nvidia brings to
the table, for PS3.
there are other things, but can't think of them right now, and I covered my
main reasons anyway :}
|