PS3 Cpu Vs todays cpus

[HFS+]

So are todays cpus more powerful than the ps3s cpu? I believe the ps3s cpu is 7 core at 3.2Ghz each core.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Yes. They've been more powerful since PS3's launch.

 

[ShawnD1]

We had this debate a long time ago.
http://208.65.201.106/showthread.php?t=2032822

The PS3 does about 25gflops at double precision. The i7 920 does 80gflops at double precision. The cell processor has been considered ghetto tech for a good couple years already.

 

[natto fire]

Cell (PS3):
230.4 GFLOPS (single precision)
21 GFLOPS (double precision)

Not finding data on single precision for Sandy Bridge CPUs but ~70 GFLOPs with double precision. So yeah, more powerful.

Of course your OP is vague and I am not sure what you mean by "powerful", but GPGPU computing makes both of those look pretty silly. A ~$200 Radeon 6950 will hit 2253 GFLOPS single precision and 563 GFLOPS double.

So depending on what kind of maths you need to do, there is a very obvious solution on what is more powerful.

 

[Arachnotronic]

These theoretical raw floating point values have very little to do with a CPU's power. Especially since CPUs aren't simply dumb floating point processors -- branchy integer code is pretty darn important.

 

[Red Hawk]

They're hard to compare, because the Cell processor architecture is radically different than traditional x86 multicore processors. In any given x86 processor, all the cores are equal and handle instructions in the exact same way as each other. In the PS3's Cell processor, there is one central core (the "Power Processing Element") while there are six functional "synergistic processing elements".

So core count, and clock speed, are not useful for comparing the performance of the Cell and current x86 processors (or AMD and Intel processors. *Ba-doomp-chsh*) Benchmarks would be better, but we can't really run benchmarks on the PS3. All we have to compare the two are theoretical numbers and apparent gaming performance. Which, as ShawnD1 indicated, modern x86 processors bury the Cell at.

 

[Smartazz]

Red Hawk is right, they're really not comparable. The Cell Broadband Engine is good at less generalized tasks than an X86 processor is. A GPU is even worse at generalized tasks and this is why we see absolutely ridiculous performance figures on modern graphics cards.

 

[natto fire]

These theoretical raw floating point values have very little to do with a CPU's power. Especially since CPUs aren't simply dumb floating point processors -- branchy integer code is pretty darn important.

Yeah this whole thread is kind of moot. I do distributed computing, so that is why I immediately went to FLOPs, and judging by the text in the OP, talking specific things like branch predictions, cache misses, pipelines, etc. would more than likely would go over his head.

 

[micrometers]

We had this debate a long time ago.
http://208.65.201.106/showthread.php?t=2032822

The PS3 does about 25gflops at double precision. The i7 920 does 80gflops at double precision. The cell processor has been considered ghetto tech for a good couple years already.

That's pretty unfair, given that the i7 came out one or two years ago, four years after the PS3.

I wonder why doesn't sony just stick an intel core processor into a box and call it a game console.

 

[Red Hawk]

That's pretty unfair, given that the i7 came out one or two years ago, four years after the PS3.

I wonder why doesn't sony just stick an intel core processor into a box and call it a game console.

Microsoft tried that by putting a Pentium III into the original Xbox. Problem was, they had to pay royalties to Intel for every single chip that they put in an Xbox. For the current consoles Sony and Microsoft essentially own the rights to produce their CPUs and can make as many as they want.

As for why Sony and Microsoft don't just put a new processor in, well, there's a lot more to a console than the CPU. They need to upgrade the graphics chip, RAM, design a motherboard to put it all on, etc. It takes a lot of time and money. Presumably they're designing new consoles now.

 

[HFS+]

so i take it the ps3 cell is technically one core?

 

[Smartazz]

so i take it the ps3 cell is technically one core?

Yes, the Cell is 1 true core, with 6 simpler SPEs which are capable of less complex operations than the main core. The CPU of the Xbox 360 on the other hand is a true triple core, Power PC processor that is rather similar to the Cell Broadband Engine.

 

[lamedude]

The PPE is about as fast as a G5 1.6GHZ.

 

[Lonbjerg]

People have forgotten Anandtech's pulled article on the PR FUD on consoles FLOPS and CPU's?

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.video.sony-playstation2/msg/62ff83d96ea78ea9?hl=en&pli=1

TL;DR

Console CPU sucks...period.

 

[Arkaign]

It was fast for a console chip circa 2006. Now it's probably not all that far from high end tablet or netbook processors really.

 

[IonusX]

So are todays cpus more powerful than the ps3s cpu? I believe the ps3s cpu is 7 core at 3.2Ghz each core.

tc by the time you see a ps4 on a store shelf modern computers will be anywhere from x10-x15 a ps3 and will probably double to 5 times the ps4's capabilities
its really quite a joke. you want me to name the parts thats probably be msot similar to a ps3 here ya go:
amd phenom I x3 2.5-2.7ghz
amd x1800gto/nvidia 7800 series equiv.
-1.5gb ram
its really quite a disgrace. at the rate this whole console gen is going integrated video, and 3rd party cpu's will surpass what the consoles are bloody well capable of doing atm. thats right VIA's cpu's and intels gpu's will rape a ps3's performance. thats where i see things and LOL everytime i think about it

 

[IonusX]

It was fast for a console chip circa 2006. Now it's probably not all that far from high end tablet or netbook processors really.

mhmm which begs me to ask wtf was the CIA thinking when they decided to host a ps3 server farm haha, the things a relic and it was then!

 

[Ben90]

its really quite a disgrace. at the rate this whole console gen is going integrated video, and 3rd party cpu's will surpass what the consoles are bloody well capable of doing atm. thats right VIA's cpu's and intels gpu's will rape a ps3's performance. thats where i see things and LOL everytime i think about it

And at the rate things are going, that Intel IGP on a console which allows direct access to the hardware will outperform whatever GTX Super SLI 99990 in everything but the most throughput intensive software.

It is already a lot closer than you think.

 

[IonusX]

And at the rate things are going, that Intel IGP on a console which allows direct access to the hardware will outperform whatever GTX Super SLI 99990 in everything but the most throughput intensive software.

It is already a lot closer than you think.

no, its not
and not after amd is done with it. i mean they own the contract deals for all three consoles gpu, as well as 2 of their cpu's (wii-u will be non-intel or amd)
atm the next xbox appears to sport a thuban 1035t and and an hd 4800 series chipset (4830-4890).
its suspected that the wii uses an hd 4830 as well and its suspected that the next ps will sport a llano quad core with a second card in HCF most likely a 6670 so designation 6990D, but cant be confirmed

how do we know this, well the sony knowledge is very dated and unconfirmed, while the xbox we know for a fact it sports an amd 6-core so thuban or zambezi, take ur pick XD.

 

[Smartazz]

I expect the gap between high end gaming PCs and consoles to only get larger as time goes on. The power consumption of high end GPUs is getting to be too high for the form factor of a console vs. a large tower. When the Xbox 360 and PS3 were built, the 7900GT and X1900XT were high end and didn't consume too much power/generate too much heat. Now, the GTX 580/HD7970 generates quite a bit of heat. By simple virtue of power consumption and heat generation, I doubt the next Xbox and PS4 will use top of the line GPUs again. If physics moves to the GPUs, the difference between PCs and consoles could become even larger.

 

[sm625]

I dont have any comments on the processing power of the PS3 directly, but I can tell you that its web browser is shite. I was browsing netflix on a PS3. I thought it would be a good idea to quickly check whichflicks.com to see if there was anything available to watch that actually didnt suck. It took forever for whichflicks to even load, and once it did I could not adjust the sliders. Just like with the icrap devices, it just didnt work. Works fine on firefox though.

 

[ElFenix]

mhmm which begs me to ask wtf was the CIA thinking when they decided to host a ps3 server farm haha, the things a relic and it was then!

which leads you to ask, or prompts you to ask. beg means to avoid. like begging off work.



anyway, the cell processor at one time powered much of the green 500 supercomputer list. with specific programming at specific tasks it was a performance/watt beast. IBM's cell-powered roadrunner debuted at no. 1 on the top 500 list more than 3 years ago and is still 10th in the world.

 

[Chiropteran]

which leads you to ask, or prompts you to ask. beg means to avoid. like begging off work.

Modern usage

Many English speakers use "begs the question" to mean "raises the question", and follow that phrase with the question that is raised;[11] for example, "this year's deficit is half a trillion dollars, which begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?" Many philosophers and grammarians deem such usage incorrect.[12][13] Academic linguist Mark Liberman recommends avoiding the phrase entirely.[14]

 

[Ben90]

Funner is a word. The English language is constantly evolving. Grammarians can get off their high horse.

 

[soccerballtux]

You know the xbox360's cpu is much more exciting IMHO. Triple core with dual threading at 3.2ghz it would be much better for day to day tasks like interneting and gaming. The PS3 cpu has one single?dual? Threaded core at similar frequency and the other "cores" aren't anything like a "core" in the traditional sense, they can only do maths.