Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Graphics Software Entertainment Games

Nvidia Partners with Sony on PS3 GPU 51

Posted by Zonk from the nvidia-and-sony-sittin'-in-a-tree dept.
Anonymous Coward writes "Just a rumour last year, but it looks like Sony and Nvidia will be partnering for the PS3. Sony will be doing the manufacturing in one of their Nagasaki plants." From the article: "The move signals a shifting of allegiances for NVIDIA, who developed the graphics hardware at the heart of the original Microsoft Xbox, only for the Redmond-based platform holder to turn around and partner with fierce rivals ATI for 'future Xbox products' last August."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nvidia Partners with Sony on PS3 GPU More

Nvidia Partners with Sony on PS3 GPU

Comments Filter:
  • Nothing like being spurned to stir the creative corporate juices! Go nVidia!

    Does this mean the PS3 is going to have supplier logos on it like the GameCube?

    GTRacer
    - Which will ship first? PS3 or GT4?

  • in a nice coincidence, less than 2 minutes after seeing this headline, my stock broker called and told me that the nVidia stock I bought last year was finally out of it's $9 dollar hole and almost back to breaking even. all we need now is for Nintendo to announce they're going with nVidia for their next console and maybe I'll have made some money in this stock market thing.

  • Nvidia's New Dance Partner (Score:3, Insightful)

    by blueZhift ( 652272 ) on Tuesday December 07, 2004 @02:06PM (#11020794) Homepage Journal
    Well, I'm actually glad that Nvidia has found a new dance partner after the falling out with Microsoft with respect to the next Xbox. With both Nvidia and ATI now firmly in the console wars as competitors, I think gamers are in for some serious treats. I just hope that gameplay won't be lost in all of that eye-candy!

  • So... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by buffer-overflowed ( 588867 )
    It's IBM all around, with Microsoft and Nintendo going with ATI. Sony's going with NVidia, and probably some hacked together backwards compat solution which will make developing for the thing a bitch.

    Interesting. Can't wait to see how this is gonna go...

    • Re:So... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Can you explain why a "hacked together backwards compatibility thing" would affect developing for the thing?

      I'll tell you what effect the PS1 emulation had on PS2 development: none whatsoever. I don't see it being different here. Developing for PS2 is/was a bitch for many reasons, but backwards compatibility is not among them.
    • Do note that Microsoft and Nintendo are also going for the "hacked together backwards compat solution" for their consoles, with Microsoft facing the most tough scenario (going from a pentium/nvidia architecture to a powerPC/ati one), and Nintendo the easiest (keeping the same architecture, theorically, powerPC/ati).

      I also fail to see why this would make those consoles a bitch to program. Most probably, it will all be done via software, and not get in the way of developers.

      (IMHO, Nintendo should release an

      • Re:So... (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        (IMHO, Nintendo should release an ultra-gameboy-player, with slots for the NES, SNES, N64, gameboy (advance), and, hopefully, DS, and also gamecube compatibility)

        And I'm sure they'll win numerous design awards for their accomplishment. Seriously, that would turn out being one buttugly console, what with the variously sized slots all over the place. Imagine a 6-in-1 memory card reader, except at least 9 inches square. Not to say I wouldn't mind seeing it done...
      • ith Microsoft facing the most tough scenario (going from a pentium/nvidia architecture to a powerPC/ati one)

        Why does everyone think this is going to be so hard? Why bother emulating it when you could simply license from Intel a mobileP3 that's the same speed as the xbox processor and then when you make the Xbox 2 OS/kernel a compatibility mode. Since ideally the GPU of the xbox was made to MS specs they can give the info to ATI and have them build in compatibility into the new Xbox 2 GPU. Tada Xbox 2 is

        • Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by dackroyd ( 468778 ) on Tuesday December 07, 2004 @07:14PM (#11025580) Homepage
          Why bother emulating it when you could simply license from Intel a mobileP3

          Because that would add cost to each Xbox2 sold.

          Since ideally the GPU of the xbox was made to MS specs they can give the info to ATI

          The graphics chip was designed by nvidia who licenses Microsoft to manufacture the chips, but not any derivatives. To make another chip that was backwars compatible Microsoft would need to pay nvdia more license fees to cover the patents which again would add to the cost of the xbox 2.

          Tada Xbox 2 is backwards compatible with a few minor code tweaks and hardware adjustments.
          Except that the Xbox2 probably won't have a hard drive.

          Why does everyone think this is going to be so hard?

          You are wrong because:

          Anything You Don't Understand is Easy to Do.
          Example: If you have the right tools, how hard could it be to generate nuclear fission at home?
          • No issues with anything previous to your final line, the answer to which is "It shouldn't be that hard to do. Doing it more than once, however, is somewhat more problematic." ;)
          • Anything You Don't Understand is Easy to Do.
            Example: If you have the right tools, how hard could it be to generate nuclear fission at home?

            Sure you could, all you need is a nuclear pile. Nuclear fission right there. How hard is it to find a few hundred pounds of high grade uranium/plutonium?
        • Well, for one it will increase the costs.

          Also, this doesn't solve the gpu problem, which may be not so large, but there are legal problems, and, now that Nvidia has partnered with Sony, they may not want to cooperate.
      • No one quote me on this but aren't all xbox games using Direct3D? I think I read some where a while back(Not sure if it was true or not) that Xbox games dont access the hardware directly and use Direct3D exclusively. So all you would need on the the new Xbox is Direct3D compatibility. Of course there will be some issues to iron out at first, but since the xbox is only using one gpu, it should not be to difficult to get it working. Microsoft can always use the current xbox cpu, or any other intel cpu(

        • Re:So... (Score:3, Informative)

          by dackroyd ( 468778 )
          no unfortunately. For speed reasons developers have bypassed the DirectX api to write native nvidia opcodes.

          D'oh!
        • It won't be so easy. Yeah, a lot of games ported over from pc would play, but, those games made exclusively for the xbox, and the most popular (Halo and Halo 2, PGR, Ninja Gaiden), probably are programming right to the iron.

          Also, think of the problems that games have had on the pc on different configurations. Most games would need patches, which would be possible if the Xbox2 has a hard disk, but not easy.
  • Playstation 3, Nforce4, Nforce5, SLI, Geforce 6xxx I want stock.

  • So which of the two is the fool? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by LordZardoz ( 155141 ) on Tuesday December 07, 2004 @02:41PM (#11021271)
    Microsoft turned their back on nVidia because nVidia would not deal on Microsofts terms.

    What makes nVidia so certain that Sony being easier to deal with then Microsoft?

    And what makes Sony feel good about keeping the PS3 manufacuring costs down when Microsoft could not get a deal with Nvidia which would let the X-Box be cheaper to manufacture?

    END COMMUNICATION
    • INvidia and Sony are co-developing the chip, which means that Nvidia will be able to use it in future cards, while Microsoft used Nvidia's own chips. Sony is also manufacturing the chip at his own facilities instead of buying them from a supplier like Microsoft did.

      Unlike Microsoft, who bought different parts from different suppliers, Sony has always stressed that all the components for the PS and PS2 had to come out from Sony facilities to keep costs down during the lifetime of the console. I'm sure NVidi
    • What makes nVidia so certain that Sony being easier to deal with then Microsoft?

      Microsoft basically demanded that they be able to renegotiate the deal once they realised how much money they were losing per xbox and asked nvidia to just give up their money.

      They also demanded that Nvidia hand over all their patents so that Microsoft could give them away to whoevers going to make the Xbox2 chips, so that they could be backwardly compatible.

      However bad sony is they can't be as bad as microsoft to deal with.
      • Could you point us to some documentation abou that? I would like to read about it some more.
        • No unfortunately - most of it came from talking to people in the know and reading between the lines of the legal struggles between nvidia and microsoft. There's no document signed by Microsoft saying how they planned to shaft nvidia.

          The dispute over price was won by nvidia [eetimes.com], presumably because it was very clear in the contract what the formula was for the profit per chip.

  • Microsoft and nVidia / ATi (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ATi is really a much better fit for MS than nVidia. Working on the Xbox's graphics only set nVidia back, and from what I've heard, they had to fight with Microsoft nearly every step of the way. As nVidia favors OpenGL, it was quite a struggle for them to make the Xbox API more OpenGL-like, despite Microsoft's pressure. ATi, on the other hand, basically makes DirectX accelerators (witness their terrible OpenGL performance. Also, ATi and Microsoft's corporate cultures are much more similar. I doubt there
  • This is so awesome! If I had nVidia stock I'd be ric...wait a minute.
  • XBOX2 (or XBOX Next): IBM CPU, ATi GPU
    Future Nintendos: IBM CPU(?), ATi GPU
    PS3: IBM/Sony CPU, Sony/nvidia GPU

    Also keep in mind that this time, Microsoft is trying to get the first-mover advantage, something that the PS2 had and enjoyed quite a bit of success from.
    • Also keep in mind that this time, Microsoft is trying to get the first-mover advantage, something that the PS2 had and enjoyed quite a bit of success from.

      Actually, that's not true at all. Remember the Dreamcast? Oh yeah, the Dreamcast. It was first to market by far... and lost.

  • This seems a bit unlikely given the approach Sony took with the PS1 and PS2, but there's a press release [nvidia.com] to back this up on nVidia's site.

  • This [gamesindustry.biz] completely debunks the myth that is this Slashdot article.

    • NEOtaku17, look at the dates! (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      [NEOtaku17] This completely debunks the myth that is this Slashdot article.

      Look at the date of the article in the link you provided, NEOtaku17. It was September 1, 2003.

      Now look at this press release from nvidia
      ( http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_17342.html [nvidia.com]):

      FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

      TOKYO and SANTA CLARA, CA--DECEMBER 7, 2004--Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. (SCEI) and NVIDIA Corporation (Nasdaq: NVDA) today announced that the companies have been collaborating on bringing advanced graphics technology a

  • I'm has happy as any cross-platform gamer should be that nVidia has a new (and thriving), console bedfellow, but I have to be honest: knowing that the PS3 will have the same type of technology that's in the guts of my OEM high-end gaming rig seems to water down the mystical hype machine. In an age where it's common to hack apart consoles and use them as you see fit, I always feel that knowing what's within is, in a way, violating the experience between the controller and the screen. What keeps me intereste

Slashdot Top Deals

I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning. -- Plato

Close