|
|
|
Official PS3 vs. Xbox 360 vs. N. Revolution
|
|
|
Grunt14
Junior Member
|
26. May 2005 @ 17:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
One last thing bout how you guys think the xbox controller is so good. Don't know bout you, but to me it looks like an adaptation of the dual shock controller. Must jus be me;)
I JUST WANT TO COPY DVD'S!, is that to much to ask for?
[img]http://www.blizzard.com/inblizz/fanart/ScreenShot.aspx?ImageIndex=01&Set=0"border=0>
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
00Gravity
Junior Member
|
26. May 2005 @ 17:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
It looks like a smaller original xbox controller to me. and i don't know if sony only does 15 million left, i just read it in the paper. maybe they only have 15 million to spend on the ps3, who knows, i just read it. and sony does have better games well exclusive games anyway.
I'm the tekken king I tell you, the kiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnggggggg!!!!!!
ps: I DON'T SOUND LIKE ZINN HE DOESN'T EVEN APPRECIATES THE THINGS SONY HAS DONE! STOP SAYING I SOUND LIKE HIM!!!!! PLEASE I BEG OF YOU! Plus, he's a tekken hater. DOWN WITH ZINN!!!
|
|
WVengence
Member
|
26. May 2005 @ 17:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
Grunt14:
"Do you really think they would use it or even suggest they were using it if they hadn't had it all ok'd? " Actually, yes. Both they and Toshiba are planning on doing just that. Without a common standard (Blue Ray or HD) both intend to move forward with their respective formats and effectively start a format war. I would fully expect Sony to use it especially if there is a format war because it means that they get their technology out there in peoples homes (with the expectation that if they have it, they will use it) and gain dominance with that particular format.
velascoj2:
While I agree that people failed to mention the 256K, it acts more like a L1 cache instead of L2 and not really even like that. While it is cache, it's not really L2 in that sense.
Now for a question that I haven't seen yet. Can anyone tell me how the hell Sony figures that the RSX is capable of 1.8 teraflops? Going through the specs (particularly the 2 Tflp rating) it seems that the cell is capable of 240 Gigaflops or something like that, while the RSX is listed at 1800 gigaflops... Now I'm not a GPU engineer, but if memory serves, the G70 that the RSX is based on is suppose to manage around 250 gflps based on the proposed hardware. I really don't get how the 1800 number came about and hoping that someone out there could clarify it...
|
|
00Gravity
Junior Member
|
26. May 2005 @ 18:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. May 2005 @ 19:45
|
|
velascoj2
Junior Member
|
26. May 2005 @ 21:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
But base on pc vs. console technology goes. the console version of those video cards are usually more advanced because they are custom for the particular consoles objectivity ( there is also a yearly cycle but I/m not going to elaborate). Kutaragi stated that what sony wanted out of ps3 was to be as close to a super computer on tflops performance due to that it would give the console an unprecedented amount of shader rendering capability that not even the xbox 360 can match. Thats why the cell was design mainly with one purpose comparing the multipurpose of xbox. if we follow that same logic when designing the rsx gpu then we should come to a conclusion that the rsx internal design will be very different that the home incarnation. It was stated several times that that special gpu was specificaly made to use the full performance of the cell chip and that to enhance the teraflops shader capacit( which is not the of Killzone 2 can be in fact a reality due to the shader rendering power that the ps3 was mainly design for ( but until all specs are fully disclosed I will have not have a dam clue as to how they get those numbers) main focus of the xbox) Think of it as that the video quality y. And since sony refused to fully detail the rsx specs it will be very difficult to have a valid the pc version assuming that it is eloper friendly as possible
|
|
Grunt14
Junior Member
|
26. May 2005 @ 21:49 |
Link to this message
|
Damn velascoj2, can you do my homework coz you my friend are hardcore. Where the hell do you come up with these facts?
Quote:
Actually, yes. Both they and Toshiba are planning on doing just that.
Well in that case, i think it's a good plan. To strive to be different. And imagine the possible games to come out with 54gigs of space to work with!
I JUST WANT TO COPY DVD'S!, is that to much to ask for?
[img]http://www.blizzard.com/inblizz/fanart/ScreenShot.aspx?ImageIndex=01&Set=0"border=0>
|
|
dammsaint
Newbie
|
26. May 2005 @ 22:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
velascoj2 as i see you read carefully the article, but someguys are wrong about the cell procesor, the cell has 7 spe, those are like the pentium 3 hypertreading technology that has 2, the cell is not 7 processors runing at the shame time as everybody think, the xbox has 3 phisicaly procesors, lets stop this fight about it, anyone of us are no playing with ps3 or xbox 360, a lot of people gonna buy both consoles (i will).
some reason with i will buy both consoles:
1- im the owner of a games & computers store on my country (dominican republic)
2- a future ninja gaiden, dead or alive, halo, forza motorsport.
3- devil may cry, gran turismo,metal gear
actuallity i love the xbox, but i dont now about the future until i get the 360 or ps3.
excuse me for my bad english, my native language is spanish.
|
|
dammsaint
Newbie
|
26. May 2005 @ 22:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
Cell V's x86
This looks like a battle no one can win. x86 has won all of it's battles because when Intel and AMD pushed the x86 architecture they managed to produce very high performance processors and in their volumes they could sell them for low prices. When x86 came up against faster RISC competitors it was able to use the very same RISC technologies to close the speed gap to the point where there was no significant advantage going with RISC.
Three of what were once important RISC families have also been dispatched to the great Fab in the sky. Even Intel's own Itanium has been beaten out of the low / mid server space by the Opteron. Sun have been burned as well, they cancelled the next in the UltraSPARC line, bought in radical new designs and now sell the Opteron which threatened to eclipse their low end. Only POWER seems to be holding it's own but that's because IBM has the resources to pour into it to keep it competitive and it's in the high end market which x86 has never managed to penetrate and may not scale to.
To Intel and AMD's processors Cell presents a completely different kind of competition to what has gone before. The speed difference is so great that nothing short of a complete overhaul of the x86 architecture will be able to bring it even close performance wise. Changes are not unheard of in x86 land but neither Intel or AMD appear to be planning a change even nearly radical enough to catch up. That said Intel recently gained access to many of Nvidia's patents [Intel+Nvidia] and are talking about having dozens of cores per chip so who knows what Santa Clara are brewing. [Project Z]
Multicore processors are coming to the x86 world soon from both Intel and AMD [MultiCore], but high speed x86 CPUs typically have high power requirements. In order to have 2 Opterons on a single core AMD have had to reduce their clock rate in order to keep them from requiring over a hundred watts, Intel are doing the same for the Pentium 4. The Pentium-M however is a (mostly) high performance low power part and this will go into multi-core devices much easier than the P4, expect to see chips with 2 cores arriving followed by 4 & 8 core designs over the next few years.
Cell will accelerate many commonly used applications by ludicrous proportions compared to PCs. Intel could put 10 cores on a chip and they'll match neither it's performance or price. The APUs are dedicated vector processors, x86 are not. The x86 cores will no doubt include the SSE vector units but these are no match for even a single APU.
Then there's the parallel nature of Cell. If you want more computing power simply add another Cell, the OS will take care of distributing the software Cells to the second or third etc processor. Try that on a PC, yes many OSs will support multiple processors but many applications do not and will need to be modified accordingly - a process which will take many, many years. Cell applications will be written to be scalable from the very beginning as that's how the system works.
Cell may be vastly more powerful than existing x86 processors but history has shown the PC's ability to overcome even vastly better systems. Being faster alone is not enough to topple the PC.
Cell V's Software
The main problem with competing with the PC is not the CPU, it's the software. A new CPU no matter how powerful, is no use without software. The PC has always won because it's always had plenty of software and this has allowed it to see off it's competitors no matter how powerful they were or the advantages they had at the time. The market for high performance systems is very limited, it's the low end systems which sell.
Cell has the power and it will be cheap. But can it challenge the PC without software? The answer to this question would have been simple once, but PC market has changed over time and for a number of reasons Cell is now a threat:
The first reason is Linux. Linux has shown that alternative operating systems can break into the PC software market against Windows, the big difference with Linux though is that it is cross platform. If the software you need runs on linux, switching hardware platforms is no problem as much of the software will still run on different CPUs.
The second reason is cost, other platforms have often used expensive custom components and have been made in smaller numbers. This has put their cost above that of PCs, putting them at immediate disadvantage. Cell may be expensive initially but once Sony and Toshiba's fabs ramp up it will be manufactured in massive volumes forcing the prices down, the fact it's going into the PS3 and TVs is an obvious help for getting the massive volumes that will be required. IBM will also be making Cells and many companies use IBM's silicon process technologies, if truly vast numbers of Cells were required Samsung, Chartered, Infineon and even AMD could manufacture them (provided they had a license of course).
The third reason is power, the vast majority of PCs these don't need the power they provide, Cell will only accentuate this because it will be able to off load most of the intensive stuff to the APUs. What this means is that if you do need to run a specific piece of software you can emulate it. This would have been impossibly slow once but most PC CPUs are already more than enough and with today's advanced JIT based emulators you might not even notice the difference.
The reason many high end PCs are purchased is to accelerate many of the very tasks the Cell will accelerate. You'll also find these power users are more interested in the tools and not the platform, apart from Games these are not areas over which Microsoft has any hold. Given the sheer amount of acceleration a Cell (or set of Cells) can deliver I can see many power users being happy to jump platforms if the software they want is ported or can be emulated.
Cell is going to be cheap, powerful, run many of the same operating systems and if all else fails it can emulate a PC will little noticeable difference, software and price will not be a problem. Availability will also not be a problem, you can buy playstations anywhere. This time round the traditional advantages the PC has held over other systems will not be present, they will have no advantage in performance, software or price. That is not to say that the Cell will walk in and just take over, it's not that simple.
|
|
00Gravity
Junior Member
|
26. May 2005 @ 23:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
Kutaragi and his team set out to create a different future, well we see how ell it's going,
but anyway music, movies, communication, and gaming all in one. and here we are complaining. looking for behind the scenes. directors cut. extra footage.
but back on subject, i think that sony was showing all cgi during e3 because, sony and ms both used the unreal engine 3, ms has more memory, but sony has better graphics. bullshit. the 360 showed a cut scene from gears of war. and it looked like "real time" on the ps3.
I'm not trying to bring down the ps3, but i just find it hard to believe that the ps3's real time looks like the 360's cgi's. it's unbelievable. straight up outrageous.
What's up with sony and ducks. I thought it was quite funny when they showed the ducks though. but they had a little to many. does sony have a fetish for yellow ducks?
what was the reason of square enix going over to ms anyway. so this whole think we're discussing is basically about graphics. and who knows what the 360's graphics are capable of. they have a custom gpu. ms may come out with a game later next year with brain tearing graphics. or they may keep the same graphics.
who knows.
Last week, the Mainichi Daily News quoted Sony Computer Entertainment officials as saying the PlayStation 3 would be priced at under 50,000 yen ($465.58). Now it appears that the console may be even cheaper when it goes on sale next year.
Today, Japanese Web site Impress PC Watch reported that SCE has told its business partners that the PS3 will be under 40,000 yen ($370) at launch. The news has spurred speculation that the company might launch the machine with the same price it set for the PlayStation and PlayStation 2. Both machines were priced at 39,800 yen ($368) when they launched in 1994 and 2000, respectively.
Sony's PS3 will be competing with Microsoft's Xbox 360 and Nintendo's Revolution in the next-generation console wars. When it launched in Japan in 2002, Microsoft's current-generation Xbox was priced at 34,800 yen ($322). The company has been shaving down the console's cost since then, and it currently sells at 17,640 yen ($163).
|
|
Alien13
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
26. May 2005 @ 23:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
Whats a teraflop?
|
|
Grunt14
Junior Member
|
26. May 2005 @ 23:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. May 2005 @ 19:46
|
|
00Gravity
Junior Member
|
26. May 2005 @ 23:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
lol!!! i almost fell over a chair.
*chewing* this imos pizza is great
*clears throat* anyway, until sony releases more info, the 360 has won it for me, but then again, sony does have those exclusive games, i mean, i'm getting them both anyway but just in case i change my mind and get something else.
the ps3's Cell Processor contains:
Contains 8 SPUs each containing a 128 entry 128-bit register file and 256KB Local Store
Contains 64-bit Power ArchitectureTM with VMX that is a dual thread SMT design
views system memory as a 10-way coherent threaded machine
2.5MB of on Chip memory (512KB L2 and 8 * 256KB)
234 million transistors
Prototype die size of 221mm2
Fabricated with 90nanometer (nm) SOI process technology
Cell is a modular architecture and floating point calculation capabilities can be adjusted by increasing or reducing the number of SPUs
Cell is a Broadband Architecture
Compatible with 64b Power Architecture
SPU is a RISC architecture with SIMD organization and Local Store
128+ concurrent transactions to memory per processor
High speed internal element interconnect bus performing at 96B/cycle
Cell is a Real-Time Architecture
Resource allocation (for Bandwidth Management)
Locking caches (via Replacement Management Tables)
Virtualization support with real time response characteristics across multiple operating systems running simultaneously
Cell is Security Enabled Architecture
SPUs dynamically configurable as secure processors for flexible security programming
Cell is a Confluence of New Technologies
Virtualization techniques to support conventional and real time applications
Autonomic power management features
Resource management for real time human interaction
Smart memory flow controllers (DMA) to sustain bandwidth
The Cell is a microprocessor design being developed by IBM in cooperation with Toshiba and Sony . The Cell chip is intended to be scalable from handheld devices to mainframe computers by utilizing parallel processing . Sony is using the chip in their PlayStation 3 game console to be released in spring 2006 .
While the Cell chip can have a number of different configurations, the basic configuration is composed of one "Processing Element" ("PE"), and eight "Synergistic Processing Units" ("SPU"). The PE is based on the POWER Architecture , basis of their existing POWER line and related to the PowerPC used by Apple Computer and others. The PE is not the primary processor for the system, but acts as a controller for the other eight SPUs, which handle most of the computational workload.
Each SPU is a VLIW 128-bit vector processor with 256 KB of local high speed memory , which is also visible to the PE to be loaded with data and programs as needed. The SPU's memory is also accessible from other SPUs, allowing data to be processed by one SPU and then handed off to the next at very high speed. In general use the system will load the SPUs with small programs, chaining the SPUs together to handle each step in a complex operation. For instance, a set top box could load up programs for reading a DVD, video and audio decoding, and display, and the data would be passed off from SPU to SPU until finally ending up on the TV. Each SPU gives 32 GFLOPS of performance, thereby giving the SPUs 256 GFLOPS of performance. Performance of the PE's VMX unit is unclear, but should be around 32 GFLOPS in addition to the SPUs.
In some ways the Cell system resembles early Seymour Cray designs in reverse. The famed CDC 6600 used a single very fast processor to handle the mathematical calculations, while a series of ten slower systems were given smaller programs to keep the main memory fed with data. In the Cell the problem has been reversed, reading the data is no longer the difficult problem due to the complex encodings used in industry; today the problem is efficiently decoding that data into an ever-less-compressed version as quickly as possible.
In other ways the Cell resembles a modern desktop computer on a single chip. Modern graphics cards have multiple elements very similar to the SPU's, known as vertex shader units, with an attached high speed memory. Programs, known as shaders , are downloaded onto the units to process the basic geometry fed from the computer's CPU , apply styles and display it. The main differences are that the Cell's SPUs appear to be much more general purpose than the average graphics card shader units, and the ability to chain the SPUs under program control offers considerably more flexibility, allowing the Cell to handle graphics, sound, or anything else. Given that the Cell is intended to be used in the PlayStation, the idea of a CPU+graphics card combination that is the fastest in the world is not entirely surprising.
Cell allows for multiple processing cores to be put onto one die, and the patent showed four cores on one die, called the "Broadband Engine", potentially giving over 1 Teraflops theoretical performance. The companies designing the chip have claimed they intend to scale performance for various uses, both low-end and high-end, by varying the number of cores on the chip, the number of units in a single core, and by linking multiple chips to each other via network or memory bus.
On the 17th May, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment confirmed the spec of the Cell processor that would be shipping in the forthcoming Playstation 3 console. This Cell will have one processing unit on the core, with seven SPEs and one SPE reserved for redundancy. It will be clocked at 3.2 GHz , although in lab conditions the processor apparently has been clocked successfully up to 5.2 GHz. The chips are being fabricated using IBM's 90 nanometre SOI ( Silicon on insulator ) process, at its fab in East Fishkill , New York . Full production may switch at some later date to use a 65-nm or 45-nm process jointly developed by IBM and Toshiba at their Nagasaki fabrication plant. Sony currently is also using its 90-nm process to produce the integrated GS/EE for the PSX *, the Japan-only combination PlayStation 2/ DVR unit. (*This usage of "PSX" is distinct from the commonly used informal designation of the original PlayStation.)
Similar multiple-core designs include Sun Microsystems ' MAJC (pronounced "magic"). The first MAJC chip was originally designed for multimedia processing, although Sun have subsequently repositioned the MAJC chip as a high-end graphics processor for workstations. In addition, Stanford University 's Imagine Stream Processor shares a similar conceptual underpinning.
next i will be releasing info on the 360
|
|
theLogue
Suspended permanently
|
27. May 2005 @ 00:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
uhhh..your stupidity kills me 00gravity..you say "next i will be releasing info on the xbox"..blah blah ..as if you know something that everyone else doesnt..what a wasted post...
|
|
00Gravity
Junior Member
|
27. May 2005 @ 01:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
ask, around, i've posted up so much stuff, i can get something that noone else knows
believe me, i can
|
|
Grunt14
Junior Member
|
27. May 2005 @ 01:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey 00Gravity, i can see your head from here, who do you think you are?. Bill Gates brown nose assistant?
I JUST WANT TO COPY DVD'S!, is that to much to ask for?
[img]http://www.blizzard.com/inblizz/fanart/ScreenShot.aspx?ImageIndex=01&Set=0"border=0>
|
|
00Gravity
Junior Member
|
27. May 2005 @ 02:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
no, i just know a lot of people and do a lot of research, and you should be booted for insulting me. but i won't let your insulence cause disruption to my conversations and replys. i'm saying if u wan't info, i can find it
|
|
Alien13
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. May 2005 @ 02:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
ok. can u get me sum info on the psp having somethin to do with the xbox 360. Like what can you do with it, like play games from psp on xbox 360?
|
|
WVengence
Member
|
27. May 2005 @ 03:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
Alien13: Nothing like games or anything. The idea is that you could connect the PSP and stream music/video/pictures from it to play on the 360. Same with the Ipod. So if you have a particularly good playlist that you like, you can just plug in your PSP and run your playlist in a game instead of what the developers have. Also, a teraflop is 1 trillion floating point operations. a Floating point operation is a basis for 3D games and once upone a time, was good for measuring how something could handle 3d games. These days, things are alot more muddled, but it's still used as a reference.
velascoj2: What I'm figuring is as follows... Basically, working with the 51 billion dot figure and assuming that they are going to 24 pixel pipes (The 6800 used 16. Technically, they 'might be able to do 32 pipes with the 90nm, but that would be a GREAT stretch). Now, 51 billion divided by the 550Mhz that it will run at comes out with 93 ops per cycle... (92.72727272...) Assuming that they use the 6800 technology, then they would produce 4 vector floating ops per cycle, leaving 372, which you would double for Multiple/Add operations... for 744 Glops... If they managed the 5 vector Flops (which I don't believe I have heard of Nvidia doing) then that would leave them at 460, doubling to 960 GFlops. All of this is assuming that the Cell isn't adding anything. If the 51 Billion dots was figured witht the Cell adding to it, those numbers would plummet drastically...
This doesn't touch on shader ability, which is more based on the pipelines than the GPU performance. The listed number of 136 per cycle seems quite reasonable (and also leads to the 24 pixel pipeline theory)
Adding up the numbers in the best case scenario (above), I can still only account for half of what Sony says the RSX can do. This is assuming that they can squeeze out the Vector5 stuff giving them a 25% improvement over the PC version.
Damnsaint: That was a good article on the Cell... Also, where are you in the Dominican? I'm down there now and again on business (Mainly Santa Domingo and Puerto Plata)...
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. May 2005 @ 03:56
|
|
velascoj2
Junior Member
|
27. May 2005 @ 04:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
00Gravity, Thank you for the info. and guys common hes trying to bring info that others may not know. I personally enjoyed some of the details. Keep it up. For the other two that reply to the post, well ignore it and move on. No offense Grunt14, The louge, your replies were out of place. Give the kid a break will you. It is repugnant replies to his post that make him angry. But if that is the intention intended, then its you personal vendetta.
|
|
velascoj2
Junior Member
|
27. May 2005 @ 04:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
Wvengence: Thanks for the post. Just wandering how diferent the gpu design is going to be from 6800 and how the integration of cell with the gpu will work on a realisct enviroment for developers to tap into the power of the system. Man I remember when sega tried to make Daytona usa for saturn. Developer team "am3 or 2" went through hell in order to untap the power of a system ( two sh-2 processors, they should had use the sh-3) that was not optimized for the perfomance looking for. At the end a dissaponting when comparing to model 2 arcade base daytona.
|
|
rap4life
Suspended permanently
|
27. May 2005 @ 05:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
don't mess with my tekken, talk about anything else, but not tekken. you can say what ever you want about me or even my family, but not tekken
___________________________________________________
sorry, i dont like fighting games.
|
|
rap4life
Suspended permanently
|
27. May 2005 @ 06:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
is sony still losing money? any one knows.
with 17 million the PS3 should take over half of that.
|
|
jmcmanu
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. May 2005 @ 06:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
Xbox will have better games, end of story. Microsoft's strength has always been software, and they've made it easy for talented people to make great games. From what I've read, the PS3's cell will be a bitch to make games for. Microsoft has been talking about "procedural rendering" which will enable them to get the most out of their hardware, which may possible already be more powerful than the PS3 anyway. Oooooh, 2 gigaflops. Yeah, that's what Sony wants you to think. Microsoft's processor is more general purpose for a reason. A large part of the work a console processor does is NOT floating point operations. Sony's processor may be too specific, even hurting its performance in areas like gaming. The Xbox graphics card will be better as well. So, sony's nvidia card is 50 mhz faster? Xbox's card uses completely new technology, developed by the clever guys at ati, that unifies vertex and pixel shaders. It has twice as many pipelines as well. Also the xbox 360 has like 5 times the memory bandwidth of the ps3. Just look at the games, and remember, this is only the beginning.
BTW:
- Saint's Row will blow GTA away. Read an in-depth review.
- Metal Gear Solid 3 sucked. The only way MGS4 will be decent is if
the whole idea is redone.
- Sony's stuff at E3 was obviously prerendered cgi bs. Remember the
PS2 tech demos?
- Killzone sucked and so will Killzone 2.
- Gears of War will be awesome. Read a preview and you will understand.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. May 2005 @ 06:55
|
|
rap4life
Suspended permanently
|
27. May 2005 @ 07:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
BTW:
- Saint's Row will blow GTA away. Read an in-depth review.
- Metal Gear Solid 3 sucked. The only way MGS4 will be decent is if
the whole idea is redone.
- Sony's stuff at E3 was obviously prerendered cgi bs. Remember the
PS2 tech demos?
- Killzone sucked and so will Killzone 2.
- Gears of War will be awesome. Read a preview and you will understand.
___________________________________________________________________
you for got
Ghost recon 3
halo 3
fable 2
elder scrolls 4
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
2 product reviews
|
27. May 2005 @ 11:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
