PS3 Processor Shrunk

manred · 02-07-2008, 03:20 PM

Quote:

IBM has successfully miniaturized the Cell processor that you know from Sony's PlayStation 3. Formerly built upon the 65nm scale, the new version will be based on the 45nm high-k process. What's this mean? Money, power and heat savings for Sony. And maybe a smaller or cheaper PS3 for you.

Along with the higher processor yields, what's most attractive is the power/heat savings. These 45nm Cells use 40 percent less power than the current, 65nm Cell. Sure that's a power savings for customers, but it's also a major heat savings for designers. The PS3 may not have the red ring of death problem like we've seen in the Xbox 360, but a cooler, smaller Cell could fit in a cooler, smaller PS3 (requiring less fans, etc.).

And while Sony has already managed to nearly break even on their console production cost vs. retail prices, the impending redesign could help Sony cut a legit profit from hardware (or allow Sony to cut prices again, instead). We'll keep an eye out for the new chips, but unless they come bundled in a smaller or cheaper PS3, none of this will really matter to you anyway.

Source:http://gizmodo.com/353687/the-ps3-pr...ssfully-shrunk

This is some good news for you PS fans.

T3kNi9e · 02-07-2008, 03:33 PM

I thought 360 used 45nm processing chips then they moved to 65nm Processing chips to reduct overheating which brought down failure rates to 10%

So is 65nm better or is 45nm better? o.O

CantGetAWii · 02-07-2008, 03:35 PM

Well the new one sounds better for the System itself, not sure if it affects anything else too much though.

Singhson · 02-07-2008, 03:41 PM

I wouldn't be surprised if PS3 released a Slimline PS3! I wonder why Sony is acting all crazy with so many models! I guess they're scared Nintendo's gonna Wii all over them, innit.

Budo · 02-07-2008, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T3kNi9e

I thought 360 used 45nm processing chips then they moved to 65nm Processing chips to reduct overheating which brought down failure rates to 10%

So is 65nm better or is 45nm better? o.O

Shrinking the die reduces power usage, which reduces the amount of heat produced.

T3kNi9e · 02-07-2008, 05:17 PM

Then why is 360 using 65nm instead. Also I thought 45nm were low quality and thats why they melted so easy.

Edit: okay Nvm I think its the other way around. 360 had 65nm and its going down to 45nm

Edit again: Okay I think the first were 90nm and now its 65nm which brought it down to 10%, the 45nm I think it be released in late 2008 to early 2009 for 360.

nxcmp · 02-07-2008, 06:23 PM

Well decreasing the size is nice, but one of the features in the PS3 that got some attention is having 9 Cores, and the legal support form Sony to run Linux (Yellow Dog) with no modifications. Sony supported a built in utility to partition and install Linux on the PS3 for dual booting.

WiiChat.com Media

FRuMMaGe · 02-07-2008, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manred

PS3 Processor Shrunk

Maybe it's just shy?

There's little blue pills that can help.

sagema · 02-07-2008, 07:49 PM

The fact is some PS3's have been over heating. I hang around Gamestop and some people come in with complaints about their system making weird a clicking noise, and it won't turn on. Anyways... This is a huge advantage for Sony.

The problem is games like MGS4, and FF13 push the limits of the PS3's processor. Does a smaller, cheaper chip mean chuggage? Lost Odyssey is a perfect example of pushing the 360. The game chugs a little at some scenes. Remember the rule of the universe. You can't get something for nothing. Only time will tell.

[DT] · 02-07-2008, 08:25 PM

Most of the reasons manufacturers go smaller is cost. If you can yield more die's out of the same size silicon wafer, it means much cheaper cost-per-processor.

Smaller dies _generally_ consume less power, which means less heat (also less heat as a result of lower overall resistance path) - however, smaller dies mean more transistor density which can boost heat back up.

It's an interesting bit of engineering balance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sagema

Does a smaller, cheaper chip mean chuggage? Lost Odyssey is a perfect example of pushing the 360. The game chugs a little at some scenes. Remember the rule of the universe. You can't get something for nothing. Only time will tell.

Not at all - if anything, smaller transistors used in the smaller dies mean faster transition states, i.e., faster switching (which is all we're doing is changing states of million of transistors very quickly). Not suggesting they'll be faster, but they shouldn't be any slower (and if more thermally efficient, shouldn't have as much performance degradation with high utilization).

Trulen · 02-07-2008, 08:27 PM

Quote:

IBM has successfully miniaturized the Cell processor that you know from Sony's PlayStation 3. Formerly built upon the 65nm scale, the new version will be based on the 45nm high-k process. What's this mean? Money, power and heat savings for Sony. And maybe a smaller or cheaper PS3 for you.

Sounds good to me ;DDDD

Good thing I havn't gotten one yet.

sagema · 02-08-2008, 08:14 AM

Well not many games are even bothering to push the processor limits. That goes for the Wii as well. Both consoles deserve more usage. It should improve this year as developers become more familiar.

Another bonus. This year 8 core processors are coming out! That means more people will be REQUIRED to learn how to program on a multi core processor for PC which has a dismal amount of games made specifically for the multi core processors. I'm not saying single core are useless. But it's essential to learn multicore for higher end graphics, lighting, and rendering.