By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - PS3 is Not More Powerful than Xbox 360, says game Dev!

Ascended_Saiyan3 on 14 April 2009

Let me know if you need more.  Just let me know why? ;)



Around the Network
joshin69 on 14 April 2009

"Fat is good for you" says butcher. Or "veg is bad for you" says butcher. What ever.



 

 assumption is the mother of all f**k ups 

Ascended_Saiyan3 on 14 April 2009

^^WTH?



Godot on 14 April 2009
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Deneidez said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
It's already been shown, though many tests, that 1 SPU can equal or surpass Intel's top single core processor in many tasks. The inter-core bandwidth has been proven at 197GB/s. The link from my percious post shows Intel Core i7 965XE's TOTAL bandwidth (cache, memory, and inter-core bandwidth) is 106GB/s. Plus, it only has 4 cores at 2 ops per clock. Also, I can't believe you talked about running code/apps not written for it's architecture! That's a bit like saying 2.4GHz PowerPPC processor would demolish an Intel Core i7 965XE at Linux written specifically for PPCs. LOL. It's just that the code is written to take advantage of different architectures.

I would like to see those tests. If you get me ps3, I can also make program for it which runs fine on Xbox(original) and really doesn't run well on ps3 even if you find any expert to optimate that program in anyway but still making it function like original(Of course).

 

Btw, parallizing is very easy on homogeneous platform.

http://www.mc.com/uploadedFiles/Cell-Perf-Simple.pdf

Against the fastest single cores (like Intel Xeon)...1 SPE can perform up to 7 times better than a single core 3.6GHz Intel Xeon.



http://www.research.ibm.com/cell/whitepapers/alias_cloth.pdf

Cloth Physics on 2.4GHz Cell vs single core 3.6GHz Intel Xeon



http://www.simbiosys.ca/science/white_papers/eHiTS_on_the_Cell.pdf

Performance comparison between Intel/AMD dual-core processors versus Cell...also partially explains that realism iin games is not limited by the GPU anymore.



http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~samw/research/papers/ipdps08.pdf

Cell beats Intel Quad-Core (Clovertown) at DP GFLOPS, which it's terrible at compared to it's SP (just divide the chart number in half for Cell due to Cell blade being used).



http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/power/library/pa-cellperf/

IBM document on Cell and per SPE performance



http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ibm-lead-architect-cell-cpu-ps3-gaming,1336.html

SPEs capable of "running single core scalar programs in their entirety.



http://lzhan.wikispaces.com/Cell+Programming?f=print

Individual programmer experiments on PS3...shows per SPE output at bottom.



http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0611/0611201v2.pdf

Cell almost 20x (2 orders of magnitude) faster than Opteron processor at Molecule Dynamics



http://www.sintef.no/upload/IKT/9011/SimOslo/eVITA/2008/hagen2.pdf

Cell versus Intel Core2 Duo in power consumption and theoretical performance.



http://www.power.org/resources/devcorner/cellcorner/hpcspe.pdf

Cell versus Intel Quad Core (Clovertown) theoretical GFLOPS...and real world Multigrid Finite Element solver running at an unprecedented 52GFLOPS sustained performance.



http://www.power.org/devcon/07/Session_Downloads/PADC07_Bergmann_Sourcery_VSIPL.pdf

Cell almost 14x the sustained performance of single core 3.6GHz Intel Xeon at VSIPL++ fast convolution.



http://www.cis.udel.edu/~cavazos/cisc879/papers/cellFMwhitepaper.pdf

Cell (1GB RAM) 11x faster than Intel Quad-Core (Clovertown) w/16GB RAM at SP for financial market applications.



http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:lLEILf-tpPAJ:gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/2005/07/26/beyond-polygons/+SPE+GFLOPS&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=30&gl=us&client=opera

Cell ray-casts complex 720p scenes at greater than 30fps.



http://64.233.169.132/search?q=cache:XcMos60ZImsJ:gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/2005/11/30/+gametomorrow+gpus-vs-cell&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Cell beats Nvidia 7800 GT OC at ray-tracing quaternion Julia fractals by a factor of over 5x.



http://64.233.169.132/search?q=cache:F7MZrviYvQwJ:gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/%3Fp%3D187+gametomorrow+Cell+vs+g80&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Cell over 4x faster at ray-tracing Stanford Bunny than Nvidia 8800GTX.

 

The last 3 links were to GameTomorrow.  That site is down, but a search will reveal that information on other site.

 

You posted old links or links to IBM. Of course, IBM will claim that their product is better.

OT: The truth is that the PS3 is more powerful than the 360 the same way the Xbox was superior to the Gamecube. Anyway, Microsoft doesn't even try to make really graphically impressive games. You just have to look at how better Halo and Gears of War sold than Uncharted and Killzone 2.

 



How many cups of darkness have I drank over the years? Even I don't know...

 

Deneidez on 14 April 2009
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Deneidez said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
It's already been shown, though many tests, that 1 SPU can equal or surpass Intel's top single core processor in many tasks. The inter-core bandwidth has been proven at 197GB/s. The link from my percious post shows Intel Core i7 965XE's TOTAL bandwidth (cache, memory, and inter-core bandwidth) is 106GB/s. Plus, it only has 4 cores at 2 ops per clock. Also, I can't believe you talked about running code/apps not written for it's architecture! That's a bit like saying 2.4GHz PowerPPC processor would demolish an Intel Core i7 965XE at Linux written specifically for PPCs. LOL. It's just that the code is written to take advantage of different architectures.

I would like to see those tests. If you get me ps3, I can also make program for it which runs fine on Xbox(original) and really doesn't run well on ps3 even if you find any expert to optimate that program in anyway but still making it function like original(Of course).

*lots of links about floating point operations on CELL vs general purpose cpus.*

So its not many tasks, but one task? Did you know that computing is much more than just floating point operations and that CELL is crap compared to newest GPUs today in flops? Do you also know why games do not run entirely on GPUs today? Thats the same reason why CELL can just beat current cpus in some tasks. I don't say its piece of crap, but its not really breakthrough in computer science.

@MikeB

I have already answered how. You just ignored my post last time. I did even provide you some pseudocode, but you didn't seem to understand it.

(Btw, tomorrow I publish one of my programs(For you anyway. It has been available on irc for a while already.). Check sig. ^^)



New crap available on mi pages!

Around the Network
NNN2004 on 14 April 2009
Deneidez said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Deneidez said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
It's already been shown, though many tests, that 1 SPU can equal or surpass Intel's top single core processor in many tasks. The inter-core bandwidth has been proven at 197GB/s. The link from my percious post shows Intel Core i7 965XE's TOTAL bandwidth (cache, memory, and inter-core bandwidth) is 106GB/s. Plus, it only has 4 cores at 2 ops per clock. Also, I can't believe you talked about running code/apps not written for it's architecture! That's a bit like saying 2.4GHz PowerPPC processor would demolish an Intel Core i7 965XE at Linux written specifically for PPCs. LOL. It's just that the code is written to take advantage of different architectures.

I would like to see those tests. If you get me ps3, I can also make program for it which runs fine on Xbox(original) and really doesn't run well on ps3 even if you find any expert to optimate that program in anyway but still making it function like original(Of course).

*lots of links about floating point operations on CELL vs general purpose cpus.*

So its not many tasks, but one task? Did you know that computing is much more than just floating point operations and that CELL is crap compared to newest GPUs today in flops? Do you also know why games do not run entirely on GPUs today? Thats the same reason why CELL can just beat current cpus in some tasks. I don't say its piece of crap, but its not really breakthrough in computer science.

@MikeB

I have already answered how. You just ignored my post last time. I did even provide you some pseudocode, but you didn't seem to understand it.

(Btw, tomorrow I publish one of my programs(For you anyway. It has been available on irc for a while already.). Check sig. ^^)

yeah and i dont think the CELL is better than the intel i7

 



Ascended_Saiyan3 on 14 April 2009
Godot said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Deneidez said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
It's already been shown, though many tests, that 1 SPU can equal or surpass Intel's top single core processor in many tasks. The inter-core bandwidth has been proven at 197GB/s. The link from my percious post shows Intel Core i7 965XE's TOTAL bandwidth (cache, memory, and inter-core bandwidth) is 106GB/s. Plus, it only has 4 cores at 2 ops per clock. Also, I can't believe you talked about running code/apps not written for it's architecture! That's a bit like saying 2.4GHz PowerPPC processor would demolish an Intel Core i7 965XE at Linux written specifically for PPCs. LOL. It's just that the code is written to take advantage of different architectures.

I would like to see those tests. If you get me ps3, I can also make program for it which runs fine on Xbox(original) and really doesn't run well on ps3 even if you find any expert to optimate that program in anyway but still making it function like original(Of course).

 

Btw, parallizing is very easy on homogeneous platform.

http://www.mc.com/uploadedFiles/Cell-Perf-Simple.pdf

Against the fastest single cores (like Intel Xeon)...1 SPE can perform up to 7 times better than a single core 3.6GHz Intel Xeon.



http://www.research.ibm.com/cell/whitepapers/alias_cloth.pdf

Cloth Physics on 2.4GHz Cell vs single core 3.6GHz Intel Xeon



http://www.simbiosys.ca/science/white_papers/eHiTS_on_the_Cell.pdf

Performance comparison between Intel/AMD dual-core processors versus Cell...also partially explains that realism iin games is not limited by the GPU anymore.



http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~samw/research/papers/ipdps08.pdf

Cell beats Intel Quad-Core (Clovertown) at DP GFLOPS, which it's terrible at compared to it's SP (just divide the chart number in half for Cell due to Cell blade being used).



http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/power/library/pa-cellperf/

IBM document on Cell and per SPE performance



http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ibm-lead-architect-cell-cpu-ps3-gaming,1336.html

SPEs capable of "running single core scalar programs in their entirety.



http://lzhan.wikispaces.com/Cell+Programming?f=print

Individual programmer experiments on PS3...shows per SPE output at bottom.



http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0611/0611201v2.pdf

Cell almost 20x (2 orders of magnitude) faster than Opteron processor at Molecule Dynamics



http://www.sintef.no/upload/IKT/9011/SimOslo/eVITA/2008/hagen2.pdf

Cell versus Intel Core2 Duo in power consumption and theoretical performance.



http://www.power.org/resources/devcorner/cellcorner/hpcspe.pdf

Cell versus Intel Quad Core (Clovertown) theoretical GFLOPS...and real world Multigrid Finite Element solver running at an unprecedented 52GFLOPS sustained performance.



http://www.power.org/devcon/07/Session_Downloads/PADC07_Bergmann_Sourcery_VSIPL.pdf

Cell almost 14x the sustained performance of single core 3.6GHz Intel Xeon at VSIPL++ fast convolution.



http://www.cis.udel.edu/~cavazos/cisc879/papers/cellFMwhitepaper.pdf

Cell (1GB RAM) 11x faster than Intel Quad-Core (Clovertown) w/16GB RAM at SP for financial market applications.



http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:lLEILf-tpPAJ:gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/2005/07/26/beyond-polygons/+SPE+GFLOPS&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=30&gl=us&client=opera

Cell ray-casts complex 720p scenes at greater than 30fps.



http://64.233.169.132/search?q=cache:XcMos60ZImsJ:gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/2005/11/30/+gametomorrow+gpus-vs-cell&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Cell beats Nvidia 7800 GT OC at ray-tracing quaternion Julia fractals by a factor of over 5x.



http://64.233.169.132/search?q=cache:F7MZrviYvQwJ:gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/%3Fp%3D187+gametomorrow+Cell+vs+g80&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Cell over 4x faster at ray-tracing Stanford Bunny than Nvidia 8800GTX.

 

The last 3 links were to GameTomorrow.  That site is down, but a search will reveal that information on other site.

 

You posted old links or links to IBM. Of course, IBM will claim that their product is better.

OT: The truth is that the PS3 is more powerful than the 360 the same way the Xbox was superior to the Gamecube. Anyway, Microsoft doesn't even try to make really graphically impressive games. You just have to look at how better Halo and Gears of War sold than Uncharted and Killzone 2.

 

OMG, you KNOW all those links aren't to IBM.  You have a funny way of ignoring proven data.  And, not that it changes anything, but you have some links to 2008 studies.  I guess you call that old as well.  Why are you acting like time will change the Cell's performance?  That makes NO sense.

Your off topic portion: PS3 is more powerful than the 360 in the same way the Xbox was more powerful than the PS2.  PLUS, you are lying to yourself, if you believe MS isn't trying to make games "graphically impressive".

 



Ascended_Saiyan3 on 14 April 2009
Deneidez said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Deneidez said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
It's already been shown, though many tests, that 1 SPU can equal or surpass Intel's top single core processor in many tasks. The inter-core bandwidth has been proven at 197GB/s. The link from my percious post shows Intel Core i7 965XE's TOTAL bandwidth (cache, memory, and inter-core bandwidth) is 106GB/s. Plus, it only has 4 cores at 2 ops per clock. Also, I can't believe you talked about running code/apps not written for it's architecture! That's a bit like saying 2.4GHz PowerPPC processor would demolish an Intel Core i7 965XE at Linux written specifically for PPCs. LOL. It's just that the code is written to take advantage of different architectures.

I would like to see those tests. If you get me ps3, I can also make program for it which runs fine on Xbox(original) and really doesn't run well on ps3 even if you find any expert to optimate that program in anyway but still making it function like original(Of course).

*lots of links about floating point operations on CELL vs general purpose cpus.*

So its not many tasks, but one task? Did you know that computing is much more than just floating point operations and that CELL is crap compared to newest GPUs today in flops? Do you also know why games do not run entirely on GPUs today? Thats the same reason why CELL can just beat current cpus in some tasks. I don't say its piece of crap, but its not really breakthrough in computer science.

@MikeB

I have already answered how. You just ignored my post last time. I did even provide you some pseudocode, but you didn't seem to understand it.

(Btw, tomorrow I publish one of my programs(For you anyway. It has been available on irc for a while already.). Check sig. ^^)

You bold words you added aren't true.  The Cell is a general purpose processor.  Even Dr. Hofstee, the creator of the Cell, said they are general purpose processors.  Those links show general purpose in the versatility of the applications they are used in...period.  There is NO LOGICAL way around that.  Stop trying to turn a blind eye to the technology just because it's a revolutionary concept.  The GDC 2009 dev PDFs even show the results of that general purpose usage.

 



nightsurge on 14 April 2009

The Core i7 is still a better CPU at what it does best. I really don't want to waste my time digging up a bunch of links to prove it to you. If you are so desperate to think the Cell is better than an i7, go do a thorough search of i7 vs. Cell comparisons. They are completely different CPU's designed for completely different things and really can't be compared in the way you are attempting.



MGS4COD4HALO3 on 14 April 2009

Tell me then why does it look just as good or even better when a game is develope for the PS3 as a lead platiform. For an example, let say deadspace lead platform was the ps3. PS3 and 360 looks exactly the same. For those that think the 360 would of looked way better if they would of use the 360 as the lead platform then I'll give you another example. Take Madden 09. The lead platiform was the PS3. I looks better then Madden 08 on the 360 and the 08 lead platform was 360. Please explain.