|
|
|
Nvideas rsx pipelines vs 360 ATI pipelines 360 core vs ps3 cell
|
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 01:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
haha, who does kookoo think he's fooling, we're taliking in the thousands here to make a 360/ps3 equivalent p.c, not 700 bucks.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 02:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
Zelda64, multicores have been out for ages and they are not important in creating something with similar abilities to a 360. I love my 360 'n' all but it has been said by many developers that Microsoft would have been better off using an athlon 64, because the core design is just so much quicker than this horrible cut down PPC design... This is from developers that I have spoken to and that I have read about - so don't flame me for that. Now I don't know about $700 but give me £700 and I could make it easily.
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 02:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
No the multi core intel viiv isn't availible on the market yet and the equivalent graphics card to both the ps3 and 360 is not availible. However being new improved technology the price of these are substancialy more expensive than the ps3 or 360.
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 02:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
The x1800xt is easily equivalent to the Xbox 360's Xenos. Secondly, we don't need to wait for viiv. We have dual core Athlon 64s and dual core Pentium 4s which are faster than both cell and the tri-core PPC in the 360.
|
|
fazyninja
Suspended permanently
|
22. January 2006 @ 03:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
In my opinon pc are always going to be better b/c they are upgradeable, but thats just the power, so what if you can make an equivilant xbox 360 pc it can not do live and a whole load of the games will not come onto the pc on the other hand the pc is used for sooooo many other things which the xbox 360 can not do.
so for me i use my xbox 360 for online gameing and my pc for work, surfing internet and playing rome total war.
|
|
fazyninja
Suspended permanently
|
22. January 2006 @ 03:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
and if you are comparing xbox 360 gameing and pc gaming then they are also two different things b/c not only are the games different but you use a mouse and keyboard which is fasrter than a controller, anyways people have their own tastes in what they like and that does not mean either one is better, just that they are very different. on the other hand by what anubis has been saying the ps3 can do most things a pc can do there if you want to compare something compare those two.
|
Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 04:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
Haha! I agree with you Anubis! I knew we'd agree on something eventually LOL
There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those who know binary, and those who don't
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 11:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
Look, like anubis say's if u can go to a website and piece together an equivalent p.c for 700 bucks then go do it and show us, I noticed no one replied to anubis' post when he suggested that. Just to make my point a 1800xt retails for about 500 bucks so you have 200 bucks left to buy a decent motherboard, hard drive, ram, multi core processor, case, power unit and fans, dvd drive, sound card and I think your just about done. Good luck!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. January 2006 @ 11:33
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 11:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
man what have i missed out on, lots, dammit.
360 PC equivilant for $700 dollars.
how?, justification is needed, ESPECIALLY for this point.
just getting the 360's core for a PCD would cost a FKING LOT as it would have to be an adapted PROTO-TYPE (so it would work on the PC). as you CANNOT get triple cores for the PC on the standard market at the min. so thats the dam core singled out already.
so its failed already, no triple core = no 360 equivilant.
you could try and get a processor that rivals 1 360 core in single threaded apps/games. but thats still not 3. the current power would be there if u did that, BUT there would be no future for that part, (when games become threaded).
the Xenon GPU is better than the X1800XT, who said that the X1800XT is better than/as good as the Xenon GPU.
idiot.
USA, 48 unified pipelines, plus all the other advanced stuff (and eDRAM for free AA (antialiasing with no performance hit at all), are just 3 major differences, there are others as well.
you are foolish to say that.
the lower clockspeed doesnt matter, as the Xenon does MUCH MUCH more work per clock than the X1800XT.
the Xenon is effectively 1 to 2 generations ahead of it, its BLATENTLY obvious.
figuring that for just $700 is crazy,
you would have to be the biggest bad ass turbo nutter overclocker with your personal (already owned) dry ice system (as if you had to buy it then you would pop the budget). (which is very very unlikely).
even then you woldnt get there as your current things jsut cant do some of the things that the Xenon and other 360's things can.
like super overclocking a dual PC core doesnt make it *grow* another one.
dont forget that the 360's hardware is NOT overclocked. (as it was made so you cant overclock it).
currently the 360's hardware is much better than the PC's best.
BUT by the time the PS3 comes out (now likely late 2006 - america/japan, early 2007 - europe/australia/canada etc) then the best PC components will possibly be as good as(or better) than what they contain.
dont judge to quickly on how fast PC tech grows, yes its VERY FAST, but not that FKING FAST!!.
it seems assumptions is causing a lot of arguments here, STOP OVERLY ASSUMING.
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.
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 12:13 |
Link to this message
|
God did I scoff and laugh and do a bunch of other things when I read you saying that the Xenos is far beyond the x1800xt, but for your sake, here it is from the mouth of a man from ATI: http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24771
Now swallow your pride and apologize.
Next. One 360 core is about equivalent to about a 1.4ghz pentium 4 in pure gaming use, since it is designed to be cheap and look quick on a spec sheet amongst other things. A single core Athlon 64 compares directly to it and a dual core Athlon 64 is faster in many ways... It is also twice as advanced when it comes to dynamic memory management...
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. January 2006 @ 12:19
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 12:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. January 2006 @ 13:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
vzero, your right about this and i was just about to say that. just because it doesnt have 3 cores does not mean its not equil or better. like three one dollar bills are not better than one 5 dollar bill.
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
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 13:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
vzero , didn't you see my last post? stop ignoring things you know you cannot answer, look at my previous post. An x1800xt cost 500 dollars, therefore you have 200 dollars in which to buy the rest, utterly impossible. I may not have researched my computers recently but I know for a fact that to buy any up to date current p.c your looking at for just the base unit, cheapest of 1000 pound, and thats pound which is worth more I don't know what that translates too in american dollars. Current consoles are cheaper, I can't believe ime arguing about this, its so obvious, its always been the case. Make me up that 700 dollar p.c, go on prove us wrong.
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 13:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
I never said $700 dollar PC - It was somebody else, try reading the whole thread. BTW I do understand all these things, a lot better than you in fact. I said I could build a similar performing PC for £650, and I stand by that.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. January 2006 @ 13:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
im gunna spend 1000-1100 on a nice pc with a 7800gt and unlock its pipelines.
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
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 14:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
anubis winds stupidest comment of the day, just - chimpanel, bad luck you came so close but I cannot believe what I just read. Unless you are a complete newbie you should know that it is impossible to unlock the pipelines on the 7800gt's, so forget it...
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 14:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
Oh and BTW, I live in the UK but I'm in touch enough to always know a rough exchange rate - every avid PC builder is...
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
22. January 2006 @ 14:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
still 650 quid, i don't think so, I remember when I got my one which was nearly top of the range back then. I paid 800 pound, I had one of the best graphics cards an ati all in wonder 9800 but i had to skimp on the proccesor, I got a 3 gig one which was not the best at the time and the ram gettin 512 instead of a gig. So even with spending 800 pound for just a base unit I didn't get a top of the range p.c and I know I got a good deal because I did my research.
So today's top of the range p.c's may be able to contend with 360/ps3 but your looking at 1000 pound. If not like I have said before, give me prices on the things your guna buy show me that you can make a top of the range p.c for 650 pound. to buy an x1800xt your still looking at 400 pound which leaves you with about 250 pound to buy the rest. You stand by your claim with no evidence of price, I have backed up mine but you cannot.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. January 2006 @ 14:23
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
22. January 2006 @ 15:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
vzreo you just proved you know nothing. thank you.
the 7800gt by evga uses a gtx gpu locked and clocked down. there are ways to unlock it to
the full potential.
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 23. January 2006 @ 04:02
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
23. January 2006 @ 04:02 |
Link to this message
|
to anyone that may care..
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
|
23. January 2006 @ 07:04 |
Link to this message
|
nice box, lol
@ vzero, I APOLOGISE (for what im about to say to you, HAHA)
vzero stop being such a smart ass, no body likes a cocky smart arse.
and i think the others will agree with me on that one^^.
currently the X1800XT (an overclocked one) could offer similar performance. at the min. the UNIFIED (hint hint*) 48 pipelines arnt being used to their potential, no way near.
plus the processor is bottlenecking the GPU because its that fast.
the FX-57 bottlenecks 7800GTX's and X1800XT's even (but that processor definately has the SMALLEST bottneck.
plus, about eDRAM, it may be *only 1 thing* but having free AA means that 4xAA for example will have no/very very very* small impact on performance. and all good PC gamers should know that at 1280x1024 rez's (and above) 4xAA has a BIG ASS performance hit.
the maximum framerate usually drops by about 5-10, and the MINIMUM framerate dops like by 20, even 30 in some games. (on X1800XT, read this in many many game tests, and from custom PC mag tests).
that difference is substantially large.
if a game at 1280x1024 with no AA (everything else on full, inc 16xAF) has a minimum framerate of 40FPS and a maximum one of 80FPS, then enabling 4xAA will likely result in the max framerate being about 70-75 fps and the minium framerate being a jerk tastic 20FPS.
playing it will be ok, most of the time, BUT the min framerate affects how often the game jumps/jerks and quyite frankly how wank it plays at the intense moments.
min framerate is more important than max framerate, that is agreed upon by many critics and i also agree, ans it makes more sense.
no one likes a game that plays ok the suddenly jerks to FK and is unplayable when the action starts, or when the game farts and u get small sudden ransom jerks.
i have experienced this many times (with FEAR for example, LOTS!! lol), and its shit as hell. very VERY annoying.
So *just* eDRAM is better than it seems.
the X1900XT looks awsome, but it doesnt have 48 *Unified* pixel pielines as well as no eDRAM, everything else is similar, but not quite the same.
and about ATI, there are likely to be seperate branches (all big companies have different branches), one for PC cards, one for console cards could be 2 for example (or should i say the chips for the console cards).
so natrually even within the overall same company, one guy from the PC branch will obviously defend its cards more than the console cards, like when the guy said it offered similar performance to the X1800XT (PC), with no evidense thou, when with claims like that evidence actually IS* needed.
and do you believe a simple short comment by that guy.
with no obviousness to it.
and about the processor. why would it perform like an old processor at 1.4 GHZ, that is quite frankly the most stupid comment of 2006 (tech wise).
the powerPC cores have a shorter pipeline than the p4's, a shorter pieline = more work per clock so to have one at 3.2 Ghz is very good.
then add 2 more cores. and there not connected by the front side bus, so theres no bandwith limitations on that part.
convincing at the moment, o wait, theres the matter of two threads per core, WITH NO LOGICAL UNIT, which is very good also (logical unit known as HT technoligy) HT is about equal to half a thread (not as good as another physical core) as it makes use of the unused execution units of the processor to make a second thread (but a much smaller one, so half a thread makes sense in this case).
like my apology. it makes total sense (what i wrote).
tell me ur processor knowledge in detail, and ill compare what i know, IN FULL DEPTH, see who can go furthest.
this is knowledge war.!!!!!!!
lol (again, but not with kookoo, thank god!)
lets see how good you really are.
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
|
23. January 2006 @ 07:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
incase no one heard or didnt pay atention, they revamped the cell, which may be the cause of the ps3 info delay. it has 2 threads for the ppe and the spe's have a 128x128 memory interface. also, the ppe runs at 4.0 ghz, and the overall gflops is now 256.
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
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 08:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
To Truthman: You, my friend, did not heed my advice. READ the f'ing link I gave you and then come back and apologize for being wrong, again. There is plenty reasoning for why the new cores in the Xenon are roughly twice as powerful as the xbox's original core in there.
Secondly. Both parts of the ATi organisation were originally designing for PC. The r580 and r520 design team could possibly be known as the best ever - they designed the radeon 9700... The other team were working on the R500, but then it was stolen by M$ and r500 was cancelled so it could eb usd in the 360... Both teams worked with teh software design team from whom that comment did sprout. I think it is fair to say the software design team wouldn't need to be biased either way - so your argument falls. Also, you should know that the pipelines you like to quote so much, specifically the number 48, are a bit of extravigant willy waving from ATi and MS. It does not have the capabilities of 48 pure pipelines, instead these are less efficient but cleverly designed pipelines for extreme parallelism...
The x1800xt is equal to the xenos and x1900xt will be much better than it. Your argument about the eDRAM is not one I ever fought, and in many cases I agree with you here. However since the x1800 can perform better in higher resolutions the requirement for AA is cut down. Also it's not free on the x1800, but 4x AA doesn't hurt as much as you think either.
You speak about my arrogance, and then you throw back good evidence in my face and come up with verbal self-demolition - nice work all-but-the-truth man.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 3. April 2006 @ 16:25
|
|
chimpanel
Member
|
23. January 2006 @ 08:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
way to tell him truth man, lol.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
23. January 2006 @ 11:13 |
Link to this message
|
Oh my, i caused a huge fuss.
I wasnt being specific about the 700$. I looked at Vzeros post and hes said 700euro, while i mistakenly put 700$. Sorry bout that.
I was using his post as an example.
The main point of that is, A PC equivalent WONT COST 2000$ - 3000$ BY THE TIME PS3 HITS. I have no clue on why you think this.
Anibus, where did you get this information from?
Quote:
incase no one heard or didnt pay atention, they revamped the cell, which may be the cause of the ps3 info delay. it has 2 threads for the ppe and the spe's have a 128x128 memory interface. also, the ppe runs at 4.0 ghz, and the overall gflops is now 256.
Truthman, it doesnt matter how many cores there are. A dual core can beat the 3cored processor. 360 & ps3's processors are NOW equivlent to to ps3 and 360 processor. 360's cores are not as powerfull as you think.
Quote:
im gunna spend 1000-1100 on a nice pc with a 7800gt and unlock its pipelines.
Wtf?
Quote:
the Xenon is effectively 1 to 2 generations ahead of it, its BLATENTLY obvious.
Oh please, it cant be 2 gens away, orelse it would be way ahead of the 7900 gtx (comming in april) WHich it dahm isnt.
I'm not going to bother with the rest of the stuff, SINCE it has already been discussed before, but ill let Vzero and Truthman continue it. lol
>_<
|
|
