|
|
|
ps3 graphic
|
|
|
dr.cool
Suspended permanently
|
23. November 2005 @ 16:05 |
Link to this message
|
kookoo theres no such thing as weak pipelines theyre a part of the chip, dont trust every article u read man c'mon.
Quote:
So if you said that Grass is red, I am suppose to believe you?
not only do u gotta learn about electronics consules, and well pipeline you gotta learn about sarcaim its a problem youve had in every thread dude.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
23. November 2005 @ 16:08 |
Link to this message
|
? Did you read why i said that? i'm not argueing this point anymore. You say w.e you want to say, you will see.
watch both xbox 360 se3 and ps3 e3 thing, then read this article.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/22/news_6128031.html
Look at the differences in graphics. And then read this DIFFERENT ARTICLE. Dont think its the same one. Its just something to point out. It sais that the e3 presentation used a way weeker chip than sony's rsx, and used a computer with 2.5ghz shit. Somthing you should consider while compairing the two, with the e3 presentation. Ps3 's graphics are goign to be whatever % they said there better than what was on sony ps3 E3 presentation.
ALSO NOTE THAT:"While the exact technical specifications of the GPU remain a secret," is Writen on that article. So i think we were argueing about nothing but rumers??
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/22/news_6128031.html
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/22/news_6128031.html
NOT THE SAME ARTICLE CLICK IT YOU WILL SE WHAT IT IS ABOUT. its not even compairing two systems.
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 23. November 2005 @ 16:14
|
|
dr.cool
Suspended permanently
|
23. November 2005 @ 17:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
dude the entire ps3 presentation was fake totally fake. at e3 ms was using an alpha chip kookoo wtf?? get facts that r up to date jeeze no wonder why your still a newb
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
23. November 2005 @ 17:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
What how is it fake? Again with your oppinions?
It used a weaker chip, So those who thaught the ps3 graphics are better thann xbox 360 graphics, they compaired it to somthing week. Rsx is goign to run i think 25% better.
+YOU CANNOT TALK ABOUT ps3 graphics anymore because Sony hasnt announced the GPU specs.
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 23. November 2005 @ 17:15
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
24. November 2005 @ 10:58 |
Link to this message
|
Kookoo:
Quote:
wtf? you expect me not to care? wtf are you talking about, Was i soppose to say nothign to taht?? wtf are u thinking? Mabey you should know that everything was based 6 months ago w. the ps3
Yeah, we've already been over this. My point was to not to base your entire argument over one article. It didn't even have any convincing technical analysis in the first place.
Quote:
LMAo, that website was when the xbox360 was suppose to have 4cores at 3.5 ghz. And wtf i didnt base it off everyartle, all them sais the same thing.
Look what the new ign ones have to say
um... "The Xbox 360's CPU has more general purpose processing power because it has three general purpose cores, and Cell has just one."
It says that multiple times. It's hard taking you seriously when you don't even put in the time to read the damn article.
Quote:
If you are so smart, why you only saying shit about me, and not debating?
I'm pretty sure I gave you a website that effectively counters your argument. But then again, you didn't even bother to read it...
Also, the E3 presentation was "fake" in that it was cut-scene, not actual in-game footage. I'm pretty sure there are now game-footage videos around, but the E3 wasn't a genuine depiction of how games will look while you are playing.
Finally, it isn't the GPU that will run 25% better, it's the Cell's processor.(CPU) I'm basing this of course on the article you cited numerous times in one of your previous posts.
And now we can't talk about sony's graphics anymore? WTF have you been doing this entire time, then?
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
24. November 2005 @ 11:21 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
um... "The Xbox 360's CPU has more general purpose processing power because it has three general purpose cores, and Cell has just one."
THE CELL HAS 8 CELLS RUNNING AT 3.2 GHZ FUCK. the cell proscessor doesnt use CORES it uses CELLS AND 8 OF THEM. WHIch WOULD MAKE PS3'S CPU MORE EFFICIENT AND have MORE GENERAL PURPSE OF PROSEESING. YOU SAID"the 360's cpu has three gerneral purpose cores." THE CORES WORK INDIVIDUALLY.!!@! and let me remind you. CORES ARE NOT CELLS.!!@!
Quote:
Yeah, we've already been over this. My point was to not to base your entire argument over one article. It didn't even have any convincing technical analysis in the first place.
I DIDNT ONLY USE ONE ARTICLE!!I just didnt put all the websites i isited because they said THE SAME SHIT. FUCK MAN DID YOU READ M POST?
Quote:
um... "The Xbox 360's CPU has more general purpose processing power because it has three general purpose cores, and Cell has just one."
It says that multiple times. It's hard taking you seriously when you don't even put in the time to read the damn article.
I DIDNT USE ONE ARTICLE LIKE I SAID IN MY PREVIOS POST. the cell has 8 cells each running at 3.2ghz!! YET AGAIN I HAVE TO SAY THE CELL DOES NOT USE ONE IT USES 8 NOT ONE !!NOT ONE not one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote:
I'm pretty sure I gave you a website that effectively counters your argument. But then again, you didn't even bother to read it...
OMFG UR FUNNY, I READ THAT WEBSITE WHEN I FIRST HEARD ABOUT THE XBOX360 AND PS3 SHIT!FFS I READ IT WHEN THE WEBSITE CAME OUT!YOU JUST FOUND IT NOW. THAT WEBSITE WAS WHEN IGN THAUGHT THE XBOX 360 HAD 4 CORES AT 3.5 GHZ??DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT I SAID ABOVE ?? THE XBOX 3560 ACTUALLY HAS 3 CORES AT 3.2GHZ, SO YOU CANNOT USE THAT WEBSITE FFS, because it was using WRONG SPECS. THAT WEBSITE U POSTED WAS USING WRONG SPECS! the website you were using had the wrong specs.imma repeat this soo manny times till you get it. THE WEBSITE FROM IGN U WERE USING, BASED IT ARTICLE ON THE WRONG SPECS, SO IT IS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!If the article was suing correct spesc and really the xbox360 had 4 cores running at 3.5 ghz, yea the xbox 360 will be better , BUT ITS NOT , XBOX360 USES LIKE 50% OF THAT.
ABVIOSLY U DIDNT READ MY POST.
Quote:
Finally, it isn't the GPU that will run 25% better, it's the Cell's processor.(CPU) I'm basing this of course on the article you cited numerous times in one of your previous posts.
well cLeArLy you didnt read the article correctly , you just skimed it. THE E3 PRESENTATION WASNT USEING THE NVIDEA RSX WHICH IS PS3 GPU, THEY WERE USING A WEEKER ONE WHIHC WILL MAKE THE PS3 GRAPHICS STRONGER THAN THE ONE AT E3 PRESENTATION.smart @$$
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 24. November 2005 @ 11:41
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
24. November 2005 @ 12:50 |
Link to this message
|
The all-caps wasn't necessary. It just makes you look obnoxious and immature.
It's your fault there is a misunderstanding with your sources. Whenever a debate came up, you only cited the same article over and over. Apparently, though, it is a misunderstanding so lets just bury that issue. If you use more than one source, then cite it please. It cill only add to your credibility.
Quote:
THE CELL HAS 8 CELLS RUNNING AT 3.2 GHZ FUCK. the cell proscessor doesnt use CORES it uses CELLS AND 8 OF THEM. WHIch WOULD MAKE PS3'S CPU MORE EFFICIENT AND have MORE GENERAL PURPSE OF PROSEESING. YOU SAID"the 360's cpu has three gerneral purpose cores." THE CORES WORK INDIVIDUALLY.!!@! and let me remind you. CORES ARE NOT CELLS.!!@!
Your liberal use of "cells" make it quite obvious that you don't know anything about "The Cell"
The Cell has one PPE and 8 SPE's. It does not have "8 cells". That doesn't even make sense. One of the SPE's will most likely be disabled to improve yield and reduce cost.
The PPE is the only part of the Processor that can handle General Purpose processing. (I use "general processing" freely, because it is basically a controller for the SPE's) The 7 SPE's do work individually, but are not independent. They can only process what the SPE gives to them. This makes general processing extremely efficient, yes, but it is still one processor. Not 8 individual "cells". It doesn't have as much general purpose processing power because the SPE's are designed for vectorized floating point code execution, whereas in the 360, each "core" can independently process general-purpose code.
Just for the record, I think the PS3's CPU is much better suited for video games (contrary to the article) and will be work better than the 360's CPU. I don't exactly know why we're debating the CPU because I thougth the issue was the GPU. I already said that I think PS3 has stronger CPU. (But weaker GPU)
If the article I posted was written when IGN thought the 360 had 4 cores, then the article would've reflected that notion. However, the article states numerous times that the Xbox 360 has 3 cores.
Quote:
THE XBOX 3560 ACTUALLY HAS 3 CORES AT 3.2GHZ
That's right, it does. The article says this multiple times.
I have no idea how you manage to argue this, because the article is based off of accurate 360 specs. Try reading it, instead of playing it off like a coward.
You are making yourself look extremely ignorant, especially to the people who have actually read the article and know that it is based off the 360 having 3 symmetrical cores.
Here's another quote from the article that will hopefully shut you up:
"Lastly, we were sent updated spec numbers on the Xbox's numbers, and we spoke with Microsoft's Vice President of hardware, Todd Holmdahl, about the Xbox 360's final transistor count."
But you know, it's all based off the 360 having 4 cores, right?
Quote:
well cLeArLy you didnt read the article correctly , you just skimed it. THE E3 PRESENTATION WASNT USEING THE NVIDEA RSX WHICH IS PS3 GPU, THEY WERE USING A WEEKER ONE WHIHC WILL MAKE THE PS3 GRAPHICS STRONGER THAN THE ONE AT E3 PRESENTATION.smart @$$
No I'm pretty sure I did. You said that the RSX would run 25% better. The article makes it clear that it is talking about the processor's clock speed. The 25% difference is in the 2.4 ghz opposed to the 3.2 ghz final system spec.
The GPU is clocked at 550mhz. Therefore, the article is obviously talking about the CPU. There isn't a percentage of how much better the RSX will be compare to the Geforce card the PS3 was using at E3.
I wasn't trying to being a smart ass at all. You were misleading everyone about the graphic capabilities with the 25% figure.
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
26. November 2005 @ 17:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
oo i completly forgot about this thread.
O yea about the cell thing, i was just reading another thread and the ppl kept saying that the cell has 8 cells in it, and completly forgot about it having spes, so I sued Cells to Replace spe, sorry bout that my bad. I still ment SPE.
O gosh dindt realize how rude i was being..sry bout that
And i ment to say the cpu was 25% better,
What I ment about the graphics was that the e3 presentation was using a weeker GPU than the actuall RSX< so the graphics actually being produced with the actual Rsx will be better than the one shown on the presentation.
Im still sticking with pipeline dont matter
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 26. November 2005 @ 17:33
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
26. November 2005 @ 18:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have also heard that The ps3 GPU is combined with its CPU, making The gpu verystrong, and i think thats why pipeline doesnt mean nothing either when compairing the two systems. Actually its even said on gamespot,IGN and many other websites.
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
|
26. November 2005 @ 18:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
I always look at these threads and wonder where these poeple get their info, and where they get the qualifications to compare.
IGN and Gameinformer, and all other gaming mags can shove their comparisions and analysis, because they are the CS or CE drop-outs who couldn't make it in the professional and scientific fields.
Lol, I just love reading these threads though, "CPU combined with the GPU" lol, lol. Whenever what's on tv gets dull these threads can replace the void of laughter.
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
|
26. November 2005 @ 18:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
hey you laughing at me?lol
Well thats what the thing said.lolAnd it was from gamespot too.
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
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
27. November 2005 @ 12:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
KOOKOO THE CELLS ARE SPECIALISED TO DO ONLY FLOATING POINT CALCULATIONS, WHICH EXPLAINS WHY THE PS3 HAS 1.8 TERAFLOPS OF FLOATING POINT PERFORMANCE AND XBOX HAS ONLY 1.
THEY ARE NOT GENERAL PERFORMANCE TIT.
AND AS I SAID AGES AGO, GAMES ARE 70% GENERAL PERFORMANCE WHEN IT COMES TO PROCESSORS, AND COS OF THE 360 GENERAL PERFORMANCE CORES IT OWNS THE PS3 IN THAT FACTOR, MEANING THAT COS GAMES ARE 70% GENERAL PER. IT BEATS THE PS3, ONLY 30% OF GAMES PERFORMANCE IS PRIMARILY FLOATING POINT (IN TERAFLOPS).
PS3 LOSES, AND IT HAS THE WORSE GPU.
PIPELINES DO MATTER U FOOL.
heres another example. take the 7800GTX (standard) and a 6800Ultra.
ok the gtx and the ultra both have EXACTLY THE SAME CORE SPEED AND THE SAME MEMORY FREQUENCY, BUT THE GTX HAS 24 PIPELINES UNLIKE THE ULTRAS 16. AND THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PERFORMANCE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO, THE GTX CAN BE UP TO 70% FASTER.
the gtx also has got a few other things which are better about it, but performance wise its main difference is its pipelines, and its much faster than the 6800 MAINLY BECAUSE IT HAS GOT MORE PIPELINES.
I SHOULD THINK THAT MANY OTHER PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY KNOW THERE GPU TECH VERY WELL (UNLIKE U) WILL AGREE THAT MORE PIPELINES = BETTER PERFORMANCE.
I ALREADY GAVE U THAT GTO2 EXAMPLE AND THAT WASNT ENOUGH FOR YOU, JEES. MORE PIPELINES = BETTER, SIMPLE AS.
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 27. November 2005 @ 13:59
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
27. November 2005 @ 15:52 |
Link to this message
|
K, why is this all in caps? AND NO PIPELINE DONT MATTER IF IT THE XBOX360'S PIPELINE COMPAIR WEEK O THE pixel AND VERTEX PIPELINES.
2ND:THE PS3 HAS 51-billion-dot-product-operations per second COMBINEED WITH GPU.
XBOX 360 HAS 31.SOMTHING BILLION DOT PRODUCT OPERATIONS PER SECOND.
Quote:
KOOKOO THE CELLS ARE SPECIALISED TO DO ONLY FLOATING POINT CALCULATIONS, WHICH EXPLAINS WHY THE PS3 HAS 1.8 TERAFLOPS OF FLOATING POINT PERFORMANCE AND XBOX HAS ONLY 1.
NO NOT ONLY FLOATING POINT OPERATIONS. PER SECOND. yES THEYMIGHT BE SPECIALIZED FOR THAT, B UT NOT ONLY THAT. iT ASLO FOR PHISICS AND MOVING OBJECTS.Whic as u said is 70% of the Games and 30 for flops.
more pipeline dont matter.
Im like gonna unsuscribe form this post soon if you keep ssaying that more pipeline matters.
So the 1.8 tflop of the ps3+ general processing power of the ps3 will have a better impact on games than what the xbox 360 tflop +general proformence of the procesor will have.
Quote:
PS3 LOSES, AND IT HAS THE WORSE GPU.
no ps3 does not loose, and NVIDEA'S SPECS ARNT EVEN RELEASED YETT, HOW IN THE WORLD WOULD YOU KNOW HOW THE PS3 GPU IS GOIGN TO BE LIKE? iF SONY REALEASED THE SPECS FO THE GPU , WELL THEN MABEY YES YOU CAN COMMENT, BUT THEY DIDNT SO SHUTUP.
gosh your more of a m$ fanboy, than i am a sony fanboy shit.
SIMPLE. ps3 cpu>xbox360 cpu
ps3 gpu?<>?xbox360 gpu ps3 1 xbox 360 0
http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3145154
ps3 sales will probably have more than xbox360 ps3 2 xbox360 0
Quote:
GTX HAS 24 PIPELINES UNLIKE THE ULTRAS 16
WEll yea, but if the Gtx were to have 16, the Gtx will still be better because its pipelines will compair better to the pixel and vertex pipelinem than what the ultra's would compair.
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 27. November 2005 @ 16:01
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
28. November 2005 @ 14:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
ok kookoo, ive calmed down now, but u still dont know what you are on about, but i will give u this, i will admit that u definately know how to put up a good fight, commendable of you, but if only you would acknowledge the facts.
i was talking about the floating point performance of the processor, not the GPU but still you said after talking about the processor, that pipelines dont matter, jees that alone proves that you dont know what you are talking about properly, aww man what do i have to do to make you understand graphics cards properly.
ill say it one more time, pipelines do mattter, and there are no such things as weak pipelines. (Please dont say that they dont matter again, for e.g. - its like trying to be a parent of a child who wont accept his own name, bloody stupid and very hard).they really do matter.
and yes dude, that card will be UPTO (that doesnt mean will always be) 2x faster than 2x 6800Ultras put together, but that doesnt suprise me as the standard 7800GTX is UPTO 70% faster than a single ultra, so as the RSX being the 7800GTX's older brother that wouldn't suprise me, although sony always brag a little more than what they can achieve though.
u quoted this.
2ND:THE PS3 HAS 51-billion-dot-product-operations per second COMBINEED WITH GPU.
XBOX 360 HAS 31.SOMTHING BILLION DOT PRODUCT OPERATIONS PER SECOND
end of quote
DUDE DOT SHADER POINT OPERATIONS PER SECOND ARE FLOATING POINT CALCULATIONS, THATS WHAT THEY ARE MEASURED IN, JEES, SEE U DIDNT KNOW THAT THEREFORE IT HAS BACKFIRED ON U.
And as u know ONLY 30% of what games fun on are FLOATING POINT calculations (when it comes to the processor), so that doesnt matter, its general performance that counts, and as u know 360 has MUCH better general performance.
+ the better GPU (dude it IS better than the RSX, BUT i WILL admit that overall it is only like 10 % faster than the RSX, and still the RSX is UNBELIAVEBLY POWERFUL, its just that the 360 ATI card has better features, like it can render HDR Lighting WITH ANTI-ALIASING, which ALL nvidia cards, including the RSX CANNOT DO. (however this may be the 'one' thing sony minght change, so the card can do it) but as we know and sony is unlikely to change, as they have never changed anythings specs once they have announced them on any of their products (gaming wise), so ATI can have HDR with anti-aliasing, whicb i tell u will be REALLY REALLY SWEET, the new X1800XT cards can to that 2, so graphical image wise (basically the graphics quality) will be higger on the ATI card(s) - if u incluse the new pc ones too.
if u dont know about HDR, then find out about it, its the future of game lighting effects on all the next gen games (or will be eventually) so this feature that ATI cards have got is a MAJOR advantage over the nvidia card(s).
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.
|
Moderator
|
28. November 2005 @ 15:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
kookoo76
You need to clean up the language and quits the all caps posts NOW. Our forums aren't the place for fouth mouthed little prats to throw temper tantrums so if you can't intelligently argue a point I'll show you the door.
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33 This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. November 2005 @ 15:43
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
28. November 2005 @ 17:02 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
i will admit that u definately know how to put up a good fight, commendable of you
uhh thanx, lol
Quote:
i was talking about the floating point performance of the processor, not the GPU but still you said after talking about the processor, that pipelines dont matter, jees that alone proves that you dont know what you are talking about properly, aww man what do i have to do to make you understand graphics cards properly.
I KNOW PIPELINE matters.I was just being stupid. Mabey i was saying it wrong. KK, the xbox360 48 pipelines are **week** **CoMpAiRiNg** to the ***vertex pipelines*** and ***pixels**
Quote:
And as u know ONLY 30% of what games fun on are FLOATING POINT calculations (when it comes to the processor), so that doesnt matter, its general performance that counts, and as u know 360 has MUCH better general performance.
Didnt i say that xbox360 has more general processing power. If you combine the floating point and gereral processing power of the ps3, and then combine the two on xbox360. Ps3 will be better overal, Not that you didnt mention that ps3 has general processing power too. YOu jsut said that it only processes tflops. Unless i misunderstood you.
Please dont make long post plz plz. It's getting tireing.
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 28. November 2005 @ 17:06
|
Moderator
|
29. November 2005 @ 02:31 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Please dont make long post plz plz. It's getting tireing.
This is an open forum for all so he can post as long as he wants - nothing you can do about it.
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
30. November 2005 @ 09:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
sry kookoo i assumed that you already knew that the 1 PS3 core was a general performance one, with SPE's (floating point) attched.
ok ill enlighten u, i do think that the PS3 is good also, so i wont just show my 360 side.
floating point calculations are basically the technical name for game math's calc's.
here are some things that use a lot of floating point calculations.
1) game level loading
2) running DVD's
they are just 2 of more things that are 80% floating point, they are used mainly in game level loading (ON CONSOLES, on PC its mainly the hard drive that depends on level loading speed + the CPU speed (but mainly hard drive for games) as the console games disks need all the calculations (e.g. what textures to load first, where to place them , in cache etc.)
plus when u put BOTH general performance + floating point together then a performance graph would show them both to be about the same (for 360 and PS3), but seen as the 360 HAS the BETTER general performance by a lot, it wins for game framerates (which matters most) although the PS3 will play DVD's better and load levels faster, but that dont matter as much.
AND YES pipelines do matter (again, for GPU's)
PS. im changing my internet provider today, so i wont be able to use net for 10 days, so i wont be able to reply to ur post until i can get back on just thought id let u know.
also, LOL glad to se a moderator on regulary at last. i ant seen one for ages.
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 30. November 2005 @ 09:06
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
30. November 2005 @ 10:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
Truth man, well i kno wthis is ofo topic, but
il just copy and paste
I got a AMD 3000+ performs like a 3ghz computer (i think) but it only runs at 2.1 ghz clock speed. Can anyone explain this to me?!
It says it runs at 2.1 ghz clock speed on controll panel.
And since you kinda really good at expaining Cpu things and i Dont get this...and before you change the internet, reply me!lol
or if there is another thread of this somone show me it.
Tthruthman.:
Well you see the example above, ps3 gcard may have 24 pipelines, mabey they probably run faster than 24 pipelines. imma see if nvidea uses new tech aswell, like the ecell is new tech.
And what did you meen by 360 have better framerate? You meen fps? If you ment fps..wouldnt ps3 win because in articles i have read, i heard ps3 would be able to run up to 120fps, while 360 at 90fps.
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 30. November 2005 @ 10:26
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
30. November 2005 @ 10:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
ok thats because an AMD chip has 4 pipelines stages (they are COMPLETELY different to graphics pipelines, in processors lower is better, as the stages are shorter therefore they load things faster), AMD chips do have lowerclock rates, but with their super short pipelines stages(only 4) and their very large 64bit L1 Cache (compared to a intel 16Kbyte L1 cache) they perform to the equivalent of a intel processor with a higher clockrate.
AMD CPU's have some neat technologies on them too which make them faster.
Heres some more processor knowledge for u about intel CPU's
(a PRESCOTT (socket 775 and 478) type Intel CPU has 31 stages, which is very long, more ineficcient, thats why the prescott P4's have 1Meg cache because they need it to help the processor fill up all the pipeline stages at once of else it would be a very ineffective processor.)
a older northwood type P4 processor (only S478) has 20 stages, and on socket 478 coards a 3.4C (C means northwood core) and a 3.2E (E means prescott core) would be similar, but the northwood would be slightly faster in most things (games as a prime example), but the prescott would be better at encoding because it has got a much improved version of hyper threading tech, and a larger slower L2 cache (larger than northwoods 512Kbyte but its slower) and a 90nm process, unlike northwoods bigger process. and ITS MUCH hotter than the northwood when running
However, for over overclocking because of its 90nm process, it can overclock better, and the proportion of performance increase against the northwood core overclocked at same clock's decreases each time, then eventually the presscott overtakes the northwood. (e.g. a stock speed 3.4E vs a 3.4C, the 3.4C will win, BUT overclock them both to 3.8GHz and the 3.2E will win the 3.2C, get it)
the prescott was a model designed for intel to take future processors to higher clock speeds with.
(however u need good cooling for an overclocked prescott CPU as there bloody hot.)
there u go. hope that helped.
o and i just found out of BT that my internet is not cancelled for at least 7 days, so i can talk on forum longer before the 10 day cut off stage, before i get signed up with a different ISP.
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 30. November 2005 @ 13:56
|
Senior Member
|
30. November 2005 @ 11:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
Nephilim
i understand why u hate it god i hate reading these long ass agruments too.
stop hoping, start loving.
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
30. November 2005 @ 11:08 |
Link to this message
|
Lol, hes a mod!! He told me to not ask other ppl to not make there post long..lol.
truthman, thanks for the info.
I'm going to edit this post to support a theory I have that compairing 360 gpu with ps3 gpu is like compairing apples and oranges..
I found a really good webpage about it. And its not going to be against the 360, rev or the ps3.but not now..
KK to start off. I will talk about the pipelines.(the 360s pipelines)K first of all 60 has 48 **shader** pipelines. Each of the pipelines will be able to produce 2 shader per one cycle, amking 96 shading opperations in total.
each of these pipelines features execution units that can operate on either pixel or vertex shader instructions.
Now about ps3's pipelines
Since Nvdia didnt release how many shader pipelines the gpu will have, everyone is expecting ti to have 24.
Now, each of these pipelines will be able to produce 5.6 shader opperations. A total of 136 shader operations.(this is where my other statement comes to play, remember in my previos posts people? I said that nvideas pipelines are goign to be more powerfull thatn 360s. Well the above just proves that)
BUT.. that is only shader opperations, we dont know how the 48 pipelines of the 360 will act with performance for the Gpu compairing to the ps3's which can give the 360 an advantage. But then you have to concider that the RSX's pipelines can produce more shading opperations with 24 pipelines, than what 360 can do with 48 pipelins, and that could also be with performance.
Similarities of the two are:
-both supports FP32.. dont really know what that meens but ok.
-Both consoles are built on a 90nm process
-both GPU designs are very closely tied to their console manufacturers.
-The RSX GPU has a 35GB/s link to the CPU, so does the 360(i think)
DIfferences
-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). The 360 is not.
-360 has 10MB of embedded DRAM.
-(copy and paste)Sony has yet to announce the exact number of pixel and vertex shader units, potentially because that number may change as time goes by depending on yields.
I am not finished yett, i will do some more work on this on another post relating what I have said above, to "compairing 360's GPu to ps3 GPU, is like compairing apples and oranges.
And i think I was'nt against any system.
O YEA.. if anyone thinks that i am wrong and they can prove it, dont critiseze me for it pretty please? I got the info above from http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2423 ... A site taht doesnt even compair the two systems, but just shows info about them.
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 30. November 2005 @ 12:39
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
30. November 2005 @ 14:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
*claps* well done kookoo, ur info is actually 95% correct.
for the first time most of ur info is actually right.(rather than most of it being incorrect)
the pipeline shader operations (the RSX can do more on each one), well the pipelines technically are called more powerful, thats why so many people have never heard of powerful/weak pipelines before, so its immediately rejected.
no probs about the processor info. theres more but i think we noth got tired, that was enough, lol.
the thing is u forgot to say anything about the Unified shader architecture, the shader pipelines, vertex and pixel are as one basically (even if a website says them seperately they are as one), and that makes them MUCH more efficient, therefore increasing the shader operations capabilities as they can focus on the specific type in play most (e.g. pixel or vertex) so if u r on a game that leans towards the pixel uses the shader archi can focus more on them resulting in a performance increase, same for if it was more vertex, resulting in higher performance (shader ops wise) than the RSX, but not by a great amount, like 10-15 % more (not much really but it IS more, lol), plus the EDRAM like u said, which is very good and the RSX doesnt have, nor will any desktop PC's have it (so i think)
the RSX is a VERY VERY good card, they both are but the ATI card is a *little* bit more powerful.
u actually did good on ur last post. im suprised, u are actually using non-biased websites to assist with ur info, ive seen that anandtech one before, its quite good.
can u tell the difference between the biased websites (to the PS3) and unbiased ones, be honest please. there is a nice big difference isnt there.
heres the scary part, EVERYTHING i posted about tech, is all what i already knew, learnt through looking into hardware in great detail, and found out from websites, and looking into what games need to work properly. And i remember all of it, i didnt look at one website when posting ANY technical posts, its all in my mind, (LOL), i really like, and am really good at computer tech stuff,
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 30. November 2005 @ 14:21
|
|
kookoo76
Suspended permanently
|
30. November 2005 @ 14:38 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
*claps* well done kookoo, ur info is actually 95% correct.
for the first time most of ur info is actually right.(rather than most of it being incorrect)
Thanx man..
Quote:
the pipeline shader operations (the RSX can do more on each one), well the pipelines technically are called more powerful, thats why so many people have never heard of powerful/weak pipelines before, so its immediately rejected.
i kinda wish more people know that...like mkaseatgb, whom said opposite wize many times against me...lol sorry, did'nt meen to be specific.
truthman:
When i first started talking about the 360 and ps3, i was like a huge sony fan. I could'nt really tell the difference between a biased website and a non biased website untill now. yea, i kinda have to admit now that gamespot is really biased, but ign is too. I dont think i'm gogin to use those websites ever again while talking about 360 and ps3. Thanx for making me relize that.
Lol, since i joined AD, I'v mostly talked about tech to, its more interesting than other threads. I got to admit i still need to do alote more research on this before posting down somthing stupid again.I'v also got to admit that you REALLY know your tech stuff.
I gotto learn more about 360 Xenon processor and the cell processor, before i talk about it now.
Oh..one little favor.. You mentioned people from another trhead not to read my post here..lol can you atleast tell the to read the last ones iv posted? I was'nt stupid that time:D
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 30. November 2005 @ 15:12
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
bballrock
Newbie
|
30. November 2005 @ 17:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey Truth Man or whatever. I have found your information quite helpful and good. Until now I have heard that the PS3 will blow away the 360. I really dont understand all the CPU GPU GGHSZSZ thus I am new to all this. I would be very thankful if I could have your insights on Which System is better performance wise, graphic wise, and overall better. Thanks.
|
|
