The xbox 360 has a 3 core cpu not that different from the Cell running at ~ 3.2 Ghz , the PS3's cell has 8 running at 4 Ghz...On paper it looks like the cell has it, but is it that simple?
Xbox 360 CPU vs PS3 CPU...3 cores vs 8 cores
- Thread starter clarkey01
- Start date
No, it's not that simple. Cell has different types of cores, many of them specialized. Depending on how you measure performance, either could be faster. They both could also be equally as powerful if the software that runs on them is properly optimized for the processor it's running on.
Wasnt' the xbox 360 supposed to have a tripple core variant on the G5?
Wasnt' the xbox 360 supposed to have a tripple core variant on the G5?
I believe the cell processors are to handle single threads and single task while the 3 cores of the 360 each can handle 2 threads....So it isn't as great as the numbers may first seem...
I have a feeling Cell is going to come up short, purely because it is supposed to be terribly hard to code for.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
It'll be so funny if nintendo with the smallest budget comes out with 4 x 4.0ghz IBM processors and dual-core ATI R600 videocard in 1 year from now at $199....ahh wishful thinking....
What exactly is the core in the XBOX 360? They say it's a PPC variant, but does it resemble a G5? A G4? Is it in order or out of order? What's the fetch and issue width? How many functional units are there? Details! We want details!
And I quote:
ie: it will be difficult to code for the Cell and use its full potential, while the XBox CPU will be easier to code for.
The XBox core also runs multiple threads (suggests 2), while each SPE will run one thread, and there are 8 of them.
The whole architecture of the two processors is also different (hence the difficult to code for part), and consequently it will depends on the developers which is faster, and how they manage to harness the power available.
Everything I hear from Nintendo is a company that wants to make new, creative games, and isn't convinced that faster, stronger is the best way to do that.
Nintendo is branching into originality, which very well may kill them in the US market. I'm sure they'll be fine in Japan though.
ive heard rumors of a 4core ppc variant at 2.5 ghz. performance shouldn't be that far behind ps3 or xbox360. What nintendo should be concerned about is features.
Put it this way...assuming those specs are correct, it is like this: If a developer spends much amounts of time working with the cell processor for a game, the cell is definately better than the Xbox 360 cpu...BUT, if there is a game for PS3 that is for all systems (or more than just ps3), they may not spend as much time with the cell, therefore, it might not be that great.
overall, it comes down to what developers do...if they work hard, the ps3 has a better cpu...but a hard one to work with, i've heard...
overall, it comes down to what developers do...if they work hard, the ps3 has a better cpu...but a hard one to work with, i've heard...
If it's like CELL's PPE (which seems likely), it's a 2 issue in-order core, 2-way SMT, draws <30 watts @ 4GHz, so probably very low power at 3.2. Apparently the 360's variant does have some changes though, like sharing the L2 between 3 cores, and 128 altivec registers (altivec normally has 32 registers). Some rumors said that it could only do single-issue per thread, but I haven't heard much about that lately; hopefully it's not true. realworldtech.com has some excellent articles on it.
Hmm, Sony up to the same old BS as usual. As to my knowledge, the xbox 360 has a four fold advantage over the PS3 in regard to raw processing power. The Sony unit (CELL) has a tested output of somewhere in the area of 200-250Gflop. Now architectural differences aside (We'll get to that later), the tri-coreIBM PowerPC processor in the 360 can perform well over a Tflop (emphasis on "well over"). Some claim it to run closer in the range of about 1.2Tflop (Unconfirmed). I saw the whole presentation for the PS3, and I felt that deja vu all over again. Sony claims that it's graphics core adds on an additional 1.8Tflop of processing power for a total of 2Tflop. ??? ... ??? ... ??? . WOW! And I thought with the release of the PSP that Sony was finally ready to step up to the big boys' table... I was wrong. The absurdity of their claims can't even be measured, as a graphics core has nothing to do with the systems CPU. To put it simply, SCEI is lying, again. And simply is trying to their way out of another technology spoof (and miserably failing). Cell is no where close to the power of microsoft's processing solution, and just as last time when they claimed that their "emotional engine" was on top, it ended up about 1/10 as fast as the marketed number. This isn't to say that the PS3 is inferior to the XBOX 360, only that we have seen this before and obviously microsoft came out on top. As far as developing goes and coding, this system looks even more rediculous than the emotion CPU. Many argue that the PS2 was more powerful than the xbox when people learned how to use it, but to be honest no one (except maybe bungie) ever dug that deep into the XBOX's power. My guess from the lineup of 3rd parties this time around (a vast majority of Sony's staples hoping on the XBOX360 bandwagon) that sony has finally run out of marketing tactics to appease the consumers, and with development costs skyrocketing, I think developers will put more consideration into what system they decide to base their games. But this is really just fuzz right now. Most consumers are terribly educated and will usually just listen to whatever the cool crowd says. Last gen, Sony had overwhelming support from pop culture, which made playstation into the cliche that took out nintendo. I think already with microsoft's MTV marketing campaign and sleek design (not to mention billions of dollars) that they will push sony out of the market. But this all remains to be seen. One thing is for damn sure. CELL is no where near as powerful as the 360CPU. It's almost unethical to compare them.
Where do you get that info from? Any reference?
Have you watched the PS3 E3 Conference? As far as I've watched; the technical showcase of the Cell processor was promising for me. The rendering of 1000 thumbnails simultaneously on-screen; Decoding of 12 channels of HD video realtime on screen(With PC currently struggling to decode 1 real time). The rendering of 3D landscape utilising none of the GPU power...
It doesn't seem to be an inferior CPU
All these are mentioned in the demo
I suggest you take a look first
http://www.gamespot.com/live/stream_asx...ayall=&letsgs=&push=&prestream=&first=
The Cell technical showcase is around middle of the 1hour video
Just search around. The whole technical demo should begin with a guy mentioning a duck in a bathtub demo
I am not saying you are wrong; But just to make sure you're not just talking without really observed anything. Just to make sure
My information is highly researched and is directly sourced from Microsoft and SCEI. The techinical numbers (output in teraflops) is from mixed sources which I deem reliable. Microsoft stated in it's xbox 360 launch that it 's tri core CPU performs at over 1Tflop, just as sony announced that it's CPU could push out 200Gflop (I think 218 was their exact number). The whole "combined for 2Tflops" thing was also a direct comment made by reps from SCEI, and I believe it was stated in their PC as well. As far as my data on past console and the console market, I have long been an amatuer analyst of the console market (or really any market for that matter). I put literally thousands of hours into my reasearch, and I try to maintain a "no spin" approach to the issues of chip wars, conosle wars, etc. And I generally get alot of my info from great people that run sites like this (AnandTech, INQ, M, ExL). This is all according to my sources, I could be wrong of course. But generally these guys know things months before you'll read it online. I trust 'em with my reputation.
hello, I'm extremely interested in the next-gen systems. From wat ur saying, the ps3 is over exagerated. The processor is a piece of crap and sony is just trying to cover up the fact they spent billions on a processor that isn't that good in the first place. I have read from many sources, the gpu is what makes the floating point performance rise. Ps3's obviously is better but, knowing how ati can pull impossibles off, i think the graphics will be the same. Look at the 6600 and x500 or w/e its called. Ati's chip had less transistors on it than nvidia, yet it still beat it out. Anyways, i think that microsoft just announced the operation of the cpu itself. They never added in the gpu. that would be a very smart move. sony will think they one uped microsoft and then microsoft will announce the "true" specs of the video card and the actually overall system performance. I'm guessing the 2.6-3+ teraflops performance. The only thing is that this all depends on waht microsoft decided to add in the spec sheet. If they were only talkin about the cpu, then they have sony in a trap and will completey blow them away when the xbox 360 is launched. remember at the bottom of the xbox 360 spec sheet. specs may SUBSTANTILY (sp?) change. I'm putting all bets on the 360 ending up being more powerful, and for gosh sakes, i hope it is. I'm sick of the japs and thier tech taking out true american made goods. But then again, i may be wrong and ps3 will blow the xbox out of the water. i dont really care, becuase im buying the xbox. They have most of the exclusive games im interested in, and the used to be exclusive games (ex final fantasy, gta) ...all eventually come to the xbox
I'm not really that big on american electronics. But I agree in some respects. Sony basically lies their way into good market status. I don't believe (IMHO) that GPUs can be defined in Teraflops, as visual quality has everything to do with smart architecture and technique, not neccesarily high numbers. I can guarentee you that ATi's X5 chip will outperform Nvidia's solution,. Why? Because ATi got smart (not that they weren't already) and completely rethought and redesigned every aspect of the video processor. Nvidia's chip variant is simply an off the shelf NV60ish core, not the G70 as previously thought. Even I am baffled by the ingenious design of the X5, a design so simple that allows shading techniques that previously thought impossible. I'd say it was the biggest chip since NV20 (Geforce3, which happens to be the graphics chip in the original xbox), as it allows programability to the progamable shader architecture (say what? 
). There's a novel idea, a revolutionary design that actually simplifies programming and lowers developement costs (Sony should take notes). But like I said, we've seen Sony's lies before. Pretty much every specification of the PS2 was exponentially everrated (sometimes up to ten times as powerful as it actually was in many respects). This smells all too familiar to me. Sony comes out with a rediculously complex architecture and throws around technical terms and numbers that their own engineers don't even understand, basically leaving us with more questions than answers.
). There's a novel idea, a revolutionary design that actually simplifies programming and lowers developement costs (Sony should take notes). But like I said, we've seen Sony's lies before. Pretty much every specification of the PS2 was exponentially everrated (sometimes up to ten times as powerful as it actually was in many respects). This smells all too familiar to me. Sony comes out with a rediculously complex architecture and throws around technical terms and numbers that their own engineers don't even understand, basically leaving us with more questions than answers.TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter