40nm RSX Allows for Lightest, Most Efficient PS3

Status
Not open for further replies.

They mean the heatsink itself. It sounds like they mean the system, but the linked website clearly shows its just the heatsink.
 
G

Guest

Guest
408 grams = 0.89948603 pounds? Is that really how light it is? Or did I miss something.
 

nun

Distinguished
Jul 31, 2009
111
0
18,680
good thing they added the new intake and headers for more performance from the rsx the chip really unlocks the potential in the k20 engine....
 

XD_dued

Distinguished
Dec 23, 2008
415
0
18,810
[citation][nom]gnookergi[/nom]408 grams = 0.89948603 pounds? Is that really how light it is? Or did I miss something.[/citation]

significant figure fail :D
 

Shin-san

Distinguished
Nov 11, 2006
618
0
18,980
[citation][nom]mister g[/nom]Why would I care how much it weighs when for me a die shrink means better performance, or is this G80-G92 all over again?[/citation]
In this case, it's more related to cost reduction. The chip could be actually more powerful (sometimes more powerful chips are cheaper to make), but it will more than likely run in practice close to the speed of the original model. Lower power requirements means less powerful of a PSU needed meaning Sony saves more cash. If it weighs less, it may mean that it would be cheaper to ship.

Maybe a possible price drop to $249-279?
 
G

Guest

Guest
[citation][nom]nukemaster[/nom]They mean the heatsink itself. It sounds like they mean the system, but the linked website clearly shows its just the heatsink.[/citation]

I checked the link, thanks for that. They really worded that poorly. I was sitting there saying to myself "No way, what?" Lol... XD
 

joytech22

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2008
1,687
0
19,810
[citation][nom]mister g[/nom]Why would I care how much it weighs when for me a die shrink means better performance, or is this G80-G92 all over again?[/citation]

Oh don't remind me.. I got sucked in with the idea that my new 9800GTX would be much faster than my 8800gts..

Oh and normally a die shrink in consoles would not result in more performance mostly because they still have to code the game for the older revisions.
 
Who would have thought back in 2005 that the G70 would be alive long enough to go from 110nm down all the way to 40nm. Then again 24 shader, 8 rop, and only 128 bit MCM package. If any thing besides ram that holds the PS3 back its the RSX while it would be nice to have all the SPEs enabled instead of one electrically dead and another reserved for OS but I can see the PS3 enjoying a few more years of new titles and apps. Linux is a requirement for longer life still but who knows they don't want us Geeks to be learning new things about the Cell or the US military using them for surveillance.
 

pcfxer

Distinguished
Dec 12, 2007
37
0
18,530
[citation][nom]nun[/nom]good thing they added the new intake and headers for more performance from the rsx the chip really unlocks the potential in the k20 engine....[/citation]

With the improved Bose Audio system, higher lift cams and more compact block design the RSX improves fuel economy by fifteen percent whilst maintaining 210hp at the crank. Unfortunately, in the "reduce weight at all costs" phase, the RSX engineers reduced seating to two persons to save on new cooling requirements.
 

Santimun

Distinguished
Oct 9, 2009
46
0
18,540
More importantly, would we be able to overclock the rsx gpu enough so that the stock heat sink can still provide adequate cooling and we also attain some improved performance? Not so much as making the graphics look better but in other areas like less screen tearing and/or increased frame rates? Or is that more of a RAM issue?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.