• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Playstation 3's CELL is 4.6 GHz

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: RealityTime
who cares :roll: whatever they come out with, latest pc hardware will still own it at the time of either the ps3 or xbox2 release
Click to expand...
Don't think so bro. When the XBox came out, NOTHING could touch DoA3 graphics wise (PC or any console). NOTHING. It was just an amazing looking game.

 
No way are they going to ship a product with a CPU that runs 85C with a heatsink. I can't imagine the final product will run more than 60C. Assuming no process improvements are made (and assuming the heatsink used in these tests is decent), they'll probably clock it down to 3ghz or so for production. Remember, it took Intel 3 years and at least 2 chip designs to finally mass produce the 3+ghz speeds they wow the crowds with so many moons ago.

 
Originally posted by: Sureshot324
So all three console's will use ibm processors?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Originally posted by: RealityTime
who cares :roll: whatever they come out with, latest pc hardware will still own it at the time of either the ps3 or xbox2 release
Click to expand...
I doubt it, but even if that were true, I wonder how much an Xbox 2 or PS3 will cost at launch. $299? $399?

ADDENDUM:

Originally posted by: arcas
No way are they going to ship a product with a CPU that runs 85C with a heatsink. I can't imagine the final product will run more than 60C. Assuming no process improvements are made (and assuming the heatsink used in these tests is decent), they'll probably clock it down to 3ghz or so for production. Remember, it took Intel 3 years and at least 2 chip designs to finally mass produce the 3+ghz speeds they wow the crowds with so many moons ago.
Click to expand...
Originally posted by: pm
At ISSCC, specifications are often presented that are the absolute limit. Since it's a circuits conference, and not a product conference, people often show shmoo plots with the absolute limits of the circuitry.
Click to expand...
With the extreme end of the shmoo plot at 4.6 GHz, is 3 GHz a reasonable guess as to a usable clock speed in terms of cost/yield and temperature?

And what would 3 GHz just mean anyway?
 
Originally posted by: bigpow
Watch out Intel & AMD... IBM is back!

Yoohoo!
Click to expand...



IBM never went away. They've been fabbing for Apple/Mac the whole time.

Besides, their money isn't in the consumer market. Their real revenue comes from DOD contracts, supercomputers, and server side sales. International BUSINESS Machines. They only sell to the consumer for a little gravy revenue on the side.

Plus, their R/D department is light years ahead of EVERYONE else. They were one of the first to demonstrate quantum teleportation, and over 3 years ago they demonstrated a transistor circuit only a single string of atoms thick (the theoretical limit of micronization). Never misunderestimate IBM...they're arguably the strongest tech firm on the planet.
 
why is this so hard to believe people? keep in mind that the next gen consoles won't be released until 2006, we already have 3.6ghz processors widely available, 4.6ghz is well within reach in 2006.
 
The streets of CPU hell are paved with slides of chips that didn't make all the hype.

Prescott was going to be a K8 killer...
Rambus was going to rule the world and Timna was "takin' over. We shall see what it's got when it shows up.
 
Either way the games library for the new consoles wont be stellar without backwards compatability no one will have a good reason to get one if they dont have any good launch games. I waited a year after the launches of the last gen consoles to get one because there was nothing exciting (and no Halo doens't count). You have to buy a machine for more then one game or you're simply wasting your money.
 
Not to mention last generation consoles ran at 640x480 or less resolution with NO AA or any fancy rendering. The only reason some of those console games look good is because of the art direction and because companies spend good money on the best artists, you can have all the poly's in the world but if your artists suck the game will still look like junk.
 
Originally posted by: RealityTime
who cares :roll: whatever they come out with, latest pc hardware will still own it at the time of either the ps3 or xbox2 release
Click to expand...

And 2 years later you might actually see some PC games that take advantage of it.

How many DX9 games did we have after 2 years? 4?

When we will see a PC game that requires a multi-core cpu or smp as a requirement to run the physics engine or AI? 2008?

 
for the person who asked about graphics acceleration i believe i read somewhere that ATI will be handling the graphics for XBOX 2 and PS3
 
Originally posted by: Hans5849
when it says 6.4GB off chip communication does that mean the FSB basically because i see the Xenon has 10.8GB
Click to expand...

Xenon? Do you mean Xeon by any chance?
If you do, the latest Nocona Xeon DP's have the same 800 MHz FSB as their Prescott P4 brethren.
Besides, massive bandwidth != massive performance, an Athlon 64 with a "mere" 3.2 GB/Sec of main memory bandwidth can still beat a P4 with twice the memory bandwidth.
 
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
Xenon? Do you mean Xeon by any chance?
Click to expand...

Xenon is the codename for the XB2.
Click to expand...

Ah, didn't know that. 😱

Oh well, at least half of what I said makes sense then...

By the way, nice to see you posting a bit more these days Ben. 🙂
 
Well see there is this thing called logic. Sony all ready sells computers....so why would they want to sell computers that only played games? I say that's a crappy bargin.

And the topic isn't misleading. It's just wrong, lol. Maybe if you said "Is at 4.6 Ghz"
 
Originally posted by: Regs
Well see there is this thing called logic. Sony all ready sells computers....so why would they want to sell computers that only played games? I say that's a crappy bargin.
Click to expand...
Huh?

And the topic isn't misleading. It's just wrong, lol. Maybe if you said "Is at 4.6 Ghz"
Click to expand...
What's the difference?
 
I'll start worrying/rejoycing when they have a pratical use for the chip (i.e., a new Apple computer). A lot of good that's going to do to the world in a frickin' game console or being stuck inside a TV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top