Welcome, Unregistered.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Reply
Old 31-May-2005, 21:21   #1
Love_In_Rio
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 894
Default Ati X850xt 43 billion shader ops against Xenos 48 billion ?

How could this small difference be explained if it is said the XGPU will be more or less twice as powerfull as X850xt ?
It is suppossed that dev alpha kits have a X850xt card, right ? then, if its shader power is so near from a Xenos, why they claim that dev alpha kits are 30 % of the final hardware ?
Love_In_Rio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-May-2005, 21:37   #2
marconelly!
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,742
Default

Well for one, dev kits have only 256MB of memory from what I've heard. Final hardware - 512. That's a big difference right there without even going into CPU and GPU.
marconelly! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-May-2005, 21:44   #3
jvd
Naughty Boy!
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: new jersey
Posts: 12,731
Send a message via AIM to jvd
Default Re: Ati X850xt 43 billion shader ops against Xenos 48 billio

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love_In_Rio
How could this small difference be explained if it is said the XGPU will be more or less twice as powerfull as X850xt ?
It is suppossed that dev alpha kits have a X850xt card, right ? then, if its shader power is so near from a Xenos, why they claim that dev alpha kits are 30 % of the final hardware ?
Just because the x850xt is capable of 43 billion shader opps (which is useless for comparing ) doesn't mean it can reach that amount . The xenos has alot of new tech that they are using to reach optimal rendering power , it has a unified shader set up and edram .
__________________
Freexbox 360 !!!
Free Psp!
jvd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-May-2005, 21:48   #4
nAo
Nutella Nutellae
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,297
Default

shader ops kill another one..
nAo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-May-2005, 21:52   #5
Megadrive1988
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,307
Default

Quote:
How could this small difference be explained if it is said the XGPU will be more or less twice as powerfull as X850xt ?
It is suppossed that dev alpha kits have a X850xt card, right ? then, if its shader power is so near from a Xenos, why they claim that dev alpha kits are 30 % of the final hardware ?

ok to try to answer only the question of why Xenos is not twice as powerful as X850 XT


Xenos does not have straight up twice as much processing resourcesl as X850 XT (R480) or even twice as much as X800 (R420)


the R480/X850 and R420/X800 have 22 pipelines. 16 pixel plus 6 vertex pipes

the Xenos is said to be *equivalent* to 32 pipelines, total.

(remember the 48 unified shader ALU pipes are not comparable head-to-head with 22 pipes of current ATI VPUs)

look at transistor count of the GPU cores: 160 million for R420/X800 and R480X850 compared to 232 million for Xenos

(we're counting rendering/shader core, not the eDRAM of Xenos)

that's the most I can think of right now, focusing on just one thing:
X850 vs Xenos.
Megadrive1988 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-May-2005, 22:01   #6
nAo
Nutella Nutellae
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,297
Default

Short answer: you can't compare different GPUs using shader ops as comparison metric, cause shader ops ARE NOT a well defined/designed concept.
Shader ops a meaningless marketing term!
nAo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-May-2005, 23:06   #7
dukmahsik
Naughty Boy!
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 994
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megadrive1988
Quote:
How could this small difference be explained if it is said the XGPU will be more or less twice as powerfull as X850xt ?
It is suppossed that dev alpha kits have a X850xt card, right ? then, if its shader power is so near from a Xenos, why they claim that dev alpha kits are 30 % of the final hardware ?

ok to try to answer only the question of why Xenos is not twice as powerful as X850 XT


Xenos does not have straight up twice as much processing resourcesl as X850 XT (R480) or even twice as much as X800 (R420)


the R480/X850 and R420/X800 have 22 pipelines. 16 pixel plus 6 vertex pipes

the Xenos is said to be *equivalent* to 32 pipelines, total.

(remember the 48 unified shader ALU pipes are not comparable head-to-head with 22 pipes of current ATI VPUs)

look at transistor count of the GPU cores: 160 million for R420/X800 and R480X850 compared to 232 million for Xenos

(we're counting rendering/shader core, not the eDRAM of Xenos)

that's the most I can think of right now, focusing on just one thing:
X850 vs Xenos.
xenos has 332 million trannies i believe
dukmahsik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-May-2005, 23:06   #8
Sonic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 1,571
Default

The Xenos is a more efficient graphics architecture. It has been designed for a specific purpose, which is the Xbox 360. Regardless of the amount of shader ops it is capable of compared to R480/420 series it really doesn't matter. The architecture as a whole is extremely flexible and able to do things using more advance shaders that are beyond what the R420/480 are capable of.
Sonic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-May-2005, 23:08   #9
Carl B
Friends call me xbd
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dukmahsik

xenos has 332 million trannies i believe
That number includes the edram however. You can't include that if all you are looking to do is ballpark the pipeline figures.
__________________
Somebody set up us the bomb.
Carl B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-May-2005, 23:59   #10
Alpha_Spartan
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 559
Default

How do u measure shader ops? Is it consistent across designs? I think not.
Alpha_Spartan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-Jun-2005, 01:02   #11
The GameMaster
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 109
Default

Let's see...

Each shader pipeline is capable of 2 Shader Operations per cycle (4 ALU operations per shader operation)... *Please correct me if I am wrong here*

The nVidia Geforce 6800/ATI Radeon x850 video cards have 16 pixel pipelines and 6 vertex pipelines for a total of 22 pipelines. 22 pipelines multiplied by 2 would make 44 shader operations per cycle for both the Geforce 6800/Radeon x850. The Geforce 6800 Ultra is clocked at 430MHz and the ATI Radeon x850xt is clocked at 520MHz so that should come out to... 18.9 Billion Shader Operations per second (75.6 Billion ALU operations/second) for the Geforce 6800 and 22.8 Billion Shader Operations per second (91.2 Billion ALU operations per/second) for the Radeon x850xt. Where are they getting the ~44 Billion ShaderOps/second from? Unless they are counting just ALU operations per second in the shaders as opposed to shader operations per second which takes 4 ALU operations per shader operation.

In XENOS the design is 48 unified pipelines with 64 simultaneous threads, and again each pipeline is capable of 2 shader operations per pipeline (4 ALU operations per shader operation). So 48 pipelines multiplied by 2 would make 96 shader operations per cycle... and since it is clocked at 500MHz that would come out to be roughly 48 Billion Shader Operations per second (192 Billion ALU Operations per second - the number that Microsoft SHOULD of used considering the math that Sony used with the RSX) (provided the design can only do pixel or vertex operations instead of both at the same time... if that was the case then it would be 96 Billion Shader Operations per second (384 Billion ALU Operations per second) as technically each pipeline would be capable of doing 2 pixel AND 2 vertex shader operations per cycle... need clarification on that.)

With the RSX... and if it is based on the Geforce 7800 design and provided nothing major got changed (outside of changing the interface)... the Geforce 7800 has 24 pixel pipelines and 8 vertex pipelines for a total of 32 pipelines. 32 pipelines multipled by 2 would make 64 shader operations per cycle... but we have two clock rates we are looking at. According the specifications released by Sony they are listing 550MHz for the RSX (which is an awfully high clock rate for a GPU with nearly 300million transistors) and the clock rate for the ultra version of the Geforce 7800 which is a more down to earth 430MHz. At 430MHz at 64 shader operations per cycle the Geforce 7800 would be capable of 27.5 Billion Shader Operations per second (110 Billion ALU operations per second), now provided Sony *CAN* achieve 550MHz with that same architecture then that would come out to be 35.2 Billion Shader Operations per second (140 Billion ALU operations per second - the number that Sony was touting with RSX).

Ok final comparison...
*nVidia Geforce 6800 - 16pp/6vp - 44shops/cyc - 400MHz - 18.9 Bshops/sec (75.6 BALUOps/sec)
*ATI Radeon x850XT - 16pp/6vp - 44shops/cyc - 520MHz - 22.8 Bshops/sec (91.2 BALUOps/sec)
*nVidia Geforce 7800 (G70) - 24pp/8vp - 64shops/cyc - 430MHz - 27.5 Bshops/sec (110 BALUOps/sec)
*PS3 RSX (unconfirmed)- 24pp/8vp - 64shops/cyc - 550MHz - 35.2 Bshops/sec (140 BALUOps/sec)
*XBox360 XENOS - 48up - 96shops/cyc - 500MHz - 48 Bshops/sec (192 BALUOps/sec)

...and if each pipeline in XENOS can acutally process pixel and vertex data simultaneously...

*XBox360 XENOS - 48up - 192shops/cyc - 500MHz - 96 Bshops/sec (384 BALUOps/sec)

I need to find out if XENOS is capable of processing pixel and vertex data at the same time, but for now I am going to say no... in which case I would believe the 96shops/cyc - 48Bshops/sec (192 BALUOps/sec) number for now.

Regardless I am certainly interested in finding out more details on the RSX as well details on XENON (The CPUs in the XBox360). I will say that the numbers that nVidia/Sony has been giving us has been without context to make them look better than it seems. If I am off on any of the math then please let me know, especially in regards to the 2 Shader Operations per cycle per pipeline data as well as the 4 ALU operations per shader operation.

The GameMaster...
The GameMaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-Jun-2005, 06:11   #12
DemoCoder
Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: California
Posts: 4,732
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The GameMaster
*XBox360 XENOS - 48up - 96shops/cyc - 500MHz - 48 Bshops/sec (192 BALUOps/sec)

...and if each pipeline in XENOS can acutally process pixel and vertex data simultaneously...

*XBox360 XENOS - 48up - 192shops/cyc - 500MHz - 96 Bshops/sec (384 BALUOps/sec)
There's some voodoo numerology going on here.It doesn't matter whether the XENOS can do VS/PS/GS simultaneously, since they all share the same ALUs. The fact that it can do VS and PS at the same time doesn't magically double the throughput of the 48 ALUs. The only number that matters is ALU throughput. I think your counts of 2 shops/cyc for both XENOS ALUs and RSX ALUs is apples to oranges.

Stick to the number of 128-bit SIMD vector ops that can be done per clock.
DemoCoder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-Jun-2005, 06:47   #13
The GameMaster
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 109
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DemoCoder
There's some voodoo numerology going on here.It doesn't matter whether the XENOS can do VS/PS/GS simultaneously, since they all share the same ALUs. The fact that it can do VS and PS at the same time doesn't magically double the throughput of the 48 ALUs. The only number that matters is ALU throughput. I think your counts of 2 shops/cyc for both XENOS ALUs and RSX ALUs is apples to oranges.

Stick to the number of 128-bit SIMD vector ops that can be done per clock.
Yea I know... that is why I am trying to clarify the number of ALUs present per pipeline in XENOS. Which is why I am choosing to believe 96 Shader Operations per Cycle or 48 Billion Shader Operations per Second (the quoted number in the specification list) which should come out to 192 Billion ALU Operations per Second. I am also trying to clarify the number offered by Sony/nVidia as I have reason to believe it is *NOT* over 136 Billion Shader Operations per second and instead is ALU Operations per second which would translate to roughly 35.2 Billion Shader Operations per Second at 550MHz. This is also assuming the RSX is using 24 pixel pipelines and 8 vertex pipelines.

I am just trying to figure out what is going on here and unfortuntaly we do not have enough details for us to verify Sony/nVidia's claims. Hopefully we will find out more details on the RSX when nVidia launched the Geforce 7800.

The GameMaster...
The GameMaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-Jun-2005, 07:30   #14
DemoCoder
Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: California
Posts: 4,732
Default

The RSX has 2 ALUs per pipe, however it can execute more than just 2 SIMD ALU ops. As an example, it has a free NRM_16 op that would require 3 ALU ops on the R500 (dp, rsq, mul). So counting scalar ops in the figure is somewhat misleading, since alot of the ops are not comparable.
DemoCoder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-Jun-2005, 07:43   #15
nAo
Nutella Nutellae
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The GameMaster
I am also trying to clarify the number offered by Sony/nVidia as I have reason to believe it is *NOT* over 136 Billion Shader Operations per second
136 ops per clock, not 136 gops per second.
Quote:
and instead is ALU Operations per second which would translate to roughly 35.2 Billion Shader Operations per Second at 550MHz. This is also assuming the RSX is using 24 pixel pipelines and 8 vertex pipelines.
I wonder how you can translate ALU ops per second (what are ALU ops? please give us a clear definition) to shader ops per second (what are shader ops?) if you don't know a thing about RSX architecture.
You're just having some fun with numbers without even trying to make some sense, imho.
nAo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-Jun-2005, 09:29   #16
jpr27
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 287
Default

1.) Wouldnt the unified structure and the edram play a role in this as well? Im guessing that RSX will have around 32-48 pipes but that just a guess on my part

2.) Do the ALU's on the Xenon or RSX have any new or extended functions in their designs?

3.) I would think that although we are talking about the GPU's on the respective consoles wouldnt the CPU's play into the shader equation as well? (For example: Some people say that the cell has the advantage in this area but I'll wait to see their final release before deciding)

Im in no way a hardware expert but just some questions

Over all I agree with Democoder on this as an Apple - Oranges comparison. I think you have to take into account the system as a whole
jpr27 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PS3 vs X360: Apples to Apples high level comparison... j^aws Console Technology 155 01-Jun-2005 14:44
Xbox 360 graphics processor codenamed: XENOS. some details Megadrive1988 Console Technology 43 20-May-2005 00:44
ATI Quarterly Earnings Press Release Geo 3D & Semiconductor Industry 14 28-Mar-2005 23:12
Driver Heaven: The Project - Serious rendering issues Jawed 3D Hardware, Software & Output Devices 45 06-Feb-2005 09:51
New ATI RENDERMONKEY Tool Supports GLSL Dave Baumann Press Releases 0 24-Mar-2004 20:27


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:32.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.