|
|
|
Nvideas rsx pipelines vs 360 ATI pipelines 360 core vs ps3 cell
|
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
6. December 2005 @ 13:27 |
Link to this message
|
Dude about the processor thingy, the xbox 360 processor can handle the physics of the game much better (as physics performance is 70% GENERAL PERFORMANCE as im sure you already know quite well), yes it wont affect it graphically as well BUT because the performance will be increased, they could use the extra fps to increase the graphical settings of the game to MAKE THE GRAPHICS LOOK BETTER. so they could increase the settings on heavy physics related things e.g. certain geometry settings, world detail settings, motion and motion blurs, they could make those plus some other physics things look better, so the physics detail settings in a game would be higher than the PS3's.
Dude SHADER OPS DOES NOT AFFECT GRAPHICS, it affects how the shader operations work on a game, to make particle effects and shadows RUN FASTER in a game (it doesnt make them look better, as its THE GAME AND ITS ENGINE that does that), higher shader ops doesnt improve graphics, they can just use its extra fps to increas the settings, but in this case even the 360's Frame rate for particle effects will be incredibly high even on full settings, so the shader thing doesnt matter, HAH!. plus Nvidia cards have always (on PC and console) been able to run shadows and detailed particles a little faster than ATI cards, always, didnt you know that, 6800GT and upwards have also got the ultra shadow 2 tech, which makes shadows run quicker still, (but shader ops aint that far ahead of 360's, though i do admit that they are better - PLUS PIPELINES ARNT USED FOR ONLY SHADER OPERATIONS, for ALL other things that use/go through pipelines the 360 is WAY better than PS3 because it has 2x more, and in this case the numbers actually mean a lot.)
plus have you totally forgot about all what i said about PAPALLEL PROCESSING. Yes you have havent you. WHY O WHY. THAT ALONE IS A SUBSTANTIAL ADVANTAGE FOR the 360 card. (AND i know i got the name wrong, its the processor thats called the xenon, not the GPU, so previously where i said xenon and referring to the GPU i didnt mean the processor, u now know what i really meant.)
The parallel processing for the 360 card is better than it on the RSX, which is lovely for the 360 card (whatever name it has?).
and the unified shader architecture thingy, well the RSX one is FAR LESS DEVELOPED THAN THE 360's, as Nvidia have only just decided upon it, and origionally they said that the USA if used on the RSX will not make much of a difference performance wise, it will on the 360's card though, a lovely one, along with its superoir parallel processing (which is how the core renders and displays its data if you didnt know, - the way it renders all the details is a better way, not faster as the RSX has a higher clockspeed, but a better way of doing that compared to the RSX's 'not as good' parallel processing) and as i said, ALL NVIDIAS PC cards rival the ATI's brute clock speeds (for PC cards) BY USI(NG GOOD PARALLEL PROCESSING, the RSX has the same type but the ATI's is EVEN BETTER (by a lot in the console card only).
you ignored half of my last points in ur last post dude, why did u do that. overall the 360 card is a *****TAD***** better than the RSX, jeesss.
this is funny - dont u find it funny (be honest)
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
6. December 2005 @ 13:46 |
Link to this message
|
Truthman, i have a MASSIVE headach today, i'm goign to reply to your post fully later on.
Quote:
Dude SHADER OPS DOES NOT AFFECT GRAPHICS, it affects how the shader operations work on a game, to make particle effects and shadows RUN FASTER in a game (it doesnt make them look better, as its THE GAME AND ITS ENGINE that does that), higher shader ops doesnt improve graphics
I ment actual opperations per second. If the pipelines are able to produse that many sops, it will obviosly be able to produce that many ops. Therefore making the rsx powerfull.
Quote:
the 360 is WAY better than PS3 because it has 2x more, and in this case the numbers actually mean a lot.)
by 2x, you better not be talking about pipelines, i already said that in first post. well the pipeline for the rsx is almost 3 times more powerfull. HA..ur right this is fun =D not to fun when your brain in awfull awfull pain. :'(
the rsx is a ***********tad*********better than the ati.......
ps3:GPU-24 pipelines producing 5.7 ops each
-700mhz ram.
-On par with geforce 7800
-rsx at 550mhz
-rsx is 1.8 tflops
ps3:CPU-Cell processor
-total of 8 spe's running at 3.2 ghz.
Cell is 218GFLOPS.
Computer Hp pavilion a700n
448 mb of ram(upgrading it to 1gb)
amd3000+
(going to have geforce 7800 soon)
Currently(a shitty intergrated via/s3)
Information about ps3's rsx is on:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/265429
Information about The xbox360 and ps3's gpu
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423
|
|
Reasons?
Suspended permanently
|
6. December 2005 @ 13:48 |
Link to this message
|
That's damn enough, don't you have to finish your algebra homework before flaming each other? Hmmm, for all I know, assuming either of you could possibly beold enough to be in algebra may just be a compliment.
Serioulsy, no links, no proof, no analysis, you got jack shit. Only someone as dumb as either of you would believe you. Here is how a real post shoudl go, not a mile long of flaming with 0 evidence -----
Here is an introduction to the Xenos GPU: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453&p=7
It also explains the unfiied architecture right away.
Here is the rest: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453&p=8
We can see anandtech is trying to bring out the cache starvation even inside the Xbox 360, but has worded it as not to offend Microsoft. The modeling engine make sit inherently possible, but not pefectly. The volume of vertex cache will apparently be insufficient for the 48 pipelines. This is a GPU discussion so I will only say that I'm surprised they did the same to the GPU, but at least it's not as bad as a 6 threaded CPU sharing a couple MBs.
So without even seeing the PS3s goods yet, we can already tell that the Xenos may not live up to it's spec sheet because of cachign bottle necks, if you explre anandtech and a few other sites, you'll find everyone bitchign abou the overall lack of cache in the entire system, which can prevent it form living up to its specs.
Here is an article on the PS3's RSX, keep in mind that Nvidia hasn't given up any significant specs like ATI has, and that is likely because Sony has decided to deviate entirely from the G70 architecture, rendering all current specs and comparison junk. I agree that SOny most liley has Nvidia working on a custom architecture only only related to G70- http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453&p=9
There really isn't anythign out yet for the RSX, and again, I'll reitierate that Sony has probably deviated forom G70, and is planning a surprise. The current RSX specs are just to keeps kids from whining, hell we don't even have a clock rate for the PS3's GPU yet.
Even when compared (Read the damn articles, then see the conclusion page.) the GPUs a very similar in performance, but PS3 at this point will have a different GPU than the speculated G70 bloodline.
GPU comparisons as of right now could be 180 degrees form the actual results. Here is their conclusion form what we have (This article is odl but relevant) ---- http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453&p=13
At this point in time, we can ask ourselves these two questions:
If Xbox 360 has already been released, and PS3 is still under developement for a number of months, will Sony still release the PS3 with an inferior GPU? The answer is absolutely not, a retard knows better.
Second, given that "NVIDIA has mentioned that by the time the RSX launches we will have a faster GPU on the PC...", how much faster will that GPU be? Well, let's analyze it a little (Speculate, this could be wrong.) They said "by the time the RSX launches" well, if that launch is 6 or more months away, would it be probably they ALREADY have a faster GPU for PS3? The answer is no, probablity coming form the mind frame and fast paced mind set of this industry would tel you that Nvidia would think at best a month or two ahead of the PS3, not 6. Therefore it is easy to conclude the RSX has to be faster than the 7800 GTX OC 512, which is an amazing recently released GPU from Nvidia, that is more powerful than the Xbox 360's Xenon GPU.
Any comparison is pure speculation because we just don't have info on the RSX, but only true idiocy can impede the conlusion: RSX.
Fanboy is a term used to describe someone who is utterly devoted to a single subject. This generally is followed by the devotion and support even when proved wrong.
Anecdotal, by my definition, it's the way too many people here think. It's also all the evidence you have.
Xbox 360 GT: NEGATIVE 273K
My advice: Wait for PS3.
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
6. December 2005 @ 14:22 |
Link to this message
|
?reasons i was using anantech to on my signiture, but not all those pages.
well said ..good job ..lol
I base all your facts are right..and this for truthman.
Quote:
Therefore it is easy to conclude the RSX has to be faster than the 7800 GTX OC 512, which is an amazing recently released GPU from Nvidia, that is more powerful than the Xbox 360's Xenon GPU.
Well since the rsx is very similar to the 7800, wouldnt that make rsx better than the xenon gpu?
?reasons:
Quote:
That's damn enough, don't you have to finish your algebra homework before flaming each other? Hmmm, for all I know, assuming either of you could possibly beold enough to be in algebra may just be a compliment.
On the first page post i have on this thread, i used informaiton from that from the same website you used........I'm sure truthman did too.
Truthman you still think rsx is worsE?
ps3:GPU-24 pipelines producing 5.7 ops each
-700mhz ram.
-On par with geforce 7800
-rsx at 550mhz
-rsx is 1.8 tflops
ps3:CPU-Cell processor
-total of 8 spe's running at 3.2 ghz.
Cell is 218GFLOPS.
Computer Hp pavilion a700n
448 mb of ram(upgrading it to 1gb)
amd3000+
(going to have geforce 7800 soon)
Currently(a shitty intergrated via/s3)
Information about ps3's rsx is on:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/265429
Information about The xbox360 and ps3's gpu
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
6. December 2005 @ 21:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
The RSX will not have pipelines exclusively for pixel shading, nor will it have a unified shader architecture. (I think you tried to say that, kookoo.)
Also, an Nvidia spokesperson in one of the Playstation Magazine issues also stated that the RSX and the GeForce 7800 share a lot of the same inner workings.
This would lead to the first conclusion in the AnandTech article that:
"The most likely explanation is attributed to nothing more than clock speed. Remember that the RSX, being built on a 90nm process, is supposed to be running at 550MHz - a 28% increase in core clock speed from the 110nm GeForce 7800 GTX. The clock speed increase alone will account for a good boost in GPU performancewhich would make the RSX ?more powerful? than the G70. "
The article also mentioned that the 360's GPU can still perform as well as the RSX without the same clock speed. The conclusion also ended on the note of the 360's GPU having an advantage in "the majority of games" because they aren't "geometry limited"
Therefore (kookoo and truthman), you cannot possibly conclude which GPU is better because the RSX isn't completed. At the present time, with the known specs, the RSX doesn't appear at all to be superior than the 360's GPU. In fact, the general notion is more the opposite.
|
|
Reasons?
Suspended permanently
|
7. December 2005 @ 05:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
Given that the RSX will be more powefufl thant the 7800GTX: Has anyone compared the 7800GTX to the Xenos?
Fanboy is a term used to describe someone who is utterly devoted to a single subject. This generally is followed by the devotion and support even when proved wrong.
Anecdotal, by my definition, it's the way too many people here think. It's also all the evidence you have.
Xbox 360 GT: NEGATIVE 273K
My advice: Wait for PS3.
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
7. December 2005 @ 09:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
Most of the Xenos vs RSX speculation is based off of a lot of 7800GTX nubers. (Including your AnandTech article)
The new GTX OC512 is basically a regular GTX with a higher clock speed (at 550mhz, just like the RSX) and 512 mb of RAM.
Or am I missing something important here?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 7. December 2005 @ 09:28
|
|
Reasons?
Suspended permanently
|
7. December 2005 @ 13:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
You're missing the importance of the RSX being G70 architecture.
Fanboy is a term used to describe someone who is utterly devoted to a single subject. This generally is followed by the devotion and support even when proved wrong.
Anecdotal, by my definition, it's the way too many people here think. It's also all the evidence you have.
Xbox 360 GT: NEGATIVE 273K
My advice: Wait for PS3.
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
7. December 2005 @ 14:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
The RSX might have newer architecture than what the 7800 series is using.
|
|
Reasons?
Suspended permanently
|
7. December 2005 @ 19:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
That has already been stated in detail, but I doubt it will go any further than G71, which is Nvidia's latest and greatest $600+ card's architecture in early 2006.
I really don't give a damn if it is G70, or a 7800 is just stuck in their, the dedicated nature of the hardware and sole dev direction will yeild amazing results all throughout the years, especially offloading mega tasks to the cell.
Fanboy is a term used to describe someone who is utterly devoted to a single subject. This generally is followed by the devotion and support even when proved wrong.
Anecdotal, by my definition, it's the way too many people here think. It's also all the evidence you have.
Xbox 360 GT: NEGATIVE 273K
My advice: Wait for PS3.
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
7. December 2005 @ 21:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
agreed.
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
9. December 2005 @ 07:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
reasons, i dont use links to websites etc because i dont need to, ive already looked at practically all the useful sites giving info on GPU's, and ive read the anandtech one 2 times.
by using what I ACTUALLY KNOW (which i know lots of) and the stuff the sites said i can *merge* it all info larger better posts instead of having fragmented infomation, which it what you get by posting your stuff with links, its more inefficient and people dont think you know that much.
i know bloody loads, and its technically correct (so IT ISNT WRONG).
by the way the 360 GPU is a *weebit* better than the RSX. (lol we are gonna say that ours are a little bit better than the other for ages aint we). technically the ati card is better, stiop saying that the RSX is better, (though it still is a very good card)
kookoo just acknowledge that BOTH cards are extremely powerful, because they both are.
plus, i love hardware and shit, i dont just care about the games like many other morons do, i like to see the hardware and the technicality of everything put into place and working. i like the more powerful stuff as it has better expanions to tweak the game settings and have more fun by testing its performance vs quality of the graphics (but in consoles the develpers set the game detail's permanently and they cant be changed, which sucks i think, they should give all gamers room to maneuver, although people who dont know jack shit about game details, wont have a clue what anisotrpoic filtering, or anti-aliasing or HDR is and what they do, which in this case is better for them if the setails are locked and cant be changed, but really they should just leave them alone if they dont know what they are doing).
Plus reasons, WTF r u on about, the GTX 512 is no way as fast as the Xenon GPU you TWIT. the younger generation X1800XT PE (soon to be released) will be the rival of the GTX 512. and that is less powerful than the xenon GPU, which is a generation ahead of the latest PC cards. plus its 90nm process meant that its a incredibly highly overclockable card (X1800XT and X1800XT PE), so it can be overclocked A LOT so it wont just beat the 512 at stock it but it will OWN its ass when compared to a OC'd 512 GTX, which can't be overclocked as much.
you dont know sh#t about what u r saying.
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. December 2005 @ 09:00
|
|
Reasons?
Suspended permanently
|
9. December 2005 @ 08:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
There should really be an age requirement on AD, that way, you have poeple who know what they are talking about, discussing with other people who know what they are talkign about, or at least know that they don't know, and then listen.
I'll reiterate the fact that no one gives a rat's ass what you say, because you never have a source, except telling us you are the all-knowing god of everything. If anyone is litening (laughing not included) to the "truthman" let me know.
Fanboy is a term used to describe someone who is utterly devoted to a single subject. This generally is followed by the devotion and support even when proved wrong.
Anecdotal, by my definition, it's the way too many people here think. It's also all the evidence you have.
Xbox 360 GT: NEGATIVE 273K
My advice: Wait for PS3.
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
9. December 2005 @ 09:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
look dude believe what you want, read what i say, then go find out some info on it, ill be waiting twit, as i already know what u will say, (but now that ive wrote this to you, you will purposely look for something that says different so you can fight back at my points that were against urs), if you do that is very hypocritical. so id reccoment not, just be honest and tell.
ill be waiting. (lets see eh)
(ps. the merged information and some other information i said will be hard to find info on, as it was info from split websites and what i knew, merged into one, so trying to find direct source of that will be extremely hard)
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. December 2005 @ 09:11
|
|
Reasons?
Suspended permanently
|
9. December 2005 @ 09:29 |
Link to this message
|
lol, it's not my job to prve you wrong, I don't want to. It's your job to prove yourself right, can you?
I already posted these, but obviously you don't read anyoen elses posts unless you can flame on then, but here you go-
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453
Basically add up the numbers (With all that tech knowlege you can do it, you shoudl know how much floating point math each core or spe can do.) and it verifies that the 360 is a 1 TFLOP gaming machine and the PS3 will be a 2 TFLOP gamign machine. And that is what it really boils down to, power, get the job done, sound, graphics, physics etc, you need dual precision performance, and if PS3 has double SP performance it'll have close to that DP on the 360. If knew your semi-conductor ass from your head you'd understand, do you?
I'll reiterate a few things, Anandtech says exactly what I've been saying, and they ar e#1 on the web as far as tech authority goes (To the public). Most of these guys are the columnists for CPU mag, and all carry degrees. And- It isn't my job to prove you right or wrong, it's your job to prove yourself right.
Fanboy is a term used to describe someone who is utterly devoted to a single subject. This generally is followed by the devotion and support even when proved wrong.
Anecdotal, by my definition, it's the way too many people here think. It's also all the evidence you have.
Xbox 360 GT: NEGATIVE 273K
My advice: Wait for PS3.
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
10. December 2005 @ 06:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
yet again reasons you dont know shit,
TERAFLOPS are floating point calculations BUT ONLY 30% OF THE GAMES PHYSICS (which is what the processors handle)ARE PRIMARILY POWERED BY FLOATING POINT CALCULATIONS, the other 70% is powered by general performance, which the 360 has MUCH MORE OF!!
you fool.
My information is MERGED with what i know and with that ive read, ive alreayd read that website that you have posted on.
i know about floating point calculations, they are used lost when loading occours and decoding is occuring, basically when levels are loading in a game, and when decoding the info that the DVD/bluray rom is reading.
therefore the PS3 will have faster loading levels, and better blu-ray play back.
no website i can find says that about floating point etc. BUT ITS WHAT I KNOW 100%, I KNOW HOW THINGS LIKE THAT WORK, its like a technician who knows how to fix computeres, i know about what games need to work and about gpu's processors, etc.
so there.
I cant believe that you thought that FLOATING POINT CALCS (in teraflops) was all of the system performance, see thats why the specs ARE NOT TO BE TRUSTED. all those people who dont know anything about technology will see that it says *overall system performance* 2 teraflops vs 360's 1 teraflop, and will be CONNED into thinking that the PS3 is more powerful when it isnt. thats why SONY arnt to be trusted as they HID the truth behind the specs, and what floating point calculations are good for. now low tech knowledge people will think thats everyt5hing is about tera flops when it is mainly NOT teraflops.
GET UR FACTS RIGHT REASONS!
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. December 2005 @ 06:27
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
10. December 2005 @ 07:19 |
Link to this message
|
Truthman:
First of all, he did'nt say anything about the 70%:30% thing.
second. He said-----------------------------------------------------
Quote:
And that is what it really boils down to, power, get the job done, sound, graphics, physics etc,
--------------------------------------------------------------------
And I can tell thats right.
So stop complaining about the 70% and 30%. I'm sure that many people think thats bullshit.Including me.
ps3:GPU-24 pipelines producing 5.7 ops each
-700mhz ram.
-On par with geforce 7800
-rsx at 550mhz
-rsx is 1.8 tflops
ps3:CPU-Cell processor
-total of 8 spe's running at 3.2 ghz.
Cell is 218GFLOPS.
Computer Hp pavilion a700n
448 mb of ram(upgrading it to 1gb)
amd3000+
(going to have geforce 7800 soon)
Currently(a shitty intergrated via/s3)
Information about ps3's rsx is on:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/265429
Information about The xbox360 and ps3's gpu
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. December 2005 @ 15:06
|
|
Reasons?
Suspended permanently
|
10. December 2005 @ 07:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
Damn, just shut up. The term "general computing performance" and variations there of were created by Microsoft specifically to make it look better than the PS3. The term is not used by anyone but dumbasses trying to compare their precious 360. Microsoft invented and defined it as the performance of full function cores, which entirely rules out SPEs, DSPs, etc. from the performance comparison.
When you compare something, you use MIPS/BIPS and TFLOPS/GFLOPS, unless you are marketing your console, like MS.
This^above, is absoltely fundamental, and easily reveals "tech know-how" fakes. You are a pretty big fool and have had no formal education in CS, becuase you whipped otu the general performance term, LOL. Shit, don't type up those big long posts and miss your bus, lol.
Where he hell do you get this 30/70 shit? Damn, everythign in computing can be measured in floating point operations per second. Floating Point is jst numbers dude, and everything in computers is numbers, from 0 and 1 to 23456789 and anycombination of those, just like when you type the letter A, the computer sees it as the number 65 in binary. Everyhtign computer does is floating point in one way or another. Yes, they descirbe certain fuctions different way, but everything, ie instructions, biols down to numbers being mathed out, by floating point operations.
Damn, the TFLOPS may not be the best way to describe certain aspects of gaming, but everythign boils down to it, and the more TFLOPS you have, the more EVERYTHING ELSE YOU HAVE.
Just shut up, please.
Fanboy is a term used to describe someone who is utterly devoted to a single subject. This generally is followed by the devotion and support even when proved wrong.
Anecdotal, by my definition, it's the way too many people here think. It's also all the evidence you have.
Xbox 360 GT: NEGATIVE 273K
My advice: Wait for PS3.
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
10. December 2005 @ 12:22 |
Link to this message
|
I'm back lol
OK everyone, cool down a bit! There's no need to insult eachother.
I've done some more research about the two GPU's. My facts are from http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423.//
K lets clear up some information.
A GPU's Speed- measured in mhz or ghz.(known as clock speed) The higher the faster. The faster the clock speed, the smoother the images will appear.The higher, the better.
Ok, most M$ fanboys love to say that the clock speed doesnt matter, but I just clearly stated that it matters. And it matters alote.
First compairison
-rsx is clocked at 550mhz
-ati is clocked at 500mhz
Now I'm gogin to talk about system ram/memory.
Memory/Ram is used for better performance.
-The ati has 700mhz of ram, a total of 518mb. (BUT this is shared with the CPU)
-"Now let's move on to NVIDIA's RSX; the RSX is very similar to a PC GPU in that it features a 256-bit connection to 256MB of local GDDR3 memory (operating at 700MHz)." So the memory/ram will opperate at 700 MHz, and it's not shared
rsx beats ati
truthman
I have a feeling you are goign to say something about the CPU. But i dont care if you do, Because i'm compairing the GPU's.NOTCPU'S
...
...=P
And guys, there's a solution for not using caps. Make it bold.CAPS JUST MAKE YOU LOOK IMATURE AND INSANE .lol
ps3:GPU-24 pipelines producing 5.7 ops each
-700mhz ram.
-On par with geforce 7800
-rsx at 550mhz
-rsx is 1.8 tflops
ps3:CPU-Cell processor
-total of 8 spe's running at 3.2 ghz.
Cell is 218GFLOPS.
Computer Hp pavilion a700n
448 mb of ram(upgrading it to 1gb)
amd3000+
(going to have geforce 7800 soon)
Currently(a shitty intergrated via/s3)
Information about ps3's rsx is on:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/265429
Information about The xbox360 and ps3's gpu
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. December 2005 @ 17:25
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
10. December 2005 @ 17:08 |
Link to this message
|
Reasons?, "general purpose processing" is a fairly common term, and is used even in AnandTech articles.
Also, measuring a system purely on FLOPS is irrational. "There are many factors in computer performance other than raw floating-point computation speed, such as I/O performance, interprocessor communication, cache coherence, and the memory hierarchy." -wikipedia
Kookoo, check your article link.
There's a couple things wrong with what you just said:
A processor can outperform another processor without having a higher clock speed. This applies to both a central processing unit and a graphical processing unit. If you didn't know this, then let me officially welcome you to a world of IBM vs AMD vs Intel processor discussions.
You are aware that both the RSX and the Xenos GPU will use 700MHz GDDR3 memory, right?
Quote:
So the gpu will opperate at 700 MHz, and it's not shared
No, the gpu will operate at 550MHz. (Thus far based on G70 architecture and released RSX specs. Like me and reasons said earlier, it will probably change)
You also didn't adequately explain how 512MB of 128-bit 700MHz GDDR3 is worse than 256mb of 256-bit GDDR3 memory, especially if you consider that the reason it was moved to the main memory bus was so it would save on bandwidth. Which would move you on to a bandwidth argument. Understand that you cannot argue exclusive points because they all connect.
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
10. December 2005 @ 17:23 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
A processor can outperform another processor without having a higher clock speed. This applies to both a central processing unit and a graphical processing unit. If you didn't know this, then let me officially welcome you to a world of IBM vs AMD vs Intel processor discussions.
Yupp i knew. I got an AMD 3000+ 2.1ghz. But it performs at 3ghz.It's because the pipelines are shorter in the amd making it perform faster or somthing like that.ahh truthman told me about that before.
And i dont htink the 360's processing has short or "strong" pipelines, as i said withthe actual pipelines..W.E
Ops i dindt meen to say the gpu will run at 700mhz, i thikn i ment to say the ram/memory. Ill edit that out.
ps3:GPU-24 pipelines producing 5.7 ops each
-700mhz ram.
-On par with geforce 7800
-rsx at 550mhz
-rsx is 1.8 tflops
ps3:CPU-Cell processor
-total of 8 spe's running at 3.2 ghz.
Cell is 218GFLOPS.
Computer Hp pavilion a700n
448 mb of ram(upgrading it to 1gb)
amd3000+
(going to have geforce 7800 soon)
Currently(a shitty intergrated via/s3)
Information about ps3's rsx is on:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/265429
Information about The xbox360 and ps3's gpu
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423
|
|
Reasons?
Suspended permanently
|
10. December 2005 @ 17:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
Bringing in the I/O performance and cache specs only burn the 360 more. I'm not much for doing that because I own two of them and am a huge fan. Everything wikipedia mentions is better on the SOny side of the grass. Someone, please pull out the bandwidth spec, and I'll explain. Hopefully most of you have figured out that little 256GBPS system bandwidth BS by now.
Fanboy is a term used to describe someone who is utterly devoted to a single subject. This generally is followed by the devotion and support even when proved wrong.
Anecdotal, by my definition, it's the way too many people here think. It's also all the evidence you have.
Xbox 360 GT: NEGATIVE 273K
My advice: Wait for PS3.
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
10. December 2005 @ 17:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
Memory bandwith
Ps3:
25.6 GB/s main memory bandwidth,
22.4 GB/s video memory bandwidth
xbox360
22.4 GB/s main memory bandwidth,
256 GB/s to eDRAM, 21.6 GB/s FSB
Is this what you are looking for?
ps3:GPU-24 pipelines producing 5.7 ops each
-700mhz ram.
-On par with geforce 7800
-rsx at 550mhz
-rsx is 1.8 tflops
ps3:CPU-Cell processor
-total of 8 spe's running at 3.2 ghz.
Cell is 218GFLOPS.
Computer Hp pavilion a700n
448 mb of ram(upgrading it to 1gb)
amd3000+
(going to have geforce 7800 soon)
Currently(a shitty intergrated via/s3)
Information about ps3's rsx is on:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/265429
Information about The xbox360 and ps3's gpu
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. December 2005 @ 17:44
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
10. December 2005 @ 17:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
And L2 Cache
ps3:
512KB L2 cache, 256KB per SPE
xbox360:
1MB
Well right now i can see that the ps3 has 512kb+ 256kb x 7?
So the ps3 cache would be arround 2.somthing mb? Or am i just being an idiot?
ps3:GPU-24 pipelines producing 5.7 ops each
-700mhz ram.
-On par with geforce 7800
-rsx at 550mhz
-rsx is 1.8 tflops
ps3:CPU-Cell processor
-total of 8 spe's running at 3.2 ghz.
Cell is 218GFLOPS.
Computer Hp pavilion a700n
448 mb of ram(upgrading it to 1gb)
amd3000+
(going to have geforce 7800 soon)
Currently(a shitty intergrated via/s3)
Information about ps3's rsx is on:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/265429
Information about The xbox360 and ps3's gpu
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
10. December 2005 @ 17:51 |
Link to this message
|
Just a defenition for those who dont know what cache is for:
L2 cache Definition
L2 cache - A piece of fast memory that sits between the L1 cache of the processor and main memory. It is usually larger than L1 cache, and the L1 cache checks the L2 cache before going to main memory for data (unless the L1 and L2 caches are unified--see unified cache). Nowadays L2 caches are almost always on the same die as the microprocessor, but they can be off-chip.
http://www.isprank.com/Glossary/L2+cache.html
Copy paste
ps3:GPU-24 pipelines producing 5.7 ops each
-700mhz ram.
-On par with geforce 7800
-rsx at 550mhz
-rsx is 1.8 tflops
ps3:CPU-Cell processor
-total of 8 spe's running at 3.2 ghz.
Cell is 218GFLOPS.
Computer Hp pavilion a700n
448 mb of ram(upgrading it to 1gb)
amd3000+
(going to have geforce 7800 soon)
Currently(a shitty intergrated via/s3)
Information about ps3's rsx is on:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/265429
Information about The xbox360 and ps3's gpu
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423
|
|
