360 CPU and Cell are fairly equal according to Dave Shippy

[joeorc]

Stan85 said:

haxxiy said:
Yeah, 165 million transistors, 1MB of cache and 3 cores are indeed very similar to 300 million transistors, 2,5MB of cache and 9 cores. That's why everybody uses X360 as cluster supercomputers like PS3.

No seriously, at its very best the X360's CPU is 3,2 GHz x 8 FLOPS/clock cycle (as any IBM PPE) x 3 cores = 76,2 GFLOPS of peak performance.

PS3 has nine cores (1 PPE, 8 SPEs) at 3.2 GHz which means 230,4 GFLOPS of peak performance or 179,2 in-game processing power avaliable.

Oh and btw the RSX is also a bit stronger than the Xenos (4 alus x 2 madds x 24 pipelines + 5 alus x 8 pipelines x 550 MHz = 255 GFLOPS verse 5 alus x 48 pipelines x 500 MHz = 240 GFLOPS)

X360 multiplats look better most of time because X360 has more memory avaliable (more memory = bigger textures and frame buffer) and PS3 is harder to work. Plus most PS3 multiplats do not even work with the whole Cell at all (only its single general purpose core).

Your haterboxes.

If you must know,the CELL is not that great for games,but great for...what Sony was thinking it will be great for.

The CELL is hard/very hard to work with,depending on your studio development budget.

The CELL is more expensive to make that the 360 CPU.

The CELL,even if it was more powerfull than 360`s CPU,the ps3`s memory bandwidth will just hold the performance down (and it is holding the ps3 down,btw).

Now,you have to give it to MS...cheaper,very developer friendly (it`s a Pc actually),same as powerfull as the CELL...yup,bravo MS.

 

 

did you not read what theOP's article stated he was pointing out "HOW you use that hardware"

and Since the Cell Processor is a CPU/GPU combo chip, i think it's well suited for Game's, and of course the memory bandwidth problem , that everyone who like's to squeese every ounce of performance out of the XBOX360 in hope's to off set any and all advantages that the PS3 has over the xbox360, just so they can make the xbox360 alway's look better in the eye's of the game community...O'l brother

the xbox360 is a fine game system, "when there is no problem's, with the hardware" that is. the game's are very cool. i play some of the GAME's that the xbox360 has on PC.

but the truth of the matter is developer's are just getting started with the PS3.

why, you may ask:

think about this for a sec:

when was the Cell Processor released to the Development community...the Cell Processor
was unvailed : 2004

"STI". The architectural design and first implementation were carried out at the STI Design Center in Austin, Texas over a four-year period beginning March 2001 on a budget reported by IBM as approaching US$400 million

so look when the Development kits for the playstation 3 was released...mid to late 2005 the first development kits were very few and released in limited #'s , and even then some developers did not get one until spring 2006.

if it takes Epic as an Example to make the Unreal Engine III for the PC/x360 3 to 4 years to develop that Engine prior to even had the chance to get a hold of a Cell Processor, than they now have a New type of Processor to add to that bunch its no wonder developers are just getting out the more mature Engines for the Playstation 3

and if you would know the Cell processor is designed to attack the "Memory Wall" problem.

http://www.gamezero.com/team-0/articles/interviews/dr_h_peter_hofstee/

And as for Multi-Platform game's nearly alway's look better and play better on the XBOX360:

since the Cell Processor is a CPU/GPU... its that dedicated GPU part of the chip. Is it being used in majority of the Multiplatform game ENGINES right now...?

thats the point..if it did, what do you think would happen with the results...One only has to look at KZ2, UNCHARTED to see some of the results they are getting right now.