Some people seem to be salty about this, lol.
Why didn't they use Oreida, or McCains, which would survive both low temperature and isolation?
Why didn't they use the 360 one?
Why didn't they use the 360 one?
People are actually mad over this news? That is hilarious.
This is the first thing that came to mind when reading OP:
Surprised no one posted that image before. It would be awesome if someone could photoshop a PS1 into this image
Don't be silly, they chose it because PS1 can push 1.5m polygons per second and you're all just butthurt.
Why didn't they use the 360 one?
Designing a chip and setting up a silicon run is extraordinarily costly even for basic logic devices with no special requirements, and rad-hardened microprocessors suitable for prolonged space missions are about as low-demand as it gets. A couple tens of thousands per unit doesn't really seem unreasonable to me.Yeah, science gadgets are ridiculously overpriced.
Why didn't they use the 360 one?
How about this:
The Mangoose (the CPU inside the spacecraft) is indeed radiation-hardened.I imagine that the electronics for this spacecraft would have to hardened against radiation.
They probably picked an available solution that was working and they "enjoyed" to use... That's a way to define "the best solution".Amazing to see people online saying NASA picked the wrong processor lol.
The Mangoose (the CPU inside the spacecraft) is indeed radiation-hardened.
The R3000 happens to be used in the original Playstation, but it's first and foremost a CPU used in many early-90 devices (the CPU itself is half a dozen years older than Playstation).
Saying that "it runs with the Playstation CPU" is the same as saying anything that use a Z80 "it runs with the Gameboy CPU". Yes, that's true, but it's mostly a coincidence.
Nice, maybe they'll use the cell processor next to power an.unmanned reconnaissance vehicle to land on other worlds.
They probably picked an available solution that was working and they "enjoyed" to use... That's a way to define "the best solution".
That's not to say researchers always go for the "best" solution... I've seen far to much researchers using Fortran 77 and even reluctant to use the 90 version just because they're at ease with the older compiler. Why change if it's working? I'm actually fine with that as long as I don't have to work with them too much on their code (code that still inherits margins from perforated cards really feel dated).
They had processors that had been redesigned for space issues, thoroughly checked and tested in space condition, why look for something else, especially when you don't need much power? Mangoose V, RAD6000 and 386 fit the job perfectly...
In the engineering field is good enough and cheap the best solution, yo.
How can it accurately navigate without a Z-buffer?
Any other CPU that have a Z-buffer would become self aware under its long and dangerous journey and would eventually malfunction because of performance anxiety and stress.
The PSX CPU's blatant disregard of the Z-plane is the reason it can courageously travel all these years with no fear or remorse.
that hack Cerny could only wish his console powers rocketships
Fun fact, voyager was a modified nes and the reason its been able to operate so long is the cartridge slot was left open, allowing for space dust to continually blow into the compartment to ensure normal operation.
does that mean psx sales are now officially stellar?
Unleash Cell on a foreign planet? Has DBZ taught us nothing!?
In the engineering field is good enough and cheap the best solution, yo.
does that mean psx sales are now officially stellar?
Yeah I think NASA scientists are more qualified to make that judgement.