CELL will be there in PS3!

Panajev2001a said:
A.I. should remain Integer heavvy and the APUs have each 4 FP Units and 4 Integer Units: 32 GFLOPS and 32 GOPS per APU...


In total, with the theretical maximum of 1 TFLOPS we would have a theoretical maximum of 1 TOPS as well ;)
Click to expand...


Yes but my point is the cell chip will be doing transformations and geomety too .
 
See thats the problem. U wont let me bring gpu's into this. Yet for ms the gpu is more much more important than the cpu. Its the gpu of the xbox 2 that will be transforming the polygons.
Click to expand...

Of course the GPU is more important, because MSoft couldn't get a CPU to even come close to tickling Cell's feet.

If both system are released on the same day, PS3 will undoubtably be more powerfull.

Unless msoft decides to lie about the fillrate and polygon performance again.
 
Yes but my point is the cell chip will be doing transformations and geomety too .
Click to expand...

Of course, however you must also look at the Rasterizer which will feature some Cell features. And will have a high flop rating, you could very well just shovel off some of the geometry to the Rasterizer if im not mistaken.

Or is this not possible? Pana? Can you clear this up.
 
Of course and the Visualizer should help with that ( the Visualizer seems to be Cell based as well and it could carry some T&L load [its APUs can do what the APUs of the Broadband Engine can after-all] or just work on Rasterization... the Visualizer would have 1/4th of the FP power of the Broadband Engine so I'd leave T&L on the Broadband Engine ) or with Pixel Shading if they decide to shade at the pixel level ( up to the programmers and the APIs )...

With the massive bandwidth coming from e-DRAM, with the flexibility of the architecture and with such high FP processing capabilities they could pursue a Micro-polygon approach with an optimized Reyes-like renderer...

There are advantages of going with a very fast CPU and a more stream-lined Rasterizer.


Talking again about sharing processing power between the Broadband Engine and the Visualizer...

Normally you'd think you would like to give the Visualizer as much 3D graphics load as you can as you can to free the Broadband Engine for more complex calculations and to take advantage of the Pixel Engines, the Image Cache and the CRTCs...

Still, given the respective power of both chips, IMHO you'd want to run shaders on the Visualizer and leave T&L on the Broadband Engine ( classical OpenGL rendering pipeline approach )...

This would change if you were using a Reyes-like approach, but in what way it is still not 100% clear...

It depends what your engine is doing at the end... if you need the FP power of the CPU for Vertex Processing or you want more physics and want to share some of the 3D processing with the Visualizer... there are a lot of ways you could do it...

Some faster and some slower depending on your needs...

If you were decompressing textures on the fly on the Visualizer using the PUs and the APUs to decode complex texture compression schemes and running complex Pixel Shaders and generating lots of procedural textures on the fly youmight do better at leaving T&L on the Broadband Engine, for example.
 
Paul said:
See thats the problem. U wont let me bring gpu's into this. Yet for ms the gpu is more much more important than the cpu. Its the gpu of the xbox 2 that will be transforming the polygons.
Click to expand...

Of course the GPU is more important, because MSoft couldn't get a CPU to even come close to tickling Cell's feet.

If both system are released on the same day, PS3 will undoubtably be more powerfull.

Unless msoft decides to lie about the fillrate and polygon performance again.
Click to expand...

I don't see where ms lied about fillrate and polygon performance . THey did what sony did. State best case senerios . Like sony letting out that it could do 75 million polygons then saying it was non shaded non nothing max that the system could do . Just a smart ploy .

Problem is ms doesn't need a 1tflop cpu. They can find other ways to put a pretty picture on the screen .

Anyways i got a date in 10 mins so i gotta like sober up and mabye shower so i don't smell like i've been drinking for 10 days strait haha :)
 
Original annouced XBox XGPU spec:

300 Mhz
150M textured, lit polygons/sec
300M micro polygons/sec
4.8 billion pixels/sec fillrate

released XBox spec

233 Mhz
116M polygons
933M pixels/sec fillrate
 
I don't see where ms lied about fillrate and polygon performance . THey did what sony did. State best case senerios . Like sony letting out that it could do 75 million polygons then saying it was non shaded non nothing max that the system could do . Just a smart ploy .
Click to expand...

Unlike Microsoft, Sony stated clearly in their first press release how many polygons under which circumstances. Microsoft started somewhere at 300 million micropolygons constantly degrading their specs with the lowering of the GPU speed. I don't blame them, but it doesn't make them shine brighter either.

Also, Sony of course pubblishing their 2.4 GPixel/s advantage, Microsoft of course had to publish numbers at least better (4.0 GPixel/s) which later proved to be sampled AA Nvidia fillrate. All in all, Sony has been more open regarding their specs than neither Nintendo or Microsoft were. It's clear that Microsoft wanted the casuals to see better numbers on Xbox's side on spec-sheet comparasments, which really, was not a bad marketing strategy but doesn't really reflect actual performance differences.
 
jvd said:
Paul said:
Good luck on your date.
Click to expand...


Thanks , she goes to a beauty school bawhahaha :) if all goes well u wont hear from me till tommorow haha
Click to expand...

Remember Remember the Fifth of November.. er wrong one, hang on bub.

OK... better be safe than sorry!
.. no..no... Dont Drink and Drive!
Not that one either.
Ahh yes... Practise Safe Sex (just say NO!)
.... I'll shut up now. :oops:
 
jvd said:
Paul said:
They lied, the Xbox GPU cannot do a 4000M fillrate. Notice the "antialiased" besides the figure :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

u got a link to where they said it ?
Click to expand...

JVD, I somewhere have a presentation of Seamus talking about Xbox in detail. At the time, the NV2a was still clocked at 250 MHz, so naturally he kept refering to 4 GPixel/sec fillrates. He also mentions in the presentation that in reality, Xbox can only draw at 1 GPixel/sec (considering 250 MHz clocked NV2a). You should be able to find it on the GDC homepage...
 
Tahir said:
Remember Remember the Fifth of November.. er wrong one, hang on bub.

OK... better be safe than sorry!
.. no..no... Dont Drink and Drive!
Not that one either.
Ahh yes... Practise Safe Sex (just say NO!)
.... I'll shut up now. :oops:
Click to expand...

LOL Tahir! :LOL: Oh and JVD, good luck... :D
 
I am thinking something.....could it be that ALL next gen consoles will not be launched before 2007.....LOGIC:- As we progress, console hardware development costs are rising....into billions...earlier they could recover it and make profits in 5 yrs time but now due to increased costs it may be almost impossible and also it is possible that with increasingly complex hardware they need more time to launch consoles...

and maybe N/S/M all have some sort of understanding to launch their consoles in 2007?? ;) They should form an association... :LOL:

think! only SONY has concrete plans for PS3...no indication of GC2 or XB2....???
 
Good thinking Deepak. I think the console makers (Sony, Nintendo, MS) will make sure they don't spend too much money on hardware to ensure that they will make profits. Also, as costs of the hardware increases, it's only thanks to the steady increase of the industry's size that makes this possible. I'm not sure about the exact numbers, but I think PS2 reached it's sales at double the speed than at the time PSX did. I'm pretty sure that Sony will launch sometime in 2005, at the latest 2006 because of Microsoft or Nintendo releasing their next generation product sometime around that time.

I think those reports suggesting a launch in 2007 because of CELL is just some attempt to make the competitors believe they might have an edge when in fact Sony is still very much on schedule. It's always better to make the competitor believe something is wrong than giving away everything.
 
Phil said:
I think those reports suggesting a launch in 2007 because of CELL is just some attempt to make the competitors believe they might have an edge when in fact Sony is still very much on schedule. It's always better to make the competitor believe something is wrong than giving away everything.
Click to expand...

don't know, i personally don't really see them doing that....

i mean, Sony is the kind of corporation that just say it as it is... if everything is going onschedule they just say they're on schedule, and if they have a problem they just say they have a problem...... with PSX and PS2 they never said anything untrue if i remember correctly, even though some people might know better...
 
london-boy, reports before PS2 was announced, denied the Emotion Engine to be linked to the next PlayStation, much like Sony has been denying reports of CELL being part of the next PlayStation now...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kaotik
AMD & Sony project Amethyst
Replies
4
Views
696
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
R
State of GDeflate *spawn
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Remij
R
L
ARM based Game Consoles on the way?
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
8K
Lurkmass
L
B
The Lack Of Interactivity In Games Is A Big Problem
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Boss
B
R
Can we just take a second to appreciate Uncharted 4 and what Naughty Dog were doing in 2016 and earlier
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Nesh
N
Back
Top