New PS3 Hardware Less Prone to YLOD


Sony has recently started releasing new PS3 consoles that have an improved version of the RSX chip (the graphics processor). It uses 15% less power, and, according to GI.biz, is less prone to the YLOD issue. This is mainly due to going from 65nm to 45 40nm (the Cell, on the other hand, has been 45nm). A couple other changes have been found as well:

The console also now uses two 128MB XDR RAM chips instead of four 64MB chips and features a new cooling assembly and a lighter power supply.

Since this is only a minor hardware change, it doesn’t improve on game performance, but the changes do help on reliability. Sony hasn’t officially announced it since it is minor, so you could call it a shadow release. The model number is CECH-2100A in case you’re wondering.

EDIT: Small update.


Written by: Jay - Community Manager / Editor-In-Chief


,

  1. #1 by Blackstaffer on April 27th, 2010

    One: It’s actually 40nm – Sony has issued a correction.

    Two: I would hardly consider the YLOD an “issue”, considering that the failure rate lives within the norm for a consumer electronics device.

  2. #2 by Gibb on April 27th, 2010 [ 2415 Points ]

    erm.. correction: it’s a 40nm RSX..

  3. #3 by Jay on April 27th, 2010 [ 83111 Points ]

    you guys replied just as I was fixing it lol

  4. #4 by Gibb on April 27th, 2010 [ 2415 Points ]

    damn.. beaten.. =/

  5. #5 by Royalty32 on April 27th, 2010

    Isnt that the whole point of it being less energy hungry.

  6. #6 by EdEN on April 27th, 2010 [ 142681 Points ]

    Ok, so basically the slims shipped at the moment use this new setup but the slims out at the end of 2009 don’t?

    How much is the change in % to the odds of the YLOD between phat, slim, and new slim?

  7. #7 by Jay on April 27th, 2010 [ 83111 Points ]

    the odds of YLOD are slim as it is, but since it went from 65nm to 40, you’re looking at a reduction in size, thus the reduction of energy needed and heat produced, making it more efficient and more reliable, but since the hardware of the PS3 was pretty reliable to begin with, it wasn’t as drastic as the 360 when it’s RROD was caused by overheating, and the system using 65nm for both the processor and graphics chips and later switched both to 45nm

  8. #8 by EdEN on April 27th, 2010 [ 142681 Points ]

    Since my slim is in a very well ventilated part of my bedroom with nothing obstructing it’s fan and AC running in the room I think I don’t have much to worry… but it’s always great to be prepared.

  9. #9 by Emrah on April 27th, 2010 [ 7319 Points ]

    Hi Jay,

    You can be *absolutely sure* that no PS3 hardware revision, minor or major, will ever increase core performance. It just goes against every single thing consoles stand for. You can rest assured that even the bluray speed will have to stay the same for equal gaming performance.. Sure, some peripherals may vary, but there’s no way that any hardware revision will be made to increase performance. This is not the PC platform.

  10. #10 by Jay on April 27th, 2010 [ 83111 Points ]

    no duh? BUT, 15% reduction in power consumption can still technically be considered a performance upgrade, though, it doesn’t affect the gaming side, and therefore, doesn’t compromise the console’s purpose in that sense

  11. #11 by Emrah on April 27th, 2010 [ 7319 Points ]

    It cannot be considered a performance upgrade, but a performance per watt upgrade. Sorry Jay, I’m genuinely a mule on this one.

  12. #12 by Jay on April 27th, 2010 [ 83111 Points ]

    that could still be categorized as a performance upgrade based on power consumption. You’ve got performance based off of processing, pixel shading, etc and performance on power. If it is capable of using less power for the same results, that still translates to better performance, and thus can be considered a performance upgrade. Performance upgrades don’t necessarily have to change the processing specs, etc to be considered as such. In fact, this does change the spec sheet slightly, and improves power consumption, and an improvement on anything can technically be considered a performance upgrade

  13. #13 by Emrah on April 28th, 2010 [ 7319 Points ]

    This might go on forever, lol..

    “Since this is only a minor hardware change, it doesn’t improve on game performance” -> This sounds as if you are expecting an improvement on game performance somewhere down the line, or at least implying that a game performance improvement is possible. When you say increased game performance, I understand games running faster / smoother; that’s where I don’t agree.

    Since the revision comes with 15% less power usage, than you should call it a game performance upgrade, if you think performance per watt increase means a performance upgrade, since it will be using less power when playing games. But you don’t do it either, I’m at a loss :P

  14. #14 by Jay on April 28th, 2010 [ 83111 Points ]

    lol, I didn’t mean to sound like I was implying that. It was just a heads up to those who might have. Some major hardware changes don’t even have to affect the games. Look at the Slim. It used less power and was more efficient and ran cooler, which translates to a performance upgrade (since efficiency could fall under a category of performance), but not a game performance upgrade (which is rare, if it even happens, BUT it has happened on the firmware side of things a while back, where 70MB of additional memory was opened up due to less resources being used for the XMB, etc, but that’s on a software level, as the hardware remained the same and was essentially retrofitted on all older consoles as well). I never said that the drop in power consumption meant an increase in game performance.

  15. #15 by EdEN on April 28th, 2010 [ 142681 Points ]

    Hahaha, that sure went on for a while. 15% less power consumption translate to a lower electricity bill at the end of the month. My Slim PS3 got heavy use during march due to some gaming escapades and several Bluray movies watched and my bill jumped $15 from february to march.

  16. #16 by Matthew on May 4th, 2010

    Correct me if I’m wrong…this is all AFAICR. I think the CPU in the first gen slim was 45nm and the GPU was 65nm (both down from 90nm in the fat), which was almost a 50% drop in power consumption and was huge improvement (playing a BD in a fat used about 160w), playing it in a 1st gen slim made it use about 80-90w. Now they have brought the GPU down in line with the CPU to make them both 40nm (not 45nm). This has caused a further 15% less power to be used (15% more less than the slim, not the fat)…..so playing a BD is now in the low 70w’s.

    I’ve only just bought my slim, from the last batch in the stores of the 1st gens – I was a bit miffed as the lower bills would have been nice. But then I remember a couple of hardware revisions in PS2 that reduced costs that I never liked….like going from a power brick (nothing like the 360’s) to an internal PSU (your PSU goes on the earlier one, you simply buy a new AC cable)…..and other less publicised changes were simply Sony finding cheaper parts to stick inside. So as my current slim is fine (cool and quiet), and YLOD is virtually unheard of in slims, I shall not be too worried I missed the new hardware revision. Although it should be fine.

  17. #17 by John Snr on February 7th, 2011

    I got ps3 slim 250gb 10 months ago & got dreaded ylod. I always take care not to make improper shut downs & ps3 is stored in well ventilated area…luckily still in warranty, so phoned Sony helpline (Sunday), and new ps3 being delivered (Tuesday). Really concerns me if it were to happen again. I’ve got 3 month extended warranty. Definitely thinking of insuring it for future tho invade it happens again, as I’m nort very confident now in Sony!!


You must be logged in to post a comment.

Like trophies? Like giveaways? Want to speak your mind? Register here!