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!

Viper1 on 14 April 2009
dahuman said:
Viper1 said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Viper1 said:
Ascended_Saiyan3, the CELL BE will best the Core i7 at certain tasks but so too will the Core i7 best the CELL BE at certain tasks.

This isn't a difficult concept to understand. For example, why are there no PC's with CELL BE's as their CPU? The simple answer is they are not designed to operate in that manner and would not perform PC tasks close to the level of any modern desktop CPU.

Who said the Cell would beat the Core i7 at ALL tasks?  It wasn't me, so why are you trying to portray this as such?

BTW, their are no PCs with Cell as their MAIN CPU because of a number of factors.  FIRST, it's hard as hell to break into the PC market.  SECONDLY, NONE of the current code was written with the Cell's architecture in mind.  I explained this with an example before.  Did you just miss that post or something?  It's not that far back.

 

  Intel's Core i7 965 XE is probably not near equal to Cell.  This would seem to put the Cell at a decent amount of performance above Intel's current implementation.

^That is why I posted.   This statement, whether intended to or not, suggests CELL BE supremacy above Core 17 in all respects and not just in the specialized tasks the CELL BE was developed for.

The sad thing is modern video cards can kick the crap out of the cell in PS3 if you compare FLOPS only, yet they are for very different things, which means the whole comparison justifys absolutely nothing. An AMD 4870x2 card by itself does 2.4 teraFLOPS vs PS3's entire 2, it doesn't mean it's better than the Cell, all your arguments mean nothing because they all have different instruction sets meant for different purposes.

 

Exactly.  It's rather pointless debating the capabilties of such vastly differing architectures with specific design purposes and code.

 



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network
dahuman on 14 April 2009

not to mention the new Cell is much more powerful than the ones in the PS3 and are expensive as all hell.



Laffer on 14 April 2009

As a IT professional in Infrastructure and having implemented some HPC Clusters, the discussion must be separated into

1.) What is the better Console

and

2.) what is the better CPU


Point 1.) is much up to your personal preference and budget

but Point 2.) does not need to be discussed. IBM developped and manufactures both CPU's. The XBOX360 CPU was some sideproduct of the Cell and Power development. IBM never used this CPU further or used it for any new development.
The Cell is absolutely the contrary. IBM is betting their future on Cell. The PS3 Cell Chip was part of their QS21 Blade Center (2 PowerCell with 8 GB Memory @ 3.2GHz).
The PowerCell8i was an improved version, now supporting Double Precision Floating Point natively in the SPU's and supporting up to 16 GB of DDR2 RAM (the QS22 Blade, 2 CPU, 32 GB DDR2 RAM)
The NextGen Cell will sport 4 Power6 Cores and 32!!! SPE's!!!
The processing Power will kill everything on this planet.

To compare DP FP Power:

PS3 Cell: with software approx 120 GFLOPS DP, 200 GFLOPS SP
PowerCell8i: 200 GFLOPS DP, 400 GFLOPS SP
ATI Radeon Firestream 9250 (HD 4870), 200 GFLOPS DP , 1200 GFLOPS SP

So the actuall PowerCell8i is matching with 8 SPU's already the fastest available Graphics board in Double Precision FP Ops.

IBM has still the issue with unleashing this incredible power, because software libraries optimized for Cell using SPE's are not available and hand coding is needed.

The Power7 Generation will just be a Cell processor.

Cell was the first mainstream hybrid processor, it is somehow the father of what AMD will do with the 1st FUSION Processor (Bulldozer) and where all allpurpose CPU will go... (like Intel's Sandy Bridge)



Software is like Sex, it is better when it is free!

dahuman on 14 April 2009
Laffer said:
As a IT professional in Infrastructure and having implemented some HPC Clusters, the discussion must be separated into

1.) What is the better Console

and

2.) what is the better CPU


Point 1.) is much up to your personal preference and budget

but Point 2.) does not need to be discussed. IBM developped and manufactures both CPU's. The XBOX360 CPU was some sideproduct of the Cell and Power development. IBM never used this CPU further or used it for any new development.
The Cell is absolutely the contrary. IBM is betting their future on Cell. The PS3 Cell Chip was part of their QS21 Blade Center (2 PowerCell with 8 GB Memory @ 3.2GHz).
The PowerCell8i was an improved version, now supporting Double Precision Floating Point natively in the SPU's and supporting up to 16 GB of DDR2 RAM (the QS22 Blade, 2 CPU, 32 GB DDR2 RAM)
The NextGen Cell will sport 4 Power6 Cores and 32!!! SPE's!!!
The processing Power will kill everything on this planet.

To compare DP FP Power:

PS3 Cell: with software approx 120 GFLOPS DP, 200 GFLOPS SP
PowerCell8i: 200 GFLOPS DP, 400 GFLOPS SP
ATI Radeon Firestream 9250 (HD 4870), 200 GFLOPS DP , 1200 GFLOPS SP

So the actuall PowerCell8i is matching with 8 SPU's already the fastest available Graphics board in Double Precision FP Ops.

IBM has still the issue with unleashing this incredible power, because software libraries optimized for Cell using SPE's are not available and hand coding is needed.

The Power7 Generation will just be a Cell processor.

Cell was the first mainstream hybrid processor, it is somehow the father of what AMD will do with the 1st FUSION Processor (Bulldozer) and where all allpurpose CPU will go... (like Intel's Sandy Bridge)

thank you for actually taking the time to type all that considering most people won't know what you just said =P. I'm watching AMD closely myself hehe.

 



Viper1 on 14 April 2009

He was comparing the double precision and single precision millions of floating operations per second....for those that were curious but weren't sure.

I too am curious about the use of ATi's cards for GPGPU as well as Intel's Larrabee project.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network
Procrastinato on 14 April 2009

The OP refers to an unknown (we don't even know if he's an engineer) former game dev, stating that the X360's fillrate is better than the PS3's for how his game is using the flexible Xenos GPU and RSX GPU, and thus, from his standpoint (where fillrate is always the bottleneck), the X360 is at least on par, or better than the PS3.

I suppose you might dig up a similar dev stating that, due to the way his/her game uses the RSX and Xenos, the extra 10% clock on the RSX, and 10% more verts or whatever processed, makes it better too.

Or maybe you could dig up another dev who claims that, due to his game relying upon optical media/DVD streaming (lol), the X360 is better for his product. Or another that suggests that, due to his game streaming critical info from the HDD, and using the optical storage only as a last resort, the PS3 is better....

On and on and on and on.

These threads do get pretty entertaining though.



 

MGS4COD4HALO3 on 15 April 2009
nightsurge said:
MGS4COD4HALO3 said:
nightsurge said:
MGS4COD4HALO3 said:
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.

Ok I will.  You see, Madden 09, is the sequel to Madden 08.  It is natural to expect the sequel to be better looking than the previous game.  So Madden 09 on the PS3 is obviously gonna look better than Madden 08 on the 360.

/post

Well Madden 08 looked pretty much the same as Madden 07 on the 360 and Madden 08 on the PS3 is not even up to par with Madden 08 on the 360.  One more question.  

Why is he they only developer saying that the 360 is more poweful then the PS3? 

 

He is not saying the 360 is more powerful.  He is saying the PS3 ISN'T more powerful and that they are equal.  Many developers share this opinion, not just this one guy.  Even the developers of the Cell and the Xenon processors say that the consoles' overall power are equal.

 

 

Okay I went and read it over and over again.  He didn't say that the 360 is more powerful, but he is applying that it is.  Well anyways I do agree that both 360 and PS3 power are about equal.



Deneidez on 15 April 2009
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Deneidez said:

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.

Did I say that CELL isn't general purpose processor? No I didn't, I did say that most of general purpose processors rape CELL when it comes to general purpose stuff. You seem to be expert in this so tell me what does IoE do for general purpose stuff with lots of branches? (Answer: It might stall processing 'infinitely'. You might ask wtf is IoE. Its something that CELL uses. X360 also uses it, but original Xbox do not use it. More info about IoE & OoOE -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_of_order_execution )

Basic idea is when running program on IoE platform, if theres no resources available for next calculation it will have to wait. On OoOE platform it will do the stuff when it can do it and not to stall. And no sometimes it does stall. You just can't make some programs to work perfectly on IoE. Yeah, I know theres branch predicting also, but its not as good as OoOE.



New crap available on mi pages!

Ascended_Saiyan3 on 15 April 2009
Viper1 said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Viper1 said:
Ascended_Saiyan3, the CELL BE will best the Core i7 at certain tasks but so too will the Core i7 best the CELL BE at certain tasks.

This isn't a difficult concept to understand. For example, why are there no PC's with CELL BE's as their CPU? The simple answer is they are not designed to operate in that manner and would not perform PC tasks close to the level of any modern desktop CPU.

Who said the Cell would beat the Core i7 at ALL tasks?  It wasn't me, so why are you trying to portray this as such?

BTW, their are no PCs with Cell as their MAIN CPU because of a number of factors.  FIRST, it's hard as hell to break into the PC market.  SECONDLY, NONE of the current code was written with the Cell's architecture in mind.  I explained this with an example before.  Did you just miss that post or something?  It's not that far back.

 

  Intel's Core i7 965 XE is probably not near equal to Cell.  This would seem to put the Cell at a decent amount of performance above Intel's current implementation.

^That is why I posted.   This statement, whether intended to or not, suggests CELL BE supremacy above Core 17 in all respects and not just in the specialized tasks the CELL BE was developed for.

NOT "just in the specialized tasks" area.  Do you not understand what general purpose means?  That doesn't mean specialized.  In fact, it's the opposite of specialized.  Geez.

 



Ascended_Saiyan3 on 15 April 2009
dahuman said:
Viper1 said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Viper1 said:
Ascended_Saiyan3, the CELL BE will best the Core i7 at certain tasks but so too will the Core i7 best the CELL BE at certain tasks.

This isn't a difficult concept to understand. For example, why are there no PC's with CELL BE's as their CPU? The simple answer is they are not designed to operate in that manner and would not perform PC tasks close to the level of any modern desktop CPU.

Who said the Cell would beat the Core i7 at ALL tasks?  It wasn't me, so why are you trying to portray this as such?

BTW, their are no PCs with Cell as their MAIN CPU because of a number of factors.  FIRST, it's hard as hell to break into the PC market.  SECONDLY, NONE of the current code was written with the Cell's architecture in mind.  I explained this with an example before.  Did you just miss that post or something?  It's not that far back.

 

  Intel's Core i7 965 XE is probably not near equal to Cell.  This would seem to put the Cell at a decent amount of performance above Intel's current implementation.

^That is why I posted.   This statement, whether intended to or not, suggests CELL BE supremacy above Core 17 in all respects and not just in the specialized tasks the CELL BE was developed for.

The sad thing is modern video cards can kick the crap out of the PS3 if you compare FLOPS only, yet they are for very different things, which means the whole comparison justifys absolutely nothing. An AMD 4870x2 card by itself does 2.4 teraFLOPS vs PS3's entire 2, it doesn't mean it's better than the Cell, all your arguments mean nothing because they all have different instruction sets meant for different purposes.

 

The sad thing is people don't realize that we are talking about a closed platform versus an open platform, yet, a processor that started rolling out of production lines in 2005 is STILL stronger than an Intel processor released a month or so ago.