• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PS3 motherboard pictures (including new 40GB model)

T

tanod

when is my burrito
20GB/60GB North American Launch:
20GB-MOBO.jpg

Has PS2 CPU and GPU hardware


60GB PAL Launch / 80GB US:
80GB-MOBO.jpg

Has PS2 GPU hardware


40GB motherboard:
40GB-MOBO.jpg

Has no PS2 hardware

Engadget:
-Reduced the power usage to around 135 Watts from 200 Watts.
-Runs cooler and quieter
-Smaller heat pipe
-PS2 hardware was located on the left side of the motherboard.
-Board width is approximately 15% shorter in the 65nm version.


FYI: PS3 Heatsink
PS3Heatsink.jpg
 
C

CoG

Member
Wollan said:
So it actually has a 65nm cpu. I believed someone (don't know who) said no to this a while ago.
Click to expand...

Does not look 65nm unless there's a tiny die in that big package.
 
E

Elios83

Member
CoG said:
Does not look 65nm unless there's a tiny die in that big package.
Click to expand...

Yup the package seems the same.
They could have used the same old package to not change the bus design around Cell on the motherboard which is a crucial element (maybe they're waiting for RSX 65nm to be ready to do a full motherboard redesign).But I'd wait for further news on the 65nm Cell front.
 
T

tanod

when is my burrito
CoG said:
Does not look 65nm unless there's a tiny die in that big package.
Click to expand...

Read the article. That's what it says

IIRC, a 65nm process doesn't necessarily determine the physical space the processor takes up on the MOBO.


Doc Evils said:
Is it me or does the motherboard actually look smaller?

from rectangular to square.
Click to expand...
Gofreak estimated that the 40GB is about 13% narrower. They really simplified the left-side of the board.

Also, take into account that the pictures may have been taken from a slightly different angle.
 
S

Sol..

I am Wayne Brady.
Whats that thing missing on the lower right hand corner of the MOBO?

Theres one less box (although the leftover box is slightly larger) and one round thingy (hail to my lack of knowledge after my first year of engineering)
 
E

Elios83

Member
Sol.. said:
Whats that thing missing on the lower right hand corner of the MOBO?

Theres one less box (although the leftover box is slightly larger) and one round thingy (hail to my lack of knowledge after my first year of engineering)
Click to expand...

Two USB ports and one capacitor less.
 
C

captscience

Member
Sol.. said:
Whats that thing missing on the lower right hand corner of the MOBO?

Theres one less box (although the leftover box is slightly larger) and one round thingy (hail to my lack of knowledge after my first year of engineering)
Click to expand...


I may be wrong but I believe that's the USB controller. Each "box" has two inputs.
80gb and 60gb versions had four, the 40gb has two.
 
B

bigswords

Member
chris0701 said:
Old PS3 does not need 380w to play games either...about 190w.
Click to expand...

Sorry wrong link.

It was stated on the 40 GB box that the maximum power consumption is 280 W compared to the 60 GB which is 380 W. But of course as you stated average voltage of the old 60 GB PS3 is 190 W.
 
S

somesayyea

Member
Some more info...

It's been revealed that the new 40GB PlayStation 3 features more than just a cut down hard disk drive. Sony has also thought to stick the 65nm version of the Cell inside the new console, reducing the power usage down to around 135 Watts (down from 200 Watts.) That means the console also runs cooler and quieter, which is always a plus for a device that usually resides in the living room. Sony also jiggled around a few other components by making the heat pipe smaller, swapping out the motherboard for a new version, and added a button battery to keep time when the system is off. Looks like potential PS3 purchasers will be looking forward to a less noticeable din then.
Click to expand...

http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/30/40gb-ps3-features-65nm-chips-lower-power-consumption/
 
V

Valkyr Junkie

Member
bigswords said:
Sorry wrong link.

It was stated on the 40 GB box that the maximum power consumption is 280 W compared to the 60 GB which is 380 W. But of course as you stated average voltage of the old 60 GB PS3 is 190 W.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep reporting watts as a unit of voltage? The max power ratings of the power supply has nothing to do with the actual power consumption of the console. The previous PS3's consumed at max 180W-190W of power and it appears now that the 40GB consumes ~135W.
 
W

Worm_Buffet

Member
Elios83 said:
Yup the package seems the same.
They could have used the same old package to not change the bus design around Cell on the motherboard which is a crucial element (maybe they're waiting for RSX 65nm to be ready to do a full motherboard redesign).But I'd wait for further news on the 65nm Cell front.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the point of cost reduction through increasing transistor density, though? I.e. fitting more chips on the same wafer thanks to a smaller chip size.
 
F

fronn

Member
The chip size on those is impossible to tell with those large heatspreaders on them... So it's kind of impossible to say "it doesn't look 65nm"
 
E

Elios83

Member
Worm_Buffet said:
Isn't that the point of cost reduction through increasing transistor density, though? I.e. fitting more chips on the same wafer thanks to a smaller chip size.
Click to expand...

Yes of course but die size is a different thing from package size. They can still make 65nm dies, reduce their on-wafer production costs and package them in the old package to not change the on-board connections to the processor for now. Redesigning such a huge bus to work correctly is not an easy task, there a lot of intereferences across the lines so maybe they're taking their time with that (and probably waiting to have both Cell and RSX at 65nm),
 
blu

blu

Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Valkyr Junkie said:
Why do you keep reporting watts as a unit of voltage? The max power ratings of the power supply has nothing to do with the actual power consumption of the console. The previous PS3's consumed at max 180W-190W of power and it appears now that the 40GB consumes ~135W.
Click to expand...

i don't know where i got your 190W figure from, but if the quoted original PSU rating of 380W is correct, then i highly doubt the original system topped at 190W. the efficiency of a 'high-grade' modern desktop PSUs stands around 80%, so such a PSU rated at 380W would pass down to the consumer ~300W of power. so your suggested 100 watts of power margin are rather, well, dubious. i would expect the original ps3 to be more in line of 250-280W peak consumption.
 
T

tanod

when is my burrito
blu said:
i don't know where i got your 190W figure from, but if the quoted original PSU rating of 380W is correct, then i highly doubt the original system topped at 190W. the efficiency of a 'high-grade' modern desktop PSUs stands around 80%, so such a PSU rated at 380W would pass down to the consumer ~300W of power. so your suggested 100 watts of power margin are rather, well, dubious. i would expect the original ps3 to be more in line of 250-280W peak consumption.
Click to expand...

It was tested. Peak usage before was between 190-200 watts.
 
Aggelos

Aggelos

Member
Im a noob , but what exactly does the 65nm mean? How does it affect the PS3 production? Does it bring about cost reduction?
 
T

tanod

when is my burrito
Aggelos said:
Im a noob , but what exactly does the 65nm mean? How does it affect the PS3 production? Does it bring about cost reduction?
Click to expand...

65nm is a chip fabrication process. It makes the chip smaller and the chip subsequently uses less energy and generates less heat allowing them to reduce the cost of cooling and the power supply used and chip manufacturing costs.

It will save them quite a bit of money (like in the hundreds of dollar per unit range).
 
R

Raist

Banned
Aggelos said:
Im a noob , but what exactly does the 65nm mean? How does it affect the PS3 production? Does it bring about cost reduction?
Click to expand...


Yes, because you can make more chips from the same silicon sample. This is a direct cost reduction. There are indirect ones, such as the ones mentionned by tanod.
 
K

KRS7

Member
Aggelos said:
Im a noob , but what exactly does the 65nm mean? How does it affect the PS3 production? Does it bring about cost reduction?
Click to expand...

65 nm refers the feature width of the transistor gates on the chip. The smaller these are the less power the processor consumes and the less heat it gives off. There is a cost reduction because the same number of transistors can be fit in a smaller area on the silicon wafer and therefore each wafer produces more chips increasing the yield, but this is partially offset by the great cost in upgrading equipment to a new process.

Obligatory Wikipedia link
 
G

gcubed

Member
blu said:
i don't know where i got your 190W figure from, but if the quoted original PSU rating of 380W is correct, then i highly doubt the original system topped at 190W. the efficiency of a 'high-grade' modern desktop PSUs stands around 80%, so such a PSU rated at 380W would pass down to the consumer ~300W of power. so your suggested 100 watts of power margin are rather, well, dubious. i would expect the original ps3 to be more in line of 250-280W peak consumption.
Click to expand...

last time i checked just because a power supply is rated at a certain wattage doesnt mean it is using all of it...

Unless i completely zoned out for 10 years and they changed the way electricity works
 
blu

blu

Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
gcubed said:
last time i checked just because a power supply is rated at a certain wattage doesnt mean it is using all of it...

Unless i completely zoned out for 10 years and they changed the way electricity works
Click to expand...

sorry, i missed your point - are you questioning the peak power rating of a PSU's power draw, the PSU efficiency figures, both, or neither?
 
R

Rolf NB

Member
Thank the maker, finally we have pics of that thing!
Now tear off the heatspreaders already you lazy bastards!
Jea Song said:
so 60 gig version wins?
Click to expand...
Define "win". Weight? Christmas-compatible coloration?
 
R

Raist

Banned
blu said:
i don't know where i got your 190W figure from, but if the quoted original PSU rating of 380W is correct, then i highly doubt the original system topped at 190W. the efficiency of a 'high-grade' modern desktop PSUs stands around 80%, so such a PSU rated at 380W would pass down to the consumer ~300W of power. so your suggested 100 watts of power margin are rather, well, dubious. i would expect the original ps3 to be more in line of 250-280W peak consumption.
Click to expand...


http://www.hardcoreware.net/image.php?src=5480&ts=1172056422
http://www.hardcoreware.net/image.php?src=5475&ts=1172042835



This test (done on a PAL model most likely) is quite complete, too

Code: 
[B]Test no.    Description                            Power consumption [Watt][/B]
01.         Standby mode                            1,8
02.         Idle mode                               181,5
03.         Switched of on the backside switch      0
04.         Idle screen saver mode                  179,2
05.         DVD movie                               176,8
06.         CD music                                180,0
07.         Game: “Need for speed” PS2              202,9
08.         Game: “Motor storm” PS3                 192,3
09.         Internet                                178,6
10.         JPEG slide show from CD                 175,6
11.         Folding@Home                            187,8
 
T

the_id

Member
OH GOD! This is cruelty! who would do such a thing to a console? This is like murdering a cat!!!

I'm calling the Royal Australian Society For The Prevention of Cruelty To Consoles (SPCC).
 
L

Loudninja

Member
the_id said:
OH GOD! This is cruelty! who would do such a thing to a console? This is like murdering a cat!!!

I'm calling the Royal Australian Society For The Prevention of Cruelty To Consoles (SPCC).
Click to expand...

What the hell?
 
1

1-D_FTW

Member
Where did Engadget get that number? Has some site listed Kill-A-Watt numbers? I've been annoyed nobody has and it's just been idle speculation. If somebody has indeed verified it's peaking at around 135, that has to be a CPU shrink. Unless they went from an incredibly inefficient power supply to a 90+, there's nothing that can explain those numbers.

EDIT: BLU: He's questioning the worthless stickers on the back of electronics. Anybody with a Kill-A-Watt device realizes those numbers are always HUGELY inflated.
 
R

Rolf NB

Member
1-D_FTW said:
Where did Engadget get that number? Has some site listed Kill-A-Watt numbers? I've been annoyed nobody has and it's just been idle speculation. If somebody has indeed verified it's peaking at around 135, that has to be a CPU shrink. Unless they went from an incredibly inefficient power supply to a 90+, there's nothing that can explain those numbers.

EDIT: BLU: He's questioning the worthless stickers on the back of electronics. Anybody with a Kill-A-Watt device realizes those numbers are always HUGELY inflated.
Click to expand...
It* consumes 190W under load. End of story. I've measured it myself. Stop doubting this number.

*the European 60GB model, which is basically the same thing as the American 80GB model
 
G

gcubed

Member
blu said:
sorry, i missed your point - are you questioning the peak power rating of a PSU's power draw, the PSU efficiency figures, both, or neither?
Click to expand...

no one is questioning the power supply unit at all, the point was made about the power draw of the unit itself. The power draw of the unit (60GB) is 190W, no matter if the power supply is 300W or 3000W

solid2snake said:
so, if you don't need BC, the 40 gig is the SKU to get?
Click to expand...

if you dont need BC there is no reason NOT to get the 40gig, the antenna's for bluetooth and wireless are also changed for the better... and you save $100 ... if you really need the space in the future, you can just swap the HDD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

"I Need a New PC!" 2024. 240 Hz OLEDs, PCI-Gen5, Path Tracing & Ray Reconstruction.
5 6 7 8 9
428
20K
Rossco EZ replied
  • Poll
SONY/SIE: The Balance Of Chasing Margins, Multiplat Expansion, And Maximizing The Console
Opinion Business Analysis 2 3
101
8K
vaibhavpisal replied
Reducing the CPU bound game lows on 2.9GHz/4.3GHz boost Core i5-10400
Analysis Hardware
13
2K
PaintTinJr replied
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 could be the new Titan
39
3K
D.Final replied
Does the 60GB PS3 run PS2 Classics through hardware or software emulation?
15
8K
Trojita replied
Top Bottom