Konfucius Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Revolution Report did an interview with John Swiminer from ATi, the whole Interview can be found here Some interesting quotes: Hollywood is a specific design and is in no way reflective of PC technology. Putting a fan on PC cards, retail cards such as ATI’s Radeon cards, adds more cost and complexity to the design of the chip. If we can get the design to the point where you don't need the fan to keep it cool, you've exceeded on a number of different levels.
Nick Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Interesting. So how is Nintendo to keep it's little Hollywood card cool? Nevertheless, it's nice to see Nintendo continues to cut costs. I wonder if the actual machine will have a fan of it's own.
mike-zim Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 that is interesting. so defo 2006 release. looking good.
system_error Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 I guess CPU and GPU layout on the PCB will take care of the heat with one fan for everything. Probably a bit heatsink which covers both the CPU and the GPU and then a fan on top or something. I just wonder why nobody else asked ATI about the Revolution yet - not that I think that RevolutionReport is a "bad" site but it is pretty new and I am just a bit curious.
Twilight Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 For a site that started as a blog, that interview is good and professional read. Respect for Revolution Report. Looks like IGN was wrong (again) when they said that Hollywood is just an extension of Flipper...
Guest Stefkov Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 they could just stick a small fan in there couldnt they to keep them cool, one of those £1 ones from the pound shop keep you cool easily. im no saying they should use one of them but i mean how hot does one of these chips actually get that they need some expensive fans for them.
Jon Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 Depending on how powerful it is, they could passively cool it.
system_error Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 The limit of my Geforce Go 6800 (it is the mobile solution from NVIDIA for notebooks) is 105 degrees celsisus after that stable work environment is not possible anymore. I really doubt that heat will be much of an issue.
DCK Posted January 12, 2006 Posted January 12, 2006 They'll probably just put on a heatsink. I was expecting that though - how could it house more than a system fan?
SpinesN Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 Depending on how powerful it is, they could passively cool it. Correction. Depending on how HOT IT RUNS, they could passively cool it. Power generally means more heat but not always, note athlon 64 vs p4.
DCK Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 I hope they're incorporating elements of ATi M58 design (the Mobility Radeon X1800). They're making a 16-pipe and 12-pipe version of it, so I figured that 12-pipe maybe existed because it matches the Hollywood design. Just a wild guess though.
darkjak Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 Correction. Depending on how HOT IT RUNS, they could passively cool it. Power generally means more heat but not always, note athlon 64 vs p4. Correct. The Dreamcast had a built in thermometer inside, so the console could shut down in case it would get too hot, which isn't included on the much more powerfull XB, and since Nintendo arent gonna have a fan at all, it seems that you can build a machine as powerful you want, without fearing heatissues, if you have the correct technology...
Nick Posted January 13, 2006 Posted January 13, 2006 Correct.The Dreamcast had a built in thermometer inside, so the console could shut down in case it would get too hot, which isn't included on the much more powerfull XB, and since Nintendo arent gonna have a fan at all, it seems that you can build a machine as powerful you want, without fearing heatissues, if you have the correct technology... Yeah, but how much of a pain in the arse is it going to be if you have been playing Prince of Persia or The Legend of Zelda without remembering to save for hours, then all of a sudden, a system message comes up saying that the console will shut down? I don't think a system shut down is a way to dodge heat issues, more of a safety system, if anything.
darkjak Posted January 14, 2006 Posted January 14, 2006 Yeah, but how much of a pain in the arse is it going to be if you have been playing Prince of Persia or The Legend of Zelda without remembering to save for hours, then all of a sudden, a system message comes up saying that the console will shut down? I don't think a system shut down is a way to dodge heat issues, more of a safety system, if anything. Yeah. That's not what I meant. The DC got so hot it had to shut down, but the GC didn't, allthough the GC was much faster (twice as fast, I think). That means that there's no real connection between heat and graphical power.
DCK Posted January 14, 2006 Posted January 14, 2006 That's bullsh*t, the Dreamcast and Cube aren't near the same level of technology ('99 and '02 releases anyone?). When talking heat, the general rule more power means more heat is a good rule when the technology is on the same level. Only the Pentium 4 Prescott is a bad example but the CPU's design is not good at all (and it's not on the same technology level as the Athlon 64). If Hollywood is passively cooled, it won't get near the GPU power of the Xenon (360) and RSX (PS3). Period. The best they can do is the ATi M58 which I'm estimating at 60% of the Xenon maximum.
darkjak Posted January 14, 2006 Posted January 14, 2006 That's bullsh*t, the Dreamcast and Cube aren't near the same level of technology ('99 and '02 releases anyone?). When talking heat, the general rule more power means more heat is a good rule when the technology is on the same level. Only the Pentium 4 Northwood is a bad example but the CPU's design is not good at all (and it's not on the same technology level as the Athlon 64). If Hollywood is passively cooled, it won't get near the GPU power of the Xenon (360) and RSX (PS3). Period. The best they can do is the ATi M58 which I'm estimating at 60% of the Xenon maximum. You missunderstood me AGAIN! What I'm trying to say is that the Revo could be MUCH more powerfull than the GC, and still need less effort to cool it...
DCK Posted January 14, 2006 Posted January 14, 2006 ... How can I make that up from your post? You compare the DC and GC directly - and you say that there's no relation between power and heat while there is one. We know it's going to be more powerful than the Cube, and it's pretty certain the GPU will be the most important factor in there. The fact that it'll be passively cooled (which we knew already) means certain that the GPU won't up against the other two, which are cutting edge and need massive cooling.
Pyxis Posted January 14, 2006 Posted January 14, 2006 Didnt they say that you couldnt compare it with pc technology? So why compare?
Stabby Posted January 14, 2006 Posted January 14, 2006 Revolution Report: Is Hollywood finalized? If not, when is work expected to be finished? Swinimer: I know that Nintendo has committed to 2006 availability. Certainly, game developers need some time to start developing games for it. I can't say anything more than that. That may actually refer to the special technique(s) the Rev uses for better graphics with less power. Were the Gamecube and PS2 chips reflective of PC technology?
RuneSP Posted January 14, 2006 Posted January 14, 2006 I have my confidence in Nintendo when they say that the Revolution probably wont be as poweful as the competition on the paper, but that there wont be a significant difference in the real product (the graphics)
SpinesN Posted January 14, 2006 Posted January 14, 2006 Actually I believe the flipper was made shader intensive, it did not have the over all computational power of the xbox, fillrate, max polygons (even in real world examples) were lower, and system ram hurt as well. Not shown in these specs are hardware lights and texture preformance which the flipper does much better in. Gamecube: http://hardware.gamespot.com/Nintendo-GameCube-9400-S-4-4 Xbox: http://hardware.gamespot.com/Microsoft-Xbox-9399-S-4-5
pedrocasilva Posted January 14, 2006 Posted January 14, 2006 Actually I believe the flipper was made shader intensive, it did not have the over all computational power of the xbox, fillrate, max polygons (even in real world examples) were lower, and system ram hurt as well. Not shown in these specs are hardware lights and texture preformance which the flipper does much better in. Gamecube: http://hardware.gamespot.com/Nintendo-GameCube-9400-S-4-4 Xbox: http://hardware.gamespot.com/Microsoft-Xbox-9399-S-4-5 Those have little information... but yeah... gamecube was so much better with shaders functions than Xbox... and it didn't have any shaders... (rare had problems with the fur effects when they changed platform, also I've yet to see a game like starfox adventures, where all the grass is texture applied in 3D)As for Raw poligons... it was inferior to Geforce 3... but superior in textured poligons, because it was more effective. "Flipper, while lacking shaders is "configurable", meaning its pipeline isn't completely fixed function. What exactly a programmer can tweak in Flipper's pipeline remains shrouded in mystery." GCN has a fixed T&L, yet it can do cel-shading, fur shading, and DOT3 bumpmapping- three effects not in the initial GPU hardware, yet it's done in games. These effects were "programmed" just as they are in shaders on Xbox. This is why Eternal Darkness is the first game ever to feature rolling volumetric fog, and why skinning is done so easily on GCN according to developers. Being fixed-function with no editable front-end would make all this impossible to do in hardware. So while Technically Flipper's T&L units are fixed, the ISA around it is completely programmable, allowing for shaders, if need be. As for lights and texture layers... Gamecube is clearly superior to Xbox in that department... that's the reason we're seeying the clouds go by in Zelda TP, because they are willing to waste one texture pass for it Gamecube pushed 15 million poligons at 60 frames by the time of launch with Rogue Squadron 2... Xbox only pushed 15 million polygons at 30 frames all in her timespan. I just think gamecube was not pushed often, due to low memory and the lack of inventment, like the investment through all Xbox timespan (with monetary fundings by microsoft). Bare in mind that RAM could be almost even with Xbox, with xbox taking 16 MB for Z-buffer leaving 48 MB of available RAM, but the DVD discs had 1,5 GB... while they had S3TC, meaning 64 MB for textures in PS2 were 8 MB with compression for gamecube, Xbox could do that too and it had at least 4,7 GB, much superior for texturework.
goku21 Posted January 15, 2006 Posted January 15, 2006 Hollywood willl have really great texture abilitys! http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=15&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=nintendo.AS.&OS=AN/nintendo&RS=AN/nintendo read!
DCK Posted January 15, 2006 Posted January 15, 2006 @ Schpickles: Yeah, I made it sound quite bad. You said what I was trying to say in your 3rd paragraph. @ Goku21: Damn, it makes it sound like Flipper all over again. It sounds like they use S3TC compression again (which is good) and have the sound DSP (which is meh) in it again. It could just be an update of the Flipper patent though, it talks about an 'enhanced' IBM PowerPC 750 which basically means the GameCube Gekko.
Recommended Posts