The PS3 Processor Has Been Successfully Shrunk [Ibm]

IBM has successfully miniaturized the Cell processor that you know from Sony’s PlayStation 3. previously built upon the 65nm scale, the new version will be based on the 45nm high-k process. What’s that mean? Money, potential and heat savings for Sony. And possibly a smaller or cheaper PS3 for you.

Along with the higher processor yields, what’s most appealing is the power/heat savings. These 45nm Cells use 40 percent less potential than the current, 65nm Cell. certain that’s a potential savings for customers, but it’s plus a major heat savings for designers. The PS3 may not have the red ring of death problem like we’ve seen in the Xbox 360, but a cooler, smaller Cell could

fit in a cooler, smaller PS3 (requiring less fans, etc.).

And while Sony has already managed to nearly break even on their console production cost vs. retail prices, the impending redesign could help Sony cut a legit profit from hardware (or allow Sony to cut prices again, instead). We’ll keep an eye out for the new chips, but unless they come bundled in a smaller or cheaper PS3, none of that will really matter to you anyway.

Note: that photo is of the old, fat, ugly, 90nm Cell. [arstechnica]


Orginal post by Mark Wilson

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Netvouz
  • DZone
  • ThisNext
  • MisterWong
  • Wists
Related Articles
  • Super 3G Tested Successfully
  • Honey, I shrunk the Wireless-N USB adapter
  • Nokia: European handset-sales growth took a hit in ‘07
  • Honey, I shrunk the Corsair Flash Voyager
  • Toshiba laptop touts ‘quad-core’ processor
  • Intel Core i7 processor-Worlds Fastest and most advanced desktop processor ever
  • Via launches Nano processor for mainstream PCs
  • NASA Successfully Tests ‘Interplanetary Web’
  • End of Intel, AMD duopoly near? Via readies Isaiah chip
  • Intel Unleashes Fast Core i7 Processor for Desktops
  • No comments yet. Be the first.

    Leave a reply