Jaguar CPU in XBox and PS4 *spawn*

vipa899

Regular
Little off-topic, how does the jaguar in ps4 compare to a i7 920/i5 3570?

Intrested to see where they are somewhere on well-known gaming cpu's.
 
The I7 920 and i5 3570 has roughly double the IPC of the Jaguarsin Xbox 1/PS4, - then scale with operating frequency. So 3-5 times faster

Intresting, dont the 8 core jaguars have an advantage of more cores compared to the 4 core/8 thread 920?
 
Intresting, dont the 8 core jaguars have an advantage of more cores compared to the 4 core/8 thread 920?
Only in efficiency (watt/work). A quad core 920 is much faster than 8 jaguar cores in any workload.

Putting Zen cores in next gen console is going to be a massive upgrade

Cheers
 
Only in efficiency (watt/work). A quad core 920 is much faster than 8 jaguar cores in any workload.

Putting Zen cores in next gen console is going to be a massive upgrade

Cheers
The i7 920 had a low base clock so an 8core PS4pro is probably ball park stock i7 920. There was a pretty big IPC jump from nelahem to sandy and then to haswell. So a Jaguar's per clock performance isn't that bad relative to nelahem ( maybe 25% per clock behind)
 
Just a quick comparison from Anandtech on Cinebench R15 with a very rough approximation to PS4 Jaguar
Code:
Cinebench R15        Athlon 5150           PS4 2x 5150            i7-3770
                     (4 cores@1.6)        (8 cores@1.6)          (4c/ 8th)
Single Thread            35                      35                  143 
Multithread             129                     258                  708
 
Last edited:
The i7 920 had a low base clock so an 8core PS4pro is probably ball park stock i7 920

The i7-920 have a base clock of 2.66GHz and will stomp all over the Jaguars. It will use an exorbitant amount of power doing so, mine would use up to 180W @2.93GHz (ie. without overclocking).

Cheers
 
920 was on 45nm, so power consumption is not relevant
It would be more interesting a comparison with an underclocked modern cpu
 
The jags in the base models I think can be fairly compared to sub 3ghz core 2 quad, phenom 2 x4 cpus. Even the first i5, the 750 is a better cpu. The i7 920 just obliterates jaguar.
 
I have a curiosity... Does Jaguar CPU suffer of Meltdown or Spectre vulnerabilities ?!? A lot of new Spectre variants are popping up that touch many AMD & INTEL cpus...
 
A quad core 920 is much faster than 8 jaguar cores in any workload.

Even when the 920 is clocked at 1.6ghz? What about heavy multithreaded, say 8 thread/core software?

Yes just the CPU alone in next gen will offer a massive upgrade.
 
Even when the 920 is clocked at 1.6ghz? What about heavy multithreaded, say 8 thread/core software?

In that case the Jaguar's just as wide (AFAIK) SIMD capabilities would give it an edge when 8 Jaguar cores are pitted again the 920. Jaguar has AVX capability, but over 2 cycles. I've always seen the 8 core Jaguar array in the OG PS4 and XBone as about the same as the i3-2120 in my wife's PC. So far the only game the i3 really falls short is with Battlefield 1 which is definitely designed for 4 cores:


GTA5 also admittedly can bog down the i3-2120 though unlike BF1 it doesn't just flat out stutter, it just slows down some, but for the very most part is completely playable and enjoyable:

 
Last edited:
It is interesting that Intel hasn't been part of the console world with the exception of the original Xbox. I suppose the margins are likely to small to be considered worthwhile. Intel has been king of the hill in terms of performance for quite a while, but the cost just hasn't been valued in the console space. Even with next gen consoles, I suspect the CPU will remain low on the priority chart compared to the GPU and memory.
 
In that case the Jaguar's just as wide (AFAIK) SIMD capabilities would give it an edge when 8 Jaguar cores are pitted again the 920.

How does that work out when the 920 has a higher IPC then jaguar? If the i7 920 has a better IPC then it should be faster even at the same clock speed?
 
It is, by a lot. Nehalem CPUs are four wide decode/issue and it can execute two SSE ADD/MUL instructions per cycle.

Cheers
 
Just a quick comparison from Anandtech on Cinebench R15 with a very rough approximation to PS4 Jaguar
Code:
Cinebench R15        Athlon 5150           PS4 2x 5150            i7-3770
                     (4 cores@1.6)        (8 cores@1.6)          (4c/ 8th)
Single Thread            35                      70                  143 
Multithread             129                     258                  708
a 3770 has a ghz on a 920 as well as about 10-15 point on IPC which would give a score somewhere around 450 for a 920. I also said PS4pro, so that would be around 340 with its 2.1ghz clock.

if you look at anandbench https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1224?vs=47 , account for the fact the 5150 is only single channel memory double the cores and increase clock by 25% im not seeing this "obliterates".

I owned a C0 920 for ~5 years, i think people are over estimating its stock performance.
 
here i went and did it myself:

ps4pro.PNG


Now if we were going to be fair we would nock off 25% of the scores for a 920 and 12.5% for the PS4's right...........


edit: i messed up x264 first pass, should be PS4 59.98 and pro 78.5738
 
Last edited:
I owned a C0 920 for ~5 years, i think people are over estimating its stock performance.

Ive had mine D0 since 2009, still running it. Can play BF4 maxed out at ultra settings between 60 and 110FPS, besides that it handles games like GTAV without problem, performance in windows is top-notch and no problems with anything else im doing with it, almost 10 years old CPU by now (late 2008 tech). No reason yet to upgrade, im impressed.
Have another pc thats being used for som light photoshop and programming work (920 C0). Both stock speeds.
Played Quake Champions too (free game during E3), maxed it out aside from textures, maintains 60fps mostly. GTX670 being used.
Many others are still suprised by how well the old 920 holds up, in special when OC'ed, but i have not yet felt the need to.

Some different views here btw, one says 3-5 times faster, another says about same ballpark for i7 920 vs jaguar 8 core.....
 
The old i7s were brutes for their time, and it's unsurprising that they still manage such good performance. IPC increases have been fairly incremental since Nahelem. The increased focus on FPU and SIMD performance seemed to more benefit dual-cores which to be fair needed it. But with four or six full fat cores, all that FPU/SIMD was just excess.
 
Last edited:
My 930 has been OC'd to 3.8 Ghz for about 8 years now. I've added a 970 and 18 GB triple channel RAM. It's a really great gaming CPU even at a decade old.

I think I'll upgrade after the next console gen hits.
 
Back
Top