Reply
Fender Bender
Registered: 02/03/2005
Offline
4679 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009

meatbag_ wrote:
not to mention it would definitly need a larger power supply as the EmotionEngine (EE)Proccessor was created with a 240mm die proccess which in nodern computing is huge. by comparison the current ps3 cell proccessor is constructed using a 65nm proccess (thats nanometers, so to compare equally, the EE was developed on a proccess of  240 000 000 nanometers!!!!) basically what all that means is a physically larger chip which requires more power to run. but i digress, truthfully if people want to play ps2 games, the price reduction will allow them to buy a used ps2 and still save cash.

I was hoping it was a typo, but then you did it again...

 

The "65nm tech" is in reference to the wire size inside the processor. The smaller the wire, the more compact and efficient it can be. 240mm is 9.5 inches. The PS2 wasn't 9.5" tall...

 

Anyways, it would be a reletively simple process to strike a new processor with the same specs as the old one on new dies. Everything could be made the same except for size and power usage. (Those being good things) Besides, Intel is on 32mn tech at the moment. Sony should be striking new processors with 45mn by now.

Message 10 of 24 (8 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 05/13/2005
Offline
3148 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009

meatbag_ wrote:

DaveTheStalker wrote:
  Leaving backward compatibility out of the PS3 Slim is a big mistake for those HDTV owners, they will miss out on upscaling" or something to that effect

i disagree. on an individual level most people that own a GT game (1-4) also own a PS2. for the few that dont, gamestop carries them used for $59.99!!! get a used one, and then you arent putting the wear and tear on the new ps3 and you dont get the disadvantage of the ps2 components on the ps3 board. the older ps3s that have backward compatibility litterally have the ps2 cpu on the motherboard, this actually decreased the performance of the ps3. the old ps3 also had increased the heat levels and power consumption because they didng have heatsinks on the GPU and CPU, and hence lower relaibility. the put backwards compatibility back in the ps3 slim would probably be impossible to retain the same form factor, you'd have a whole other proccessor and heatsink to try and fit someplace, it would generate more heat even with the heatsink and that would need to be managed as well, not to mention it would definitly need a larger power supply as the EmotionEngine (EE)Proccessor was created with a 240mm die proccess which in nodern computing is huge. by comparison the current ps3 cell proccessor is constructed using a 65nm proccess (thats nanometers, so to compare equally, the EE was developed on a proccess of  240 000 000 nanometers!!!!) basically what all that means is a physically larger chip which requires more power to run. but i digress, truthfully if people want to play ps2 games, the price reduction will allow them to buy a used ps2 and still save cash.

 


actually the slim is sporting a 45nm cell.
also i'm wondering why you think the old ones have decreased performance?  judging from what i've read the only thing the slim does better is power consumption, which is literally cut in half.  personally i don't think saving power and performance go well together in the same sentence.  the old one might run hotter and consume more power, but comparison's have shown that the original ps3 operates faster.  some bluray disc's load up to 10 seconds faster on the original 60gb than they do on the new slim.
so really i'd say the orignial has increased performance because it sports 4 usb ports, memory card readers, backwards compatibility, it loads faster, and it supports the "otherOS" install feature.  all the slim does is come in a smaller package and save some power!

 

search
Message 11 of 24 (8 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 08/14/2009
Offline
1080 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009
i was comparing the old 60 to the current 'fat man' ps3 the 'little boy' i have no idea about... i didnt know they went to a 45nm on the slim.
Photobucket
Message 12 of 24 (8 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 02/03/2005
Offline
4679 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009

erikgolson wrote:
also i'm wondering why you think the old ones have decreased performance?  judging from what i've read the only thing the slim does better is power consumption, which is literally cut in half.  personally i don't think saving power and performance go well together in the same sentence.  the old one might run hotter and consume more power, but comparison's have shown that the original ps3 operates faster.  some bluray disc's load up to 10 seconds faster on the original 60gb than they do on the new slim.

Strange, the more efficient processors are usually faster to boot, because they can be pushed harder without overheating. (Using Core2Quad 65mn vs 45mn as a reference)

Maybe they're having ventilation issues with the slim, causing the need to underclock? Or maybe it's simply a different BD-ROM that's a bit slower?

 

Interesting anyways. Still glad I have a 60gb.

Message 13 of 24 (8 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 05/13/2005
Offline
3148 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009

it could very well just be the bluray-disc drive that is slower.  i didn't see anything that suggested games run slower.

 

and yep, glad to have my 60! 

search
Message 14 of 24 (8 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 08/14/2009
Offline
1080 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009

Pyro6000 wrote:

erikgolson wrote:
also i'm wondering why you think the old ones have decreased performance?  judging from what i've read the only thing the slim does better is power consumption, which is literally cut in half.  personally i don't think saving power and performance go well together in the same sentence.  the old one might run hotter and consume more power, but comparison's have shown that the original ps3 operates faster.  some bluray disc's load up to 10 seconds faster on the original 60gb than they do on the new slim.

Strange, the more efficient processors are usually faster to boot, because they can be pushed harder without overheating. (Using Core2Quad 65mn vs 45mn as a reference)

Maybe they're having ventilation issues with the slim, causing the need to underclock? Or maybe it's simply a different BD-ROM that's a bit slower?

 

Interesting anyways. Still glad I have a 60gb.


ok, my turn Smiley Wink  while we may not be talking about milimeteres here.... we're definitly not talking about Minnesota (MN) either nanometers is abbr. nm unless you're measuring in Minnesotas, which is entirely possible

Photobucket
Message 15 of 24 (8 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Last Guardian
Registered: 02/13/2005
Offline
13694 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009
So, uh, GTA, did the dude tell you when GT5 is coming out
Facebook|Twitter
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us





Image Hosted by ImageShack.us















GT5P TeamSpeak Server





Image hosted by Photobucket.com
Image hosted by Photobucket.com
What are you listening to???!
Image hosted by Photobucket.com
"Stalking the lost not by land, but by air with the Word of God through music" DTS
KittenWar Crackers' Kittenwar stats Lord Of The Peeps
Message 16 of 24 (8 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 08/14/2009
Offline
1080 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009
DTS, besides having a name like a Caddilac, you also possess perfect comedic timing! i LOL'd i cant explain why but perhaps its somthing to do with beng 2:30am
Photobucket
Message 17 of 24 (8 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 08/14/2009
Offline
1080 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009

hahahaha.... thats what i get for posting with my brains off! and for using wikipedia as a source!

 

"The Emotion Engine contained 10.5 million transistors on a die measuring 240 mm" - wikipedia.org

 

what they ment was a 240nm proccess...  in anycase the point is still valid but thanks :embarrassed: as a network engineer... i should definitly have known better i'm tired, thats my excuse! i know the nehalems are 45nm are any 35nm being sold yet?

Message Edited by meatbag_ on 08-28-2009 01:24 AM
Message Edited by meatbag_ on 08-28-2009 02:44 AM
Photobucket
Message 18 of 24 (8 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Highlighted
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 10/11/2008
Offline
386 posts
 

Re: A Fishing Expedition

Aug 28, 2009

meatbag_ wrote:

while we may not be talking about milimeteres here.... we're definitly not talking about Minnesota (MN) either nanometers is abbr. nm unless you're measuring in Minnesotas, which is entirely possible


 

For ease of conversion, 1 MN is ~650,000,000,000,000 nm (depending on which orientation you use)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Message 19 of 24 (8 Views)