PDA

View Full Version : Bitboys



Dogbert
29th October 2002, 00:35
Read about them here (http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/bitboys/default.asp).
Interesting...

PAugustin
29th October 2002, 01:56
Great article. So they are now working with Nec (the name can be seen on the last prototype). Well maybe they will market a good part for mobile market.

Ribbit
29th October 2002, 03:03
Anyone know/guess what MatrixAA was?

Tempest
29th October 2002, 03:37
Originally posted by Ribbit
Anyone know/guess what MatrixAA was? You can read some guesses in this old thread from Beyond3D: http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2363&highlight=matrixaa

Nemesis
29th October 2002, 11:59
Originally posted by Ribbit
Anyone know/guess what MatrixAA was?

Form of FSAA. Screenshot available here (http://www.bitboys.com/graphicstechnology_professional_services.htm)

luni
30th October 2002, 02:19
Many consider them a joke

That about summs it up imho. Just wondering where they got all the funds for development. I mean, they must have some really dumb investors to give them money for years and get only prototype boards in return.

Chrono_Wanderer
1st November 2002, 14:23
does anyone think Bitboys have done something secret with matrox?

After all, the eXtreme Bandwidth Architecture from a year ago really sounds like the parhelia's 256-bit DDR architecture. Also, the MatrixAA thing and FAA... seems kinda similar

just speculating :p

Nemesis
1st November 2002, 14:31
Originally posted by Chrono_Wanderer
does anyone think Bitboys have done something secret with matrox?

After all, the eXtreme Bandwidth Architecture from a year ago really sounds like the parhelia's 256-bit DDR architecture.

it doesn't. Matroxes 256bit memory-bus is just a regular 256bit bus to external RAM. XBA is EDRAM (on-die embedded RAM) on an ultra-wide (1024bit) memory-bus.

K6-III
1st November 2002, 18:17
If Matrox actually used bitboys XBA, they would stomp all else on the market....assuming they could make Embedded RAM work...

superfly
4th November 2002, 22:34
I believe that Edram is no longer required as a way to have a lot of bandwith,even if limited to how much of it you can squeeze into the die itself,since with the use of DDR II and GDDR III memory as well as 256 bit wide memory buses,we'll see cards within 18 months having close to 60 gb/sec of bandwith....More that enough for pretty much anything developers can come up with,graphics wise,for the next few years at least.....

Wombat
4th November 2002, 23:11
Except that eDRAM isn't just about bandwidth. Latency matters too.

Nappe1
5th November 2002, 03:32
Wombat: they were using Cas=1 tech eDRAM on Axe.

Nappe1
5th November 2002, 03:39
Originally posted by superfly
I believe that Edram is no longer required as a way to have a lot of bandwith,even if limited to how much of it you can squeeze into the die itself,since with the use of DDR II and GDDR III memory as well as 256 bit wide memory buses,we'll see cards within 18 months having close to 60 gb/sec of bandwith....More that enough for pretty much anything developers can come up with,graphics wise,for the next few years at least.....

just calculate how much those Parhelia's 16 TMUs are needing bandwidth when usin bilinear 4 textures per poly and running at the full speed... you soon find out that there isn't enough bandwidth just for the textures. The real thing is that you never cannot have too much bandwidth.

Wombat
5th November 2002, 03:55
Yep, not only things like CAS, but you don't have to worry about bringing it out of a package, across a PCB, through another package, to a bus unit, etc.

Nappe1
5th November 2002, 04:04
Originally posted by Wombat
Yep, not only things like CAS, but you don't have to worry about bringing it out of a package, across a PCB, through another package, to a bus unit, etc.

yep, that's right.
and basically CAS1 type eDRAM has so low latency that it's almost as fast as internal registers (SRAM??) so to frame buffer use it's optimal because there's paractically nothing slowing down reads and writes to Frame Buffer. eRAMs (eDRAM, T1-SRAM, SRAM, etc.) are the way to make Super Sampling AA for free. Quality is excelent and no fps drop. :)

btw, that is what MatrixAA was all about.

superfly
5th November 2002, 19:09
Originally posted by Nappe1


yep, that's right.
and basically CAS1 type eDRAM has so low latency that it's almost as fast as internal registers (SRAM??) so to frame buffer use it's optimal because there's paractically nothing slowing down reads and writes to Frame Buffer. eRAMs (eDRAM, T1-SRAM, SRAM, etc.) are the way to make Super Sampling AA for free. Quality is excelent and no fps drop. :)

btw, that is what MatrixAA was all about.


True..but on the other hand,you're always limited by how much edram you can fit into the die and there always the tradeoff as far as features go...

Imagine the costs associated with building a Full DX9 chip,which if we look at competitors cards,already easily exceed 100 million transitors,and on top of that, adding a meaningfull amount of edram on the same package.....Yikes.

Nappe1
6th November 2002, 06:18
Superfly: as said, they had DX9 chip on the works and It's specs are on that article.

The idea how they used eDRAM, was very cool. in their method they didn't need to fit whole frame buffer to edram, just that part which was being rendered. That's one of the reasons why they only had 3MB of eDRAM on Hammer.

Still, because of known facts, they were forced to move on to work with PDA/Cellular Phone core. And Hammer got scrapped.