I was talking about the yields for the processor.
I apologize, since you already failed to interpret the interview correctly, I should have assumed your lack of reading comprehension would also extend to my posts. That was my error.
2,000,000 units by lauch time window.
Not buying one, don’t care.
2,000,000 units by the end of 2006.
Still not buying one, still don’t care.
2,000,000 more after the start of the new year.
3rd generation don’t give a fuck, still not gonna buy one.
Sorry, not happy with $ony right now.
Way to be a sport about it, though.
This argument is stupid.
All the chap is doing is explaining, in simple terms, that the Cell is difficult to create perfectly. Most people only know the Cell as PS3 technology- he tries to assuage them by saying that the PS3 only requires seven SPEs. These chips are easier to produce.
The 4 SPE comment has nothing to do with PS3- he does not even link the two, but merely mentions that imperfect Cells Sony does not want might still find a use. In fact, the interviewer brings up the idea of imperfect Cells being used to make a cheaper PS3. The chap says that he has no idea, but does not think so.
Also, they could increase PS3 Cell yields by including logic redundancy in the chips. I think. Engineer, please?
The interviewer brought up four SPEs in relation to the PS3. The interviewer is stupid. Mox is right. What he’s talking about is they don’t get many perfect Cells. Everything fabbed has the physical logic for all 8 SPEs. Maybe 10% come through with all of those working at an acceptable clock speed. Those chips are set aside for high margin applications. Cell Blades, etc. If you only need 7 working SPEs you’re probably getting like 3 or 4 times as many of those. That’s what you want for the PS3. Those that test with 7 functioning SPEs at 3.2 Ghz get set aside for PS3. At that point you’re talking about 50% of the chips you’re pumping out could conceivably work in a PS3, although some will be sold at a big profit instead. IBM is also finding they’re getting a ton of 6 SPE chips which they have no current customer for, but which they don’t really want to throw away. These could be used in TVs or Set top boxes or something.
Part of the problem is the interviewer doesn’t understand what the redundancy actually means. He seems to be under the impression it’s there so after you sell a PS3, if one of the SPEs goes bad the chip will have a back up and heal itself, more or less. This is stupid. Defects are assessed at the time of fabrication. If it breaks in a few years, well it’s broken. RMA, Exchange it, whatever. But chips that have been tested and work don’t usually break down over time unless it overheats due to overclocking or poor ventilation or something. They are no moving parts in the Cell, you’re much more likely to have a hard drive or Blu-ray drive failure.
Yea, you’re right about the interviewer bring up the PS3 and four SPEs - I’m not sure why Reeeves even answered.
Thanks for the clarification, though. I’m not an engineer and wasn’t following Cell development before this.
We’ve gotten to the point (actually we hit it a few months ago), that a vast majority of the bad press Sony is getting is simply the result of journalists who don’t understand what they’re talking about. They ask wrong headed questions (like the 4 SPE PS3 one) of the wrong people (like a guy from IBM who doesn’t really know what future products Sony might introduce) and create a ton of confusion. They also dig up technical deatils that sound bad, but are only bad if you’re trying to use the hardware the wrong way. They deconstruct every interview with every yahoo who may or may not have ever even seen a PS3 devkit, take quotes out of context and attempt to create a panic across the internet. I mean, where do all the quotes about how hard the PS3 hardware is to work with come from? Traditional PC developers. The fact that PC developers like PC development is hardly news, let alone indicative of poor PS3 development tools.
There was some blood in the water after the price announcement and it’s been an internet dog pile ever since. All people need now is one word (like “Entitlement”) and they’ll invent some fiction about how big a mistake it is for Sony to be making. Who cares if we don’t actually have any idea as to what the label refers to or how it will work. MS, on the other hand, announced “Consumables” actually proposing that you pay for fake money or ammo or potion with real money and there’s no comparable backlash. MS keeps announcing they’ll charge for stuff their competitors are giving away for free. Online gaming, home brew development, but Sony are the bad guys. If it’s good news about Sony, well it must be a lie, right? MS would never lie to you. They tell you how much they’re screwing you right to your face. And they’re gonna reach a billion gamers this generation to prove it!
Ironically I think it’s because people feel “entitled” to a cheaper PS3.
Actually a lot of those quotes come from game developers who work on multiple consoles and pc games. Regardless of their preferences, I’d think it would be fairly obvious (to them) to say which avenue provides better support and documentation and from all accounts the PS3 is dead last in that regard.
Very true. The only person I’ve really heard making a stink out of Microsoft’s handling of Live, and specifically Live Marketplace, is MS/Halo fanboy Luke Smith. He has said he thinks that allowing the publishers/developers to set their own prices is retarded, and I tend to agree with him. MS should step in and set up some standards and boundries on prices for transactions on Live Marketplace, especially since they are setting a precedent.
Now, I know Sony has said their version of Live will be free, but have they actually said there will not be a marketplace for microtransactions, where players can buy from third-parties, and that all of this will be free as well?
Look, just because id, valve and epic decide they want some slices of console money pie doesn’t mean they’re not PC houses. Let’s hear from some developers who didn’t farm out their PS2 ports to a third party. What do Rockstar, Square-Enix, Konami and Capcom think about it? Anyone who isn’t just trying to wedge their PC code base on to every platform for a quick payout…
No, I’m sure they will be selling casual/retro games, music, movies, expansion packs and downloads too, but you’ll be able to play online against your friends without a yearly service fee. It’s not like MS give you an allowance to spend on downloads when you sign up for live. They take your money, arrange peer hosted games and still charge you for all the extras.
I don’t have a 360, and haven’t tried Live Gold, but what are the “extras?” Unless you mean marketplace content. Whether your a Sony-hater or not, the competition in this area is sorely needed.
Btw, has Sony mentioned whether they will be setting price standards for content (including third-party content) in their marketplace?
I think Nintendo mentioned VC games will be around $5 USD each, which seems quite fair.
Yeah, when I say extras I’m talking about all the market place type stuff. Sony hasn’t announced any pricing information as far as I know. I’m guessing they’ll basically try to be competitive with MS and iTunes. Competition will be good. Hopefully it’ll put an end to $15 map packs and $6 horse armor…
The horse armour I don’t care about; really that entire debacle was just retarded before you even factor in any pricetag.
But the $15 for a map pack that is free for PC gamers and that doesn’t let you play with people that don’t have the pack is just ridiculous. Zipper handled the release of the SOCOM 3 map pack much, much better.
Or maybe he was asking about a different kind of redundancy. There is such a thing as live redundancy – checks are constantly being run, and duplicate reserve units are automatically substituted for any active units that have failed. Such systems are used in aerospace industries and the like. It’s not unreasonable to ask whether the Cell chip might have such facilities.
Whether or not Sony’s “free Live-alike” is a good thing remains to be seen. When has a company ever done something like that (a network service of any type, not necessarily console-specific) for the long haul and managed to keep the service free, ad-free and in good working order throughout the life of the product? I’m drawing a blank trying to come up with an existing example.
Xbox Live costs extra, but it is still an amazing value for what you get, IMO.
If Sony CAN provide anything in the ballpark of Xbox Live and keep it free (without turning it into an advertising monstrosity), I’ll be the first to admit I’m impressed, but I won’t believe it until I see it.
BS. If they’re having enough 6-SPE units that they are trying to find uses for them, there is no way the yields are this high. Don’t just pull numbers out of your ass. My wild guess on 7-SPE yields would be something like 30-50%. (Note: This number is also an ass guess - it has no credibility.)
I’m not guessing, I’m misquoting. I remembered the linked article mentioning a very high yield - 95% - then going on to talk about chips as complex as the full Cell having 10-20% yield. I assumed that he was ‘bridging the gap’ as the rhetoricists would say, setting out two apparently contradictory claims (“we’re getting high yields” versus “chips as complex as Cell get low yields”) then reconciling them (parallel, fault-tolerant architecture, only need seven functioning for PS3, etc.). In fact, the question and answer doesn’t even relate directly to the PS3; he’s using Cell only as an example of what he means by a “big” chip.
So in fact, no-one outside of IBM has seen a figure for the yield on any version of the Cell.
Well one thing about Sony is that they are actualy an electronics manufacturing company who own factories full of people who actualy manufacture electronic equipment. It’s very possible they’re telling the truth on the number of units they will ship when the time comes.
When was the last time Sony told the truth about anything?
Well… I guess “the PS3 isn’t being manufactured yet” counts.
I mean, obviously what I just said was an exaggeration. But I trust Sony like I trust the Bush administration.