|
|
|
Nvideas rsx pipelines vs 360 ATI pipelines 360 core vs ps3 cell
|
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
2. January 2006 @ 01:45 |
Link to this message
|
Kookoo
I found this on a website and didnt relise a blue ray disc looked like this.
Did anyone else know a blue ray disc looked like this? I thought it was the same design as any other disc like CD and DVD. I didnt relise it was in a case like mini disc or UMD. I find this good becuase you dont get any scratch's and dont have to treat it as the most delicate thing in the world.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
fazyninja
Suspended permanently
|
2. January 2006 @ 03:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
yeah it looks interesting.
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
2. January 2006 @ 09:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
the xbox can handle more threads than the PS3, but not sure how the PS3 numbers fit in, as it has an odd number (7) of SPE's working, (unlike the eigth defect one - for some reason)
i think that the main core is just a single thread one (as it is the control daddy of the SPE's, which it does instead of having another thread, so all in all the core has 1).
i think each SPE can handle half a thread. but not sure.
so 0.5x7 gets 3.5 threads + 1 = 4.5
but you can't have half a thread (at least i dont think u can), so that bit confuses me.
but threads only count in to games when there multi-threaded, then all cores can be used, but it also depends on how many threads the game has. 6 threads on a game is a lot, but if they can pul it off, then 360 will encounter blistering performance.
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.
|
|
fazyninja
Suspended permanently
|
2. January 2006 @ 09:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
basically the xbox 360 core procesor is btter than the ps3
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
2. January 2006 @ 11:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
2. January 2006 @ 11:40 |
Link to this message
|
yea basically it is, but when games are single threaded, the performance will be about the same.
and in intensive graphical games (with complex textures, effects etc), the processor doesnt help much as not a great deal of physics are used (but there still is some physics in there, EVERY GAME has physics init, or else it wouldnt work or look properly).
in quake 4, a PC with the same card (X1800XT) and different processors had the exact same framerate. one was with an FX-57, it got 64FPS (this is ultra quality, 1280-1024, 2xAA 2xAF), the other was with a AMD64 3000+, and that got 64.
BUT in games with more physics (eg. rome total war which has LOTS of physics in, and AI which is also handled by the processor) there was a large difference between the two.
3000+ had 12 fps (1600x1200, everything set on full, 6xAA, 16xAF), FX-57 had 20FPS.
usually the lower the framerate the more powerful a component has to be (BY A LOT) to make the minimum framerate higher.
e.g. the average and max framerate on a 7800GTX512 was higher than a 6800GT, but the minimum framerate of the 7800GTX512 was only 2 hgher than the 6800GT.
so the difference between 12 and 20 in rome total way, IS MASSIVE. that shows how much more powerful than a 300+ the FX-57 is, in physics intensive games.
speaking of physics, when games are threaded, developers are going to dramatically increase the quality and amount of physic details in a game, so the game will appear MUCH nicer, and still run FAR faster than they did as single threaded ones.
the increase of physics will give processors a much bigger sense of control in graphical intensive games (like F.E.A.R, and quake 4 at the min). therefore instead of it being like 95% GU in games like that, it will be more like 60% GPU and 40% processor.
so the difference in substantial processing power will be noticable between the two systems.
so if one system had a better GPU but a worse (NOT directly referring to the PS3 and 360 here)CPU, in graphical intensive games it would be better than the other. but when games become threaded then the better GPU system would get a big kick up the arse, and competition would become very fierce.
referring to the 360 and PS3, the 360 has the slightly better processor, and GPU wise, the PS3 wins in OpenGL and in some areas and the 360 Xenon GPU in other areas.
bacially both cards are as good as each other in different ways.
RSX has better shader ops, so the PS3 will have bit better looking particle's, shadows etc. but the Xenon has unified shader architecture, and it can have HDR (high dynamic range lighting) enabled WITH adaptive anti-aliasing, with a low performance hit, as the eDRAM stores the adaptive AA samples specially for that purpose, so enabled AA will have practically no performance hit.
eDRAM does nothing else, thats why it has 256GB/s bandwith, for VERY fast AA samples.
so both cards have superior graphical quality in dirrerent areas.
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.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
2. January 2006 @ 12:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
the rsx wont have a performance loss with hdr and aa. aa is done by a spe.
and why would sony spend so much developing a backwards processor? i really dont think the cell is anything close to less than the 360's processor.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
3. January 2006 @ 00:26 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
the rsx wont have a performance loss with hdr and aa. aa is done by a spe.
No, you loose an SPE soooo you loose performance.
Truthman, i tjhink the cell core can handle more than 2 threads, while the SPE's handle little. So in the end it will be 4-5 threads. Understandable since the cell core is more powerfull than ONE 360 core.
And zelda the blueray loooks nice.
>_<
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
3. January 2006 @ 00:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
I forgot to include why i think kz2 is prerenderend.
1)Sony E3 was using a 2.4ghz CPU wiht an unknown(But know that its not an rsx) GPU.
2)2.4ghz CPU+(A GPU WHIHC IS NIETHER RSX OR XENOS) cant render KZ2
3)Therefore they prerendered so they can show us how it is suppose to look like.
But then we dont know if its prerendered or not.
>_<
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
3. January 2006 @ 01:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
Those pics of a blue ray I posted. Is that what they look like or is that some other version of blue ray?
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
3. January 2006 @ 06:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
well spotted kookoo about pre-rendered killzone.
about the SPE stuff, im not sure as to how amny threads an SPE could handle, half a thread just seemed like a logical guess.
YES the single core on the PS3 IS MORE POWERFUl than a single xbox 360 core, by like 35% id guess.
threads dont show how powerful a core is though.
pipeline stages are an important thing.
in single threaded stuff, lower pipeline stages = faster and more efficient.
BUT in multi-threaded stuff, more pipeline = less efficient but much faster. and i think speed is much more important than efficiency.
im really sure that with PS3 main core, they made the pipe-line super short, for kickass performance (physics and AI handling) in games that are single threaded, then when games become multi-threaded thay can rely on their SPE's more and MUCH MUCH less on the main single core.
but as weve noticed the SPE's arnt threaded that much which means less performance in threaded games. good floating point power, but we also know that that is mostly redundant when it comes to powering games fast. its general performance that rules in the game world and powers the physics, the floating point stuff powers the AI calcs, but that doest count towards much at all. physics is the main and most important thing the processor handles.
when games become multi-threaded then the 360 will get the biggest performance boost, as it has more threads. (Also this is assuming that the GPU power of both RSX and Xenon are approx same, which they ARE, me and kookoo have concluded that. graphical quality will be better on each system in different areas, and ive gave examples on my last post).
but dont forget 90% of the ingames graphical quality is the game itself, its only HDR, AA, AF and shader ops detail that the cards handle directly. the overall best processor is the 360's, but not by too much. i think even kookoo admits that all the hype about the *Cell* is just a load of crap, although it is good. sony are milking it too much. (over doing it)
crap, i wrote too much again. :-(
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.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
3. January 2006 @ 08:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
find side by side comparissons, then decide. because i doubt its processor is better. the cell is designed with games in mind. the one, more powerful core, is designed to lead the others. the spe's are processors without direction. like a car with no driver. the core is the remote and drives them.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
3. January 2006 @ 11:14 |
Link to this message
|
I thought you lot would want to read this:
Quote:
Richard Doherty, an analyst from research firm Envisioneering Group, predicts that tomorrow Bill Gates? main message at his CES keynote will focus Windows Vista, the next-generation Windows, but Doherty also thinks Gates will talk about HD DVD as part of the Xbox 360.
What Bill Gates has said
Quote:
?The initial shipments of Xbox 360 will be based on today's DVD format,? Gates said at a joint news conference with Toshiba. ?We are looking at whether future versions of Xbox 360 will incorporate an additional capability of an HD DVD player or something else.?
http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/9984/Will-Microsoft-Announce-a-HD-D...
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
3. January 2006 @ 11:21 |
Link to this message
|
Got some bad news. Hope it isnt true
Quote:
San Mateo (California) - A spokesperson for Sony's PlayStation division denied to TG Daily this morning that the company would be making a PlayStation 3 related announcement at CES 2006.
"Although we are participating in many CES activities with Sony," said the spokesperson, "we have no new announcements on PlayStation 3 planned at this time." Sony Corporation has planned special announcements on Wednesday evening and Thursday morning, which had been presumed by many in the press and elsewhere to pertain to PS3.
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/01/03/sony_says_no_ps3_announcement/
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
3. January 2006 @ 11:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
ha that was enjoyable. gates came out saying previously that there would be no hd-dvd and
if there was, not for gaming. now look at this. all of you who baught a 360 baught a 400
dollar beta. i knew this and that is one of my main reasons for not getting a 360 now, or
maybe ever with them flipping their minds all this time.
that second one is wrong. sony reserved the entire center stage for ps3 display. or maybe its
right. if it is true, then sony made a bad move.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 3. January 2006 @ 11:29
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
3. January 2006 @ 17:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm pretty sure that sony didnt reserve Sony CES only for the ps3.
>_<
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
3. January 2006 @ 17:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
i dont think the ces is sony alone.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
4. January 2006 @ 08:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
neither do i.
@ anubis
anubis the SPE's arnt some tech breakthrough, they arnt some AWSOME - super - hyper - special technology you know.
they arnt that good when it comes down to technological breakup.
they are primarily focused (like 95% were talking here) on floating point calculations as that is the only thing that they can really do, which as we know, are pretty redundant *ish* when it comes to powering games. and they arnt threaded that much, so even with multi-threaded games they wont provide a huge boost unlike the 360 will get.
the 360 will get a 70% power boost (the other processors are 60% of the 70%, the other 10% is the extra thread that wasnt being used on the first core). the PS3 will probably get a 40-50% power boost which is still really nice, but to offer equal performance to the 360 they will have to lower the number of physics enchancements although there will still be a lot. (it will still look much nicer, but not quite as nice as the 360 - physics wise, NOT GPU wise).
both bottlenecks on the GPU's of both systems, will also dissapear because all cores can tell the GPU what to do, probably giving an extra 30% performance boost (yes the bottleneck is THAT big). So in theory the 360 should get a 100% power boost, and the PS3 should get a 70-80% power boost. (plus with the extra physics enchancements on both systems, though 360 will have a few more as explained above).
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 4. January 2006 @ 08:07
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
4. January 2006 @ 08:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes, but it isnt only power. Its also FPP. Ps3's FFP adds alote more when you think of it. In the end they are practically the same. (alost) Not saying which consol tho. LOL =P
>_<
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
4. January 2006 @ 09:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
yea but FPP's dont matter at all hardly, i rarely ever consider them.
which has more, PS3 or xbox 360, i dont actually know, and i dont care which has most. just interesting to know.
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.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
4. January 2006 @ 09:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
fpp means quite alot. they are a high contributor to performance.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
6. January 2006 @ 05:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
thats FPS* which is performance,
the war for power is all to do with graphical quality, balanced with a still playable framerate.
currently the xbox 360 plays perfect dark, (on mine) at around 80FPS, which is VERY high to say its high defination and only 30% of its potential power.
FPP ISNT *FPS*.
if you can 2 cards side by side powering the same game, with exact same graphic settings, the card powering the game with the highest framerate is the more powerful one. (although im 95% sure you already knew that)
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 6. January 2006 @ 05:59
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
6. January 2006 @ 08:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
I think he ment FPP as in floating point performance.
>_<
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. January 2006 @ 08:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
i did mean that.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
6. January 2006 @ 10:55 |
Link to this message
|
Here is somthing I found yesterday. Its an interview with John Carmack the man who created Wolfenstien, Doom and who is a well known programer who has his own software devision which we all know as id.
Quote:
They are both powerful systems that are going to make excellent game platforms, but I have a bit of a preference for the 360?s symmetric CPU architecture and excellent development tools. The PS3 will have a bit more peak power, but it will be easier to exploit the available power on the 360. Our next major title is being focused towards simultaneous release on 360, PS3, and PC.
Take it how you want to take it but I love these developer interviews because they give a more unbiased view towards the consoles with a creat knowledge in technical components and of course have the dev kits of both systems.
|
|
