Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by ChrisMatson, Mar 9, 2002.
More PS3 unofficial, "official" rumors from IGN:
Oh my gosh!! 110GHz?? Too unbelievable!
Actually, a lot of that is old news. This is the first I have heard of 110 Ghz (though I don't doubt it) but the 1,000 times powerful and such are old news.
I read about these 100 Ghz + processors IBM has created, but not in connection with any video games systems. They are to be used in specialized devices such as routers and other communications hardware. They already had chips that are 80GHz. I'm sure these things are EXPENSIVE so we won't see them in PCs let alone a game console any time soon. It would certainly be cool though.
Playstation 3 REVEALED: http://www.misinformer.com/archive/01-01/15.html
Warning: if you're sensitive to politically incorrect material, you might not want to click the link as it's pretty crude
Yea, the 110Mhz IBM chips are highly specialized DSPs -not CPUs. It has nothing to do with PS3.
110Mhz is reasonable and affordable to put in a game console. 110Ghz will never happen in our lifetime.
Jeremy - do you typically contradict yourself like that?
110Mhz is likely within the next 5 to 10 years.
Is it Mhz or Ghz???
I would assume Ghz, which they probably could put in a gaming console in a few years. Remember when 1 Ghz was this amazing thing?
We are just getting pased the 2GHz barrier in home PC's now. I don't see how they will manage to get this 110GHz chip into a game console (at an affordable price) in 3 years(approx.) time.
Andy that's old, old, old man...
The article said that IBM has developed a 110GHz processor. It didn't say that the 110 GHz processor would be in the PS3.
Eh, who cares. I'm still waiting for PS4 to come out.
Assuming Moore's law holds, we should be on track for 60-100GHz processors in about 5 years.
Of course, there are quite a few issues with running transistors that quickly, and IBM's current 110GHz ring counter is hardly a model for a future uber-powerful streaming processor.
Realistically, though, I have no idea why anyone would target such obscene clockspeeds for a processor whose primary task will be 3D graphics, since you can get a nearly linear increase in throughput by adding additional processors on a well-designed system. As long as the ALUs/FPUs are running quickly enough to output a few million pixels with complicated shading effects applied every second, you're typically better off adding a second chip rather than doubling the clockspeed.
If a processor that quick were put into a motherboard now it would be totally useless. It would be starving for bits so often it would be pointless. The HD wouldn't be able to feed the ram fast enough which wouldn't be able to feed the processor fast enough. Processors now-a-days already sit starving for data enough I can only imagine how bad just a 50Ghz processor would be.
Woops, my above post should read 1100Mhz or 1.1Ghz not 110Mhz. A 1.1Ghz chip is nice for gaming. As far as the 110Ghz being in the PS3, if it is I'll buy one and eat it.
And Camp even with my typo I don't see that as being contradictory at all.
Here's a story from CNN: I think an online-only broadband system will not be viable in 2005. The broadband revolution has been too slow in the US.
Actually, it's all TRUE. The new PS3 WILL have a 110Ghz IBM based pocessor. They also announced that the new PS3s will have the MSRP of $1.4 MILLION dollars.
Color me done. The PS2 is the last Sony/Playstation based system I will buy.
The PSX and the PS2 were the only systems I ever had that broke early in their life span and IMHO the PS2 was rushed and never really excelled at what it was hyped for. The graphics only ever looked marginally better than the Dreamcast (save for a few games like GT3).
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
XBOX-2, Now that I will look into.
Microsoft did it right, Hard drive,Modem, 9 foot cords and they even listened to gamers concerns and made a smaller controller. This is the way a system should be.
I had one PSX break on me (the controller port, actually my brother broke it) but I have yet to have any consoles actually stop working or get all screwy.
LOL@online based gaming. That technology doesn't even exist now. With my computer and games that are installed on the HD there is lag. I can't imagine a game that is being recieved solely from the source. I don't even know how that would work. Would you download it first? How would you download a gig of a game in a reasonable time to play it onto your PS3 hard drive?