PS3 Frankenstein PHAT PS3: CECHA with 40nm RSX

And how do you know that the probability is not high? How do you know they are not dead? Whose reballing ? How are you going to prove just because the client did not return, that their console stayed working? How many reballed CECHA/Cs are out there still working? Can you also prove proof of that? And how would you explain that Cell almost never gets bga problems? More importantly, what is your motivation behind this #90nmLivesMatter movement ?

Lmao LMAO The 40nm GPUs ARE ALREADY 12 years Old From Slims and 10 years old from SS, So theres No way you can say to your customer that he Will have an safe gpu with long life, Also you must remenber that the way to prevent ps3 problems in general is to use Webman an tool that take great knowledge from Psx Place proggamers.

Edit: the 90nm RSX are just 3 years older than the 40nm RSXs.

Edit: Pacorretaco Thank you for supporting me.

Edit 3: Sorry, for me Evolution of Species is Nothing more than pure PseudoScience.

Thats all.
 
Last edited:
You fail to remember that the "Frankenstein " mod has only recently come about publicly. So reballing the 90nm has been very much the norm for the past 10+ years and myself as a reballer for the past 13 years have a very different and a very experienced percentage rates of the good,the bad and the ugly!

Yes, it used to be the norm. But now that there's a better way available, why stick to the old way? That is what I'm also trying to understand. Bumpgate or Bga, the 40nm processor is cooler and more reliable. Of course, reasonably anybody would prefer that over taking the risk of reballing prone-to-issues 90nm and hoping it holds up ?

But if you also have rates for the consoles you reballed, then do share. But even with statistics we wouldn't know 100% if all the consoles that didn't come back in fact stayed alive and for how long. How would you know if the customer didn't simply gave up/ used it for a short time and moved on? Or perhaps you have tracked the reballed consoles (specifically 90nm ones) that still work and don't have issues?

Bro well about your 8600m you said you Just reflow it, thats not how you test it, you have to do an reballing with Perfection to scientificaly Remove the possibility of the "Big Bgas" to be the problem, and then you need to see if works, if the reballing went fine and the chip works then is ok or the Heat Reflow Repaired its Bumps or the Reball of "Big Bgas" was really the problem, and for detect the an Bump Failure you would need to wait an Max of 3 months with that Machine working fine after being repaired, and then if fail again in that períod then or the chip transístors died or could be the bumps, so you must make an reflow and if the chip come Alive again we will know that it was the bumps all the times cause we just make an Reball 3 months ago max but now is dead and I did reflow and is Alive again then I just repaired the Internal Bumps Micro Bga Cracks Teoretically.
All this is just an representatiin of how an bump failure would be Easy detected.
.

If you are aiming at scientific proof, then sure. Maybe that's how it could be/should be done. But yet those chips were documented to have issues. And it's not only big bgas. And they did develop problems more often than any other chips at the time.

Lmao LMAO The 40nm GPUs ARE ALREADY 12 years Old From Slims and 10 years old from SS, So theres No way you can say to your customer that he Will have an safe gpu with long life, Also you must remenber that the way to prevent ps3 problems in general is to use Webman an tool that take great knowledge from Psx Place proggamers.

Edit: the 90nm RSX are just 3 years older than the 40nm RSXs.

Oh I would say his chances of having a console YLODing from a 3034 fault are way lower with a 40nm on board rather than with the 90nm. So you rate reliability based on how old a processor Is ? With that logic a 16 year old Cell is no way safe either. That's got nothing to do with how old they are though. You do realize some systems had very little use from 20 to 50 days, while others could have logged 300 days. If anything, I'd look at that more than age of the proccesors. Not to mention 40nm NOS chips can be found brand new on ebay. But also 3034 error could develop at any time regardless of the age. Some GPUs are tougher than others.

Edit 3: Sorry, for me Evolution of Species is Nothing more than pure PseudoScience.

And what's that got to do with anything? You don't believe in evolution?
 
Last edited:
10 years back the ylod fix was belived to be a reball and the reason for this fail was belived to be the high temprature that cracks the lead free solder. but today it proved that the problem is bga itself. cell is geting higher tempature is soldered with same lead free solder and its rarely an issue. also nobody sayed that the rsx swap with a 40nm will last for ever. but 40 nm rsx doent suffer from premature death. its a post 2008 gpu and post 2008 gpus corrected the underfill issues
 
Yes, it used to be the norm. But now that there's a better way available, why stick to the old way? That is what I'm also trying to understand. Bumpgate or Bga, the 40nm processor is cooler and more reliable. Of course, reasonably anybody would prefer that over taking the risk of reballing prone-to-issues 90nm and hoping it holds up ?

But if you also have rates for the consoles you reballed, then do share. But even with statistics we wouldn't know 100% if all the consoles that didn't come back in fact stayed alive and for how long. How would you know if the customer didn't simply gave up/ used it for a short time and moved on? Or perhaps you have tracked the reballed consoles (specifically 90nm ones) that still work and don't have issues?



If you are aiming at scientific proof, then sure. Maybe that's how it could be/should be done. But yet those chips were documented to have issues. And it's not only big bgas. And they did develop problems more often than any other chips at the time.



Oh I would say his chances of having a console YLODing from a 3034 fault are way lower with a 40nm on board rather than with the 90nm. So you rate reliability based on how old a processor Is ? With that logic a 16 year old Cell is no way safe either. That's got nothing to do with how old they are though. You do realize some systems had very little use from 20 to 50 days, while others could have logged 300 days. If anything, I'd look at that more than age of the proccesors. Not to mention 40nm NOS chips can be found brand new on ebay. But also 3034 error could develop at any time regardless of the age. Some GPUs are tougher than others.



And what's that got to do with anything? You don't believe in evolution?

What is your history with reballing?
How many units have you reballed?
How many of those have you had come back?
How many RSX's have you burnt out?

Enlighten me to convince me that you and your experience are correct!
I'm looking forward to it
 
Last edited:
10 years back the ylod fix was belived to be a reball and the reason for this fail was belived to be the high temprature that cracks the lead free solder. but today it proved that the problem is bga itself. cell is geting higher tempature is soldered with same lead free solder and its rarely an issue. also nobody sayed that the rsx swap with a 40nm will last for ever. but 40 nm rsx doent suffer from premature death. its a post 2008 gpu and post 2008 gpus corrected the underfill issues

I ask you the same questions as above.
Let us all know so we know
 
10 years back the ylod fix was belived to be a reball and the reason for this fail was belived to be the high temprature that cracks the lead free solder. but today it proved that the problem is bga itself. cell is geting higher tempature is soldered with same lead free solder and its rarely an issue. also nobody sayed that the rsx swap with a 40nm will last for ever. but 40 nm rsx doent suffer from premature death. its a post 2008 gpu and post 2008 gpus corrected the underfill issues

50% of the time it was a reball and the other 50 was caps or another component.
You are delerious if you think that the lead free solder has nothing to do with it.
It's proven better than anyone can prove their voodoo bump theory lol
 
I've reballed thousands of units here in Australia,since 2009.
I buy 99% of the faulty units available on the selling platforms over that period also to repair and resell.
Now one would expect to see a lot of them do a round trip back to myself if all the theories you guys present were true/fact.
I have had 2 x units of my own throughout that period land back on my doorstep that were faulty and they were both a cap issue and nothing to do with the reball they had. The reball was still 100% ok.
Tell me this! I am one of a handful of people that actually reball here in Aus and now there may be 3 max.
Are the majority of the population just throwing them out? Or only 2% of them relisting them as faulty? i buy the majority of the faulty units and my markings are not present in them.
Which leads me to believe that my work is good or they just mysteriously go missing by the 1000's.
 
Last edited:
Is not that difficult...
People are free to do what they want, but
If the goal is to "prove" somehow that the real issue is inevitably the "broken bumps" and reballing is pointless...
Theory alone is not enough. Do as @Victor Hugo Alvarez says: Find the reballed machines which failed, and investigate them and why they failed. With what symptoms.
See if they actually failed because of the "broken bumps" and count them. Compare them to the ones that didnt.
Are they frequent enough to justify the paranoia?

If the "broken bump"/"underfill" story were so universal, they would not be so difficult to find... If they didnt come for warranty, many would sooner or later find their way into the hands of another or even the same repairer.
But not only that. After they are found, they would not be so difficult to fix either... Probably much easier to fix than a board that was never reballed before.
Because the lead balls have a much lower melting point and this makes them much easier and safer to work with.
Most of the damages and destruction (delamination, warping, popcorning...) happen in the first rework cycle, which is when the board needs to be heated to the highest temperature, required to melt the solder from the factory. It is also where the risk of board humidity will be higher.
There is no way around this really... Just a lot of preparation and a bit of luck.
Regardless of reball/replace... This will be the same main difficulty/risk for the board.

But after the first cycle, most of the dangerous humidity will be gone, and if the solder was changed... The required temperature will be significantly lower as well. The overall risk for the board is therefore much lower. Only as small fraction now.

So even in those cases, even just changing the solder balls (reballing) is not pointless... It may not be magic, but Is not for nothing. I dont understand the taboo.
About the supposed "40nm/65nm superiority"...
Yeah maybe you could make a prediction that a 40nm/65nm chip would probably last longer than a 90nm.
But is not so easy to predict which "board" would last longer overall.
The new chip may be a couple years newer, but the boards are still 16 years old and have many other components.
You dont know what will fail next, or if the "underfill" will have a chance to actually matter or not.

I just think that the truth must be somewhere in the middle...
Again I could be wrong like any human being. But I know I am right in asking.
@truemaster Didnt you have a board with a 40nm RSX? Did the "underfill" get its chance to matter in your board?
@squeept You mentioned a frankenstein board that came back for warranty. What was the story with that in the end?
Had a 65nm CECHA01 swap returned under warranty for YLOD. Will tear down and report someday when I have the time, just wanted to share for now.
 
Lmao LMAO The 40nm GPUs ARE ALREADY 12 years Old From Slims and 10 years old from SS, So theres No way you can say to your customer that he Will have an safe gpu with long life, Also you must remenber that the way to prevent ps3 problems in general is to use Webman an tool that take great knowledge from Psx Place proggamers.
Yes, it used to be the norm. But now that there's a better way available, why stick to the old way? That is what I'm also trying to understand. Bumpgate or Bga, the 40nm processor is cooler and more reliable. Of course, reasonably anybody would prefer that over taking the risk of reballing prone-to-issues 90nm and hoping it holds up ?

But if you also have rates for the consoles you reballed, then do share. But even with statistics we wouldn't know 100% if all the consoles that didn't come back in fact stayed alive and for how long. How would you know if the customer didn't simply gave up/ used it for a short time and moved on? Or perhaps you have tracked the reballed consoles (specifically 90nm ones) that still work and don't have issues?



If you are aiming at scientific proof, then sure. Maybe that's how it could be/should be done. But yet those chips were documented to have issues. And it's not only big bgas. And they did develop problems more often than any other chips at the time.



Oh I would say his chances of having a console YLODing from a 3034 fault are way lower with a 40nm on board rather than with the 90nm. So you rate reliability based on how old a processor Is ? With that logic a 16 year old Cell is no way safe either. That's got nothing to do with how old they are though. You do realize some systems had very little use from 20 to 50 days, while others could have logged 300 days. If anything, I'd look at that more than age of the proccesors. Not to mention 40nm NOS chips can be found brand new on ebay. But also 3034 error could develop at any time regardless of the age. Some GPUs are tougher than others.



And what's that got to do with anything? You don't believe in evolution?


No Mr.Deadend I dont disagree with you about 40nm being more durable cause its newer, I was just Following your thought, well the 40nm are 10 years old and well they not brand new, anyways, I would fully Love to put an 40nm Rsx on Cok-00xs and Fats in general, May only problem is the 90nm is not trash cause nobody prove it has total Failure due to Teoretically Broken/Cracked Bumps.


DON'T READ IF YOU LOOKING FOR PS3-COMPUTER TOPIC- HERE IS JUST MY WORLD VIEW;
Well I think pretty much in this place or topic is not the place to argue into a brand new Diferent area of science which has nothing to do with our topic, actually I just wanted people to know my Position in world view and my logical view by science philosophy of how we as biological creatures came to be, my scientific view of the world, my theory, my logic, my absolutely logical world view is we came from an Inteligent mind that designed us, for me absolutely, Random Mutations Could Never Create not Even one Single bacteria Cell but Random mutation indeed bring cancer to people/líving biomolecular creatures, i'm Not arguing I just said my absolut philosophy, i'll not argue here about that with nobody cause im sure the moderators will not accept that here cause its no place for that topic or Psx Place.

Edit: @Pacorretaco thanks for support

Edit 2: also for me, my view, is that the 40nm Rsx on Coks heatsink will mostly likely only Fall with 100 years or something, Idk how long will live but I believe that due to extremely low temperatures that chip will never die by Bga cracks, I believe only Temps of 80c cracks the bgas, and like I said before my theoretilly (by Now) mod is to mod ps3 Coks heatsink Cpu and Gpu together only for the Franks cause as the 40nm works so cold as ~58c we can make the Cell Heatsink together with Rsx Part and for that making Cell High Temps of 75c factory to decrease Teoretically 10c or more and Rsx working at 68c Max will be no problem, it will be perfect to prevent Such high Temps on Cell!!

Edit 3: An Professional It Repair in Brasil: (Getech Informatica) the owner does some reballing some times, cause he is the Boss só he dont need to do Repairs cause he has employers, but anyways he does Reballing some times and when he rarely dont has vídeo in an Gpu like an Vega 64 he says: "well I just reballed this gpu perfectly but its not working/showing picture/vídeo Sooo it can only be the Bumps (Micro internal under gpu die bgas) and thats it only a New gpu could make it work"

So he all the time he makes one reballing and the graphics card shows no video/Not Working Gpu, then he says its the Bumps, which logically is Not Correctly as the Internal Micro Bgas or Bumps have Been reflowed During the Reballing, AND right now comes in my mind that Felix said only 350c could actually Melt the internal Bgas could they have diferent alloy and NOW logically I could say when we Reflow an processor and Everybody or the Reballing is Bullshit "says when you doyng and reflow or reballing youre actually just reflowing the bumps and making the chip work again, but again Felix said some bumps could only be melted at 350c and I cant remenber what bumps he was talking about, Idk if was general bumps or specific But fact is again If you Reball or Reflow an Chip which you Will use Max 245c Max and you Will never be able to reflow the bumps cause they melt at 350c Acording tô Felix, so its all an mess of Information, which one is right???? The higher melting point Bumps of 350c as Felix Said sounds to make my believe of Bumps hardly being Cracked more close to the truth, as Intel Processors or Amd Processors Rarely Rarely Rarely rarely Fails and they do Use Bumps but Not Bgas and when they do Use Bgas like an NoteBook then there they Start to Fail which again proves its not Bumps and yes its the Bga Cracking the problem.

As I said before extremely thin Soldering like the ones that are always left on pads are always conductivy and show no deffect, so as I said before as the Bumps are Extremely small as the rest of solder in an cleaned pad in thickness wise I say or the solder is so extremely thin in thickness that the electrical Waves has no problem going trhough that ultra extreme small cracks or the bumps dont crack at all.
 
Last edited:
if the 90nm is a ok chip. then why all fats with 90nm rsx come with swaped rsx from sony? with either 65nm or 40nm? woudnt be easier to clean the solder from the 90nm rsx reball and reflow back to mainboard? why they go so deep to replace smd resistors-capacitors power regulators and replace syscon as well? and finaly why cell isnt giving issues? as i said is getting hotter than rsx
 
What is your history with reballing?
How many units have you reballed?
How many of those have you had come back?
How many RSX's have you burnt out?

Enlighten me to convince me that you and your experience are correct!
I'm looking forward to it

Did you even read the post? I never claimed to have reballed 90nm nor did I want to reball them. I am also not trying to dismiss your experience or efforts. I was asking for your rates and said that even if the units did not come back, it wouldn't necessarily make a conclusive evidence.

But I'm not here to enlighten or convince you of anything. I'm saying the video is going to present a good insight as to why it's not a good idea to reball processors that are prone to failures , since we have a better solution now. And this concerns primarily 90nm chips. Do you yourself still recommend customers to reball 90nm after seeing 3034?

50% of the time it was a reball and the other 50 was caps or another component.
You are delerious if you think that the lead free solder has nothing to do with it.
It's proven better than anyone can prove their voodoo bump theory lol

Are you talking about BC units or all ps3s ? Again, just because the units didn't return doesn't mean the bumpgate fail was not going to happen at some point later. At least for BC consoles. It's not any voodoo really, there's plenty of research/information and the video will go over that. But in the end, everybody is free to make their own conclusions...

I've reballed thousands of units here in Australia,since 2009.
I buy 99% of the faulty units available on the selling platforms over that period also to repair and resell.
Now one would expect to see a lot of them do a round trip back to myself if all the theories you guys present were true/fact.
I have had 2 x units of my own throughout that period land back on my doorstep that were faulty and they were both a cap issue and nothing to do with the reball they had. The reball was still 100% ok.
Tell me this! I am one of a handful of people that actually reball here in Aus and now there may be 3 max.
Are the majority of the population just throwing them out? Or only 2% of them relisting them as faulty? i buy the majority of the faulty units and my markings are not present in them.
Which leads me to believe that my work is good or they just mysteriously go missing by the 1000's.

So are you saying that caps is the problem now?
 
Last edited:
if the 90nm is a ok chip. then why all fats with 90nm rsx come with swaped rsx from sony? with either 65nm or 40nm? woudnt be easier to clean the solder from the 90nm rsx reball and reflow back to mainboard? why they go so deep to replace smd resistors-capacitors power regulators and replace syscon as well? and finaly why cell isnt giving issues? as i said is getting hotter than rsx

Where did you See that Cell is geting Hoter than Rsx?? You Wrong!!! And actually in the PS3 Slims 21xx and 25xx the first with 40 nm rsx where Cell works Hotter than the Rsx in that models the Cell has Cracked Bga Soldering, I did reflow lots of them only in the Cpu and they Start to work again, also for the 2 Usbs fats ps3s the Cells works indeed at 80c but the Cell has no Bga Connecting to the motherboard in the middle Right where the silicon generates the most heat ~80c so the heat dont directly goes to bgas on Cell and ALSO Cell space has an big Hole on motherboard and all that should indeed decrease Temps on Cell Bgas while Rsx has Bgas that are right under the middle of the gpu which is the hottest area, Lmao Also Rsx has 4 Vrams modules and God only know how much heat they generate to the bgas under Rsx fiberglass, also more the silicon Size should absolutely influence on Bga Heating, as the Cell Silicon is small and Even in the 90nm model the silicon of Cell is smaller than the Gap/Hole in motherboard where Cell sits that absolutely will prevent Cell heat to Reach the bgas directly in pose to the Rsx as the RSX IS AN FURNACE LMAO.

Edit: The PS3S 4 Usbs, their Cells work at 74c 77c and if they Hit 80c fan from factory syscom goes to 50% (very fast, loud and high air pressure) again Cell works at ~ 75c on those first fats but if Rsx is at 81c the fan Dont increase even one Single Step and yes those gpus works above 80c on Gaming.

Edit 2: RSX is a FURNACE FOR IT'S BGA!!! While Cell Area has of Motherboard has an Hole on Motherboard so No Bgas directly receiving Cell Die Heat, but now why the Cells on the 21xx Slims has Bgas problems is hard very hard to guess but I always thought that they have too much small heatsink and if their Cell Hits 80c the fan syscom wont give a fart for Cell, It just let go higher than 80c without the fan speeding up.
 
Last edited:
Is not that difficult...
People are free to do what they want, but
If the goal is to "prove" somehow that the real issue is inevitably the "broken bumps" and reballing is pointless...
Theory alone is not enough. Do as @Victor Hugo Alvarez says: Find the reballed machines which failed, and investigate them and why they failed. With what symptoms.
See if they actually failed because of the "broken bumps" and count them. Compare them to the ones that didnt.
Are they frequent enough to justify the paranoia?

I believe the goal is to shed some light that it can be broken bumps as well as bga. It may be difficult to know % of each, but the fact that bump faults can easily happen is important to realize. Especially since they were developed at the time when other graphics chips had this issue too.

But there's no paranoia really.

About the supposed "40nm/65nm superiority"...
Yeah maybe you could make a prediction that a 40nm/65nm chip would probably last longer than a 90nm.
But is not so easy to predict which "board" would last longer overall.

The new chip may be a couple years newer, but the boards are still 16 years old and have many other components.
You dont know what will fail next, or if the "underfill" will have a chance to actually matter or not.

But I never denied that the board has 100 of other components that could fail. I said that in my own video as well. But the fact is, when faced with a 3034, even at the basic level you have a chance to put a cooler GPU into the machine which does not develop 3034 as easily as the dodgy 90nm. So why would you not prefer that ?


I just think that the truth must be somewhere in the middle...
Again I could be wrong like any human being. But I know I am right in asking.
@truemaster Didnt you have a board with a 40nm RSX? Did the "underfill" get its chance to matter in your board?
@squeept You mentioned a frankenstein board that came back for warranty. What was the story with that in the end?


His board actually had a temperature sensor error. And i was still learning to do it right at the time. That most likely had nothing to do with 40nm. squeept's board may have nothing to do with 65nm either . You are trying to pick individual cases. Why not ask about david booter's frankies instead? OR even Alty's frankies?
 
Did you even read the post? I never claimed to have reballed 90nm nor did I want to reball them. I am also not trying to dismiss your experience or efforts. I was asking for your rates and said that even if the units did not come back, it wouldn't necessarily make a conclusive evidence.

But I'm not here to enlighten or convince you of anything. I'm saying the video is going to present a good insight as to why it's not a good idea to reball processors that are prone to failures , since we have a better solution now. And this concerns primarily 90nm chips. Do you yourself still recommend customers to reball 90nm after seeing 3034?



Are you talking about BC units or all ps3s ? Again, just because the units didn't return doesn't mean the bumpgate fail was not going to happen at some point later. At least for BC consoles. It's not any voodoo really, there's plenty of research/information and the video will go over that. But in the end, everybody is free to make their own conclusions...
So are you saying that caps is the problem now?[/QUOTE]

Where did I say that it was just the caps that is the problem in general?
I stated that I had reballed units returned 7 odd years later that just needed caps as the reball was still 100% fine.

You guys just dont get it as you are not repairers or reballers,just readers of unproven crap on th net!
I have been reballing 90nm RSX's since 2009 and still do,Just because the "new" Frankenstein modification has landed a few month ago,does not mean that it is an essential and the only repair that should be carried out.
From my history reballs work and last. i have seen it many times

There is no statistical evidence nor data regarding PS3 RSX's bumps failing, proving that this issue is a big percentage of a problem,there is no data there ,it could be as little as 1% and as large as 99% but where is the statistical data? Any problem with a PS3 could be 1%, could be 99%. It all comes down to personal experience. No one here can nor will be able to provide a percentage rate to conclude that bump faults are the majority of RSX faults.

Hence my questions to you! no experience with it at all imo
 
Last edited:
So are you saying that caps is the problem now?

Where did I say that it was just the caps that is the problem in general?
I stated that I had reballed units returned 7 odd years later that just needed caps as the reball was still 100% fine.

You guys just dont get it as you are not repairers or reballers,just readers of unproven crap on th net!
I have been reballing 90nm RSX's since 2009 and still do,Just because the "new" Frankenstein modification has landed a few month ago,does not mean that it is an essential and the only repair that should be carried out.
From my history reballs work and last. i have seen it many times

I don't understand why do you keep bringing up your experience and get all defensive about it as if I personally accused you of not being experienced enough? I never said your experience doesn't matter ,but it also doesn't mean you can't be wrong about something. Experience is not immunity against making mistakes. I'm talking in general, not just in this case.

Actually I was only asking for some statistics out of your experience. Maybe provide some numbers. For instance, roughly how many units came back 5-7 years later after being reballed and only needed other maintenance ? What were those models? Did all of them have 90 nm or are you talking various models including slims ?

There is no statistical evidence nor data regarding PS3 RSX's bumps failing, proving that this issue is a big percentage of a problem,there is no data there ,it could be as little as 1% and as large as 99% but where is the statistical data? Any problem with a PS3 could be 1%, could be 99%. It all comes down to personal experience. No one here can nor will be able to provide a percentage rate to conclude that bump faults are the majority of RSX faults.

Hence my questions to you! no experience with it at all imo

Just to clarify, I talk about 90nm chips only. It's hard to know which ones you refer to . But assuming you mean the same ones, then what is your statistics to say that the majority of faults are not bumpgate faults after all? Instead of repeating time after time how much experience you have with reballing, why not show some personal data to conclude this ? And in fact, I don't even think I ever fully denied that bga faults happen too. What percentage? Indeed, we don't know 100%. But that again doesn't disprove that 90nm is more likely to develop bumpgate issue than other chips.
 
Last edited:
if the 90nm is a ok chip. then why all fats with 90nm rsx come with swaped rsx from sony? with either 65nm or 40nm? woudnt be easier to clean the solder from the 90nm rsx reball and reflow back to mainboard? why they go so deep to replace smd resistors-capacitors power regulators and replace syscon as well? and finaly why cell isnt giving issues? as i said is getting hotter than rsx
It doesnt work like that for them.
If you want the simple answer... The reason as always, indeed boils down to cost.

65nm is cheaper than 90nm, and 40nm is even cheaper. Thats why they redesign the chips in the first place...
They want to stop production of the old 90nm chip as soon as possible, and move on to the newer ones.

So they will use what is available for them at the time. For them the cheapest solution is to replace with their current production 65nm or 40nm, whatever they have. Is not economical for them to keep using 90nm... Maybe they did in the very early days but their incentive is to move on.
The newer chips were more available.
For them it was also cheaper to modify some ICs, put different thresholds to allow more unfiltered noise to enter the processors instead of touching the Tokins. Doesnt mean it was the best/more correct solution either... Is just what they did.

About why CELL normally doesnt get so many problems... Well first of all they do, especially on slim and superslim as @Victor Hugo Alvarez says.
But you are right that thankfully is not so frequent in the old boards.
Whether it is something fundamental about them or is simply because something else tend to fail first... Is a good question but there are a few things to consider. Some time ago I asked the same to @RIP-Felix and back then he gave a few reasons, none of them being necessarily "the bumps".
Among them for example:
Firstly that the CELL does not experience nearly as many thermal cycles as the RSX does. Its temperature is very very stable and almost does not fluctuate with the load, unlike RSX. Also the SYSCON is programmed to keep the CELL temperature stable at its operating target.
Second their design is quite different.
They have a square hole under them, this give more flexibility to it and greatly reduce the stress.
Third their heatspreader is different. It has no VRAM chips and it is designed in such a way that it provide support to the interposer all along the periphery unlike the RSX. With flexible silicone and not rigid cement.
Lastly we simply dont know... We cant know and we dont need to pretend know what is going on inside the chips... We can make guesses but ultimately the best we can do is look at the real world and deal with it.
 
cell and rsx 90 nm runs either at same temps or one can be higher than other depens on the game is running. and the story about bgas from 2005-2007 early 08 has been discased for varius uses. there underfill was faulty. but if you wanna be 100% sure then an xray will be tell for sure
 
I don't understand why do you keep bringing up your experience and get all defensive about it as if I personally accused you of not being experienced enough? I never said your experience doesn't matter ,but it also doesn't mean you can't be wrong about something. Experience is not immunity against making mistakes. I'm talking in general, not just in this case.

Actually I was only asking for some statistics out of your experience. Maybe provide some numbers. For instance, roughly how many units came back 5-7 years later after being reballed and only needed other maintenance ? What were those models? Did all of them have 90 nm or are you talking various models including slims ?



Just to clarify, I talk about 90nm chips only. It's hard to know which ones you refer to . But assuming you mean the same ones, then what is your statistics to say that the majority of faults are not bumpgate faults after all? Instead of repeating time after time how much experience you have with reballing, why not show some personal data to conclude this ? And in fact, I don't even think I ever fully denied that bga faults happen too. What percentage? Indeed, we don't know 100%. But that again doesn't disprove that 90nm is more likely to develop bumpgate issue than other chips.

Deadend Bro I think he @alty75 pretty much shared his professional analisys, if he said he reball lots of fats with 90nm Rsx and they work for long time with no deffect then he just show us his experience and he May need to bring some scientific text just to Fully prove as an fact that the 90nm Rsx rarely has bump failure and only reballing can solve the problem.

But Still @alty75 prove his point with his logical experience fixing bgas on Fat ps3s.
 
Last edited:
cell and rsx 90 nm runs either at same temps or one can be higher than other depens on the game is running. and the story about bgas from 2005-2007 early 08 has been discased for varius uses. there underfill was faulty. but if you wanna be 100% sure then an xray will be tell for sure

Mate did you Saw the giant text I write for you on why Cell has no Bga Problem on fats, cause youre telling the same things again, I Will say again Cell and Rsx ""Anatomy"" are very Diferent, Cell has no Bga under its silicon which prevent Cracking of any Bga that would be there, so Cell Theres no Bga under its silicon and theres a Hole where Cell Silicon Part of motherboard sits so thats weight alot of Why Cell has no Bga deffect on fats also AGAIN Cell on 4 usbs runs at 77c Max while Rsx can work up at ~85c or higher, Did you Ever used Webman Running an game????
If you wanna argue here you have to read what others answer to you, you repeating the same questions so sounds like you wont hear or you wont Care for answers.
 
Last edited:
yes i use webman and observe the temps and found as i said. althouh the other facts about cell may play a role here. but lets go on another famous to fail console the xbox 360 xenon and zephyr boards are 90nm cpu-gpu again gpu issues. although on this console gpu always run hotter, but on 2009-10 there was a 80nm elpis gpu that didnt suffer from defects. also there is a video from the manufacters that shows the issus is the underfill. and again same thing like ps3 reball or reflow was belived to be the cure. hell i have booted a ylod and rrod consoles by simply overheat them. the reball or reflow simply close the gap of the crached solderballs between die and substrate after all the crack is nanometers. now when thay will fail again is a mater how well the crack is cured. and how much the console will be used.
 
Back
Top