Tim Sweeney comments about PS3 architecture

[Xoj]

Soleron said:

Xoj said:
he better get used it, because multi thread it's the future.
now intel and IBM cpu are way over 8 cores. so more than the cell.
and future cpu are going to be multi core, and multi SPE. making more complex.

and PC have unified memory architecture, this isn't really a plus but a minus,
cpu and gpu sharing memory have it downsize, either way integrated chips would be outperforming dedicated DDR3-5 GPus now.
360 aids itself with a fast 10mb , but that isn't enough for a full msx2 and HDR fp 16 720p, thats why we get a 640p halo: reach upscaled to 720p --> 1080p.

I don't really see multi-threading as the future on the desktop. On the server they have 6 cores (Intel and AMD) [Not 8 yet] and that will be 12 early next year with Magny-Cours, but on the desktop except for the $1000+ CPU price point it will be all quad-cores until 2011 at least.

Server apps scale with more cores, but desktop apps don't - and don't need to; most consumer apps are either GPU-bound (games, media encoding, rendering) or don't actually benefit from faster hardware noticeably (Office).

PCs don't have unified memory, the CPU has RAM and the GPU has VRAM. Integrated graphics that use main RAM are much slower due to high latencies and low bandwidth. GPUs will eventually be on the CPU package but this isn't happening to high-end GPUs in the foreseeable future (Clarkdale/Llano are IGPs basically).

RAM is not the main bottleneck on either console. GPU power is, and the 360 has more in most cases unless you use the Cell to render which no one does.

who said desktop ? but rather gaming PCs and consoles and there are multi thread servers, IBM road runner it's a cluster of cell processors.

and IGP take ram from main pool, for IGP, especially for notebooks almost 50% of notebooks sold in 2007 had intel gma 950 which share ram, a dedicated gpu should be faster.

a pc with 3gb ram, vs a pc with 2gb + 1gb on the gpu same spec, the dedicated one would be faster.