|
|
| Page 4 of 5 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
 Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 10:53 Post subject: |
|
|
| MuterFurker wrote: | Yes, it does. The PS3 has a 4.0ghz CPU (which as far as ai know will be faster than the Xbox equivalent).
A top PC can match both easily. |
You are wrong as far as the ps3 goes. The ps3's cell is far more advanced than the cpus both intel and amd put out together. The way cell works makes the x86 look like old tech.
You shuld read the article on the cell.
http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cells/Cell0.html
As I wrote earlier in this thread.
"If over clocked sufficiently (over 3.0GHz) and using some very optimised code (SSE assembly), 5 dual core Opterons directly connected via HyperTransport should be able to achieve a similar level of performance in stream processing as a single Cell"
The ps3 is expected to have 4 cells! So it's not hard to see how damn awesome it is when you need only 1 cell to do what 5 dual core overclocked opterons do when it comes to stream processing."
"To Intel and AMD's processors Cell presents a completely different kind of competition to what has gone before. The speed difference is so great that nothing short of a complete overhaul of the x86 architecture will be able to bring it even close performance wise"
I personally think this is great for the computer world. Intel and Amds have long been using the old architecture, but now they will have to change it to the better unless they want to fall behind, and that's just good for us that likes computers.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 19:54 Post subject: |
|
|
| AnimalMother wrote: | | MuterFurker wrote: |
A top PC can match both easily. Within a couple of months of their release they will be hugely outdated by comparison.
|
Haha, I don't think so. 'Hugely outdated' is a bit of an exaggeration.The xbox 2 has the equivalent of an 8ghz processor. Maybe they'll be matched.
What you've gotta remember is they had chronicals of riddick (which looks fantastic) running perfectly on an 800mhz machine with 64mb RAM.
I can't wait to see what they can do with 8Ghz and 1GB RAM.
BTW, chronicals of riddick runs perfectly on my computer (1600x1200), better then Doom 3. I think it looks almost as good too. |
Its not an 8ghz CPU. Its the equivalent on a 3-4ghz CPU on the PC. Its NOT the same instruction cycles ect so it only doezs the same as a 4ghz max cpu....
Its lamost the same power as the PS3 cpu which is 4 ghz. They are the same tech level.
Basic Hardware Specifications
Xenon is powered by a 3.5+ GHz IBM PowerPC processor and a 500+ MHz ATI graphics processor. Xenon has 256+ MB of unified memory. Xenon runs a custom operating system based on Microsoft® Windows NT®, similar to the Xbox operating system. The graphics interface is a superset of Microsoft® Direct3D® version 9.0.
No gig of ram no 8ghz cpu...
http://forums.gametrailers.com/archive/index.php/t-1369.html
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cheez-It
Posts: 1106
Location: Rochester, NY
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 20:09 Post subject: |
|
|
People, the fact of the matter is, the PC is a faster machine. It doesn't matter what specs your looking at, specs (generally) don't mean shit.
I might be intrigued by the cell chip and xbox 2, but I'm telling you right now, I've heard this same bullshit before, and it will NOT be faster than a PC when it comes out.
I've already heard negative things about the cell technology, but I won't go into them... This is all just hype and bullshit, I can't believe people take it seriously...
Pallebrun: you brought every word of it didn't you lol. Do you have a Segway by any chance? 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 20:15 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Supino
Posts: 699
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 20:21 Post subject: |
|
|
Good thoughts in this thread.
Another anoying thing with consoles is TV support ONLY. Why can't they add a monitor output on the back?!
Why can't they drop mem-cards once and for all?! Just add USB/FireWire
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Supino
Posts: 699
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 20:28 Post subject: |
|
|
I remeber they said that the PS2 was gonna owne PCs in performance and power. It didn't in any way. We'll take up the discussion when its out.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cheez-It
Posts: 1106
Location: Rochester, NY
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 20:30 Post subject: |
|
|
Supino: I think mem card generate profit for them, they charge ridiculous prices for them!
As for outputs, I would imagine on the new one's they'll have DVI and so on out put things you could buy, like how they have the svideo/component stuff you can find now.
Pallebrun: I don't really know that much about it, all I'm saying is that I've heard IBM, Apple, Transmeta.. all these people touting their newest things and how much more powerful they are than intel or amd... None have lived up to their promises thus far, and in the foreseable future, PS3 included, I can't believe it will happen. We'll see what happens, but even if it does come close to the speculations, intel or amd will be forced to put out something faster like you said, so in either case im happy 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 20:40 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah memcards exist just because it's more money for them, and easy money since everyone needs them. It would be very easy to just have a "memcard" built in, but then they wouldn't get cash.
Maybe it will change with this new generation?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Supino
Posts: 699
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Apple had a isolated marketing strategy, they lost. Nintendo have the most isolated marketing strategy of all consoles, they lost. XBOX won lots by being the most open/tweakable concole. I just hope Microsoft continues this strategy... I HATE Sony becaus they are isolating lots of good game-titles.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| pallebrun wrote: | | MuterFurker wrote: | | Its lamost the same power as the PS3 cpu which is 4 ghz. They are the same tech level. |
Geez.
Dude, you dont have a clue what you are talking about. Read up alittle like I told you on the cell, because you are talking crap.
Here it is again.
http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cells/Cell0.html
It's FAR superior a pc cpu dude. 1 cell is equal to 5! dual core opterons overclocked to 3ghz or more. And the ps3 will have 4 of these cells. So in other words, you would need 20 dual core opterons overclocked to 3ghz or more to do what 4 cells do. 
If it's one thing I hate it's when clueless people try to act like they know it all..grr. 
Cheez-It: Yes I did because I understand the article. I'm not the average n00b that think he understands
The cell WILL be extremely powerful, anyone that have a clue can see that by reading the article.
But just because the cell is such a monster, it doesn't mean the ps3 will be a monster. The gpu for example isn't that well known, all we know is that it will use some tech from the 6800 generation and some from the newest unreleased generation. But the cell WILL be extremely powerful, that's why ibm will have it inside servers. |
No offence but you should check your own facts.
The cell doesnt dictate the CPU speed at all. the CPU IS 4ghz and there is only ONE in the PS3. the Cell architecture allows for fatser throughput ONLY, upto 6.5 Gigaflops.
I suggest you read your own link and try posting soemthing sensible. the CPU for the PS3 IS 4ghz. Thats it, the one for the Xbox is 3ghz.
CELL arhcitecture is good but it is not a limiting factor..... the CPU cannot utilise the cell architecture to its maximum its isnt fast enough.
A Cell is simply side processing but it is STILL dependant on the ability of the CPU to handle the central lode.
You are living in rdeamworld where you think each cell offers realtime increase. Its more like a souped up co-processor than a true CPU, it simply assists with decentralised processing of data.
Its final equivalent all in for the power of the PS3 is a 4-4.5ghz equivalent.
All the data is ont the link you so knidly provided, go read it again.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Supino
Posts: 699
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:13 Post subject: |
|
|
oh, another thing on my mind:
Why do we see PS2-titles converted to GC and vice versa, but XBOX and PC on the sideline?!
I think I have an answer: Sony and Nintendo are fighters for isolated marketing!
Last edited by Supino on Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:15; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:19 Post subject: |
|
|
Haha.
Man, give it a rest. I wont even discuss with you because you obviously do not have a clue what you are talking about :/
The real power of the cell is not even the cell itself, it's in the APU's.
And where you see that cell equals a amd/intel 4ghz cpu is beyond me??
It says "Cell Equivalent To 5 Dual Opterons ". That's a shitload more than a simple 4ghz amd/intel cpu man.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:25 Post subject: |
|
|
Haha, no that's not what I am saying at all.
If you think I thought it will run at 32ghz you shuld rethink fast........
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:27 Post subject: |
|
|
Yes the clock rate will be 4ghz (likley 4.6), but not 4ghz as in 4ghz intel/amd rates.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:28 Post subject: |
|
|
| pallebrun wrote: | Haha, no that's not what I am saying at all.
If you think I thought it will run at 32ghz you shuld rethink fast........ |
Its will run at what i said it will run the real power in it is in the architecture, and the ability to steam multiple instructions across each cell. Still this does require some central activity and thats always going to limit it.
Just look on the PS3 as a 4ghz system thats what ist going to be, considering thats almost 5 times faster than PS1, you should be able to see why its a good upgrade......
Cell is fascinating cure, but its young and PS3 wont be its real testing ground.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:29 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:30 Post subject: |
|
|
| pallebrun wrote: | | Yes the clock rate will be 4ghz (likley 4.6), but not 4ghz as in 4ghz intel/amd rates. |
Its very hard to compare. Until we see it running and how it integrates with other factors, we wont know.
You should know that even things like AGP 8x are barely used, because the throughput isnt handled eslewhere in the system. Theoretically things are very powerful but actually making those theorectical powers come to life means a lot of things all having the same power. At the moment I find this unlikely. As i said when it hits desktops we will see how things pan out, I doubt we will see its real power for 10 years at least.
Too many other factors will inhibit those kind of speeds.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:33 Post subject: |
|
|
@pallebrun: I have read the link you provided and i have read this link here wich gives kind of feedback to the above link:
http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cells/Cell6.html
Now to some points he is mentioning:
| Quote: | I'm too Enthusiastic
I am very enthusiastic about this technology and I believe I have good reason to be.
I wrote this because after the recent announcement were made, it was clear that not many people knew how the Cell operated. |
Well the main point here is the word announcement, meaning it's all a marketing hype, Intel has announced a while ago that in their labs,a cpu ran succesfully at about 7Ghz, yet it means nothing as you won't see any like these CPUs from them soon.
| Quote: | Cell Will Demolish The PC On The First Day
One point that has been made to me is that claiming the Cell will demolish the PC on the first day is inviting criticism.
This claim is based on the fact that the similar technology in GPUs is already demolishing general purpose CPUs by hundreds of percent margins. This is not in theory, this is happening in real life applications today. GPUs are used in a variety of ways to accelerate different research applications, they can be used for a lot more than graphics. |
This is just bullshit, if it is this simple, nvidia and ati would put their gpu's in a fcpga package and sell them in competiton to amd and intel. GPUs are designed for a special purpose, and that's efficently calculate mathmatical operations wich are maybe not special but very commen to graphical scenarios. So to assume they are as efficeint in other areas without giving any examples is just talk by this guy. You know a formula one car might be fast on a race track but it's useless in a rally race.
| Quote: | Technical Analysis?
A few people have been making comments about the quality of this "Analysis". If you read the first 4 paragraphs at the beginning of part 1 it's pretty clear that this is not a technical analysis. |
Well if this is not about technology i wonder what it is then? To me it all sounds a lot like speculation.
| Quote: | Cell Equivalent To 5 Dual Opterons
Slashdot liked the article so much they posted it twice, unfortunately first time they used the dodgiest quote in the article...
This comparison is based on the Cell reaching it's theoretical maximum computing power. We will not know IF this is possible until the chip becomes available and even then it will need a "perfect" application which can use all the APUs at full power simultaneously. |
So here he is admitting that it's all about theoretical maximums in a perfect enviroment. If you look at ati and nvidia's press releases you can see that they always claim that their newest products are 100% faster than their old ones, in reality the only thing that remains is like a 10% margin, so to actually believe what this guy is writing sounds a bit foolish to me
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:40 Post subject: |
|
|
Ofcourse it's theoretical maximum since it's not even out yet. But IF sony and ibm can get all the power out off the cell, it will be very powerful, and problary up at those theoretical numbers. Ofcourse this might not happen (shit have happened before *cough* geforce fx *cough*), only time will tell.
The key is, the cell will be one extremely good architecture and both amd and intel will have to change the whole x86 if they want to keep up. They cant just keep on pushing it faster and faster, it will be at it's peak soon.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:41 Post subject: |
|
|
Half of this is the fault of geeks with too much time on their hands.
They explain things in a way that makes people misread and over estimate things. Cell is good technology, but people fail to understand a few points, its going to come onto PC also, and AMD and Intel are still going to dominate.
Why? because this is what they do, they specialise in making fast CPU powers and they will adapt and learn.
Also Cell is unproven and theroretical abilities mean nothing. Even AGP 8x is almost never used, depsite its mainstream application. The architecture and data movement in systems simple doesnt allow for those kind of speeds to be achieved in real terms. Bottleneck is the word.
Until you perfect the achitecture across every single pipeline and data processing area, you still have the same old issues.
Its FAR to early to be talking about Cell as the next big thing,, maybe it is maybe it isnt we will wait and see.
The main thing people don get is that a Cell chip has a CPU and eight other cells, giving it NINE cores.
The sum total power of the first patented chip, the one liekly to be in the PS3 is 4ghz.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/chips/0,39020354,39187097,00.htm
This article explains it far bettter without so much nerd speak to confuse people.
The PS3 with have eight cells and one cpu making the complete Cell chip which has a total estimated power of 4-4.5ghz
Thats still good, but not as world changing as some people are suggesting. For a console with all that power dedicated for games, it will make some nice games, but it does come with an array of problems in its own right.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Supino
Posts: 699
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:47 Post subject: |
|
|
Pallebrun:
That guy is babbeling about Cell V's the PC. That is just stupid! Cell VS Personal Computers?!?! I'm telling you Palleburn, this guy is a joke. What is this guy trying to tell us, exactly? I actually dont understand that article.
again: Cell vs Personal Computers? where is the logic?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 21:50 Post subject: |
|
|
I dont knock Xbox 2 and PS3....they will own the rig I am running right now. 4ghz is a lot of power for a pure games system without the OS overheads, and having 2.5mb of CPU memory is a very nice touch, power where it is trully needed!
Still I dont think it can be compared to the top end PC rigs, they are running some serious hard power, and I doubt any console ever will be able to compete at the top end of the PC market.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Surray
Posts: 5409
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 22:03 Post subject: |
|
|
| MuterFurker wrote: | I dont knock Xbox 2 and PS3....they will own the rig I am running right now. 4ghz is a lot of power for a pure games system without the OS overheads, and having 2.5mb of CPU memory is a very nice touch, power where it is trully needed!
Still I dont think it can be compared to the top end PC rigs, they are running some serious hard power, and I doubt any console ever will be able to compete at the top end of the PC market. |
most certainly, however, while an Xbox2 will perhaps cost around 400$ when it is launched, a PC which is able to run games with superior graphics at high performance at the time will cost what? 2000$?
I don't think it's a good idea to compare consoles and PCs, given the always-upgrading nature of PCs and their high costs to stay be able to play the newest games.
The 2 system types are so different from each other it's no use to try to compare them.
The PC of a guy who has unlimited funding available will probably always be faster than the consoles at the time, but truth is, people don't have enough money to keep upgrading their PCs all the time, while with a console you buy it once and you can always play the newest games and don't have to worry if your hardware can run it at decent framerates.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Feb 2005 22:15 Post subject: |
|
|
I agree, consoles are not for me, but I dont criticise them much. They are good in their own way, just not my think.
Im justa little sad that Xbox has hurt PC FPS market somewhat and hope devs can find some centre ground so PC games can still have the kind of performance they should get with PC based code and Xbox can have the best for its setup also.
Then we are all happy.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 4 of 5 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
