MS: "Xbox 360 More Powerful than PS3"

Discussion in 'Console Industry' started by Alpha_Spartan, Dec 9, 2005.

  1. Bobbler

    Bobbler Shazbot!
    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,827
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Red Cloak (the poster in that gamespot link) has a history of posting things like that on many different forums. You'd think he was on MS' payroll for the amount of FUD he spreads. It's almost amazing...

    What's worse is he doesn't seem to understand anything, even when told/shown (with proof) straight out what he says is BS he still goes on his merry way and continues to spread it.
     
  2. j^aws

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,915
    Likes Received:
    13
    Yep.

    IIRC, the EIB is clocked at half, 1.6 Ghz, at 96 bytes/cycle (128 B/cycle burst) -> 154 GB/sec (205 GB/sec)

    That's the ISSCC 2005 disclosed figure. For PS3, it's 40 GB/sec (35 CELL-RSX, 5 I/O).

    For peak access to 'external RAM'. Also for RSX, 22.4 GDDR + 35 FlexIO ~ 57 GB/sec

    Yep.



    Yep. Xenon+Xenos to 'external' RAM.

    Not sure. Probably missed this somewhere?

    Has a caveat. As mentioned earlier, when accessing GDDR at 22.4 GB/sec, only 10.8 GB/sec Xenon_L2-Xenos available.

    Yep.
     
  3. jvd

    jvd
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Messages:
    12,724
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    new jersey
    well come one , its the same as ms getting hit with launch some launch titles lacking fsaa .


    Sony was all big at thier e3 press confrence talking about fp32 hdr let alone fp16 hdr . Now devs are using int 8 to get more speed .
     
  4. Lysander

    Regular

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    5
    This is unrealistic, not effective; you just added both BW (xdr, gddr3) together.

    I will do the same for 360gpu: 22.4 GB/s gddr3 + 32 GB/s to edram = 54.4 GB/s
     
  5. "Nerve-Damage"

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    14

    All the systems numbers that I listed are either effective or peak rates. Real-world performance will always dictate final performance. So Cells EIB peak performance of 300GB/s may only be 210GB/s (or less) of real-word performance depending on the intensity of the data that’s being executed across the channels. Or the Cell FlexIO of 76.8GB/s of peak bus bandwidth will of course drop in overall real-world performance as stated with the Cell EIB. The only thing (in theory) high peak rates are suppose too guarantee is that there’s enough real-world bandwidth (at least 75-80%) there for task to perform efficiently without to much latency (i.e. slow down). You’ll never aspect a game like “pongâ€￾ too rapidly deplete or topple the bandwidth; however a game like Heavenly Sword that’s a whole other story. :wink:


    In the end PS3 has higher tolerance for real-world performance than Xbox 360 if you choose to accept the truth or not. My Xbox 360 e-penis isn’t hurting because another system has better specs (on paper), only time will tell (CES or Sony Feb-Conference) if the PS3 lives up to those specs.
     
  6. jvd

    jvd
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Messages:
    12,724
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    new jersey
    Never Jawed has already corrected your numbers. You should go read what he said
     
  7. "Nerve-Damage"

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    14

    Effective or peak rates versus real-world performance are two different things. Which I do understand!! That doesn’t negate the fact the RSX has access “simultaneouslyâ€￾ to both of them (XDR & GDDR3); be it a physical hardware link or software allocated data link. And what you did above was kind of lame, since the 10MB EDRAM already sits on the GPU die and the EDRAM memory allocation (10MB part anyway) is only there to support the resolution 1280x720p. And yes I do know the EDRAM supports the supposed free Anti Aliasing and other post processing effects.
     
  8. hadareud

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    London
  9. ralexand

    Regular

    Joined:
    May 22, 2005
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm confused. Is Int8 considered hdr lighting? I thought RGB was int8.
     
  10. "Nerve-Damage"

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    14
    This one I will agree upon (for now anyway). :wink:


    Actually you’re quite wrong here…

    The flexIO provides 12 channels at 6.2GB/s per channel, hence the 76.8GB/s of peak bandwidth performance. The FlexIO besides connecting the CPU to GPU, and CPU to South Bridge, also provides individual channels between the CPU and Blu-Ray Drive, Blu-Ray Drive to South Bridge, Hard Drive to CPU, Hard Drive to South Bridge, and the other channels are split between the South Bridge and other IO devices such as Bluetooth, ECT. Yes, the Cell has a physical connection (FlexIO channel) between it and the Blu-Ray drive and Hard Drive (Data streaming purposes versus going through the South Bridge). You don’t have to believe me, but know that I know it’s true.

    And for comparison sake the PS2 has a 2,560bit data bus system and a peak 48GB/sec bandwidth rate among its GPU, CPU, and other IO devices. The current FlexIO is only 16-bit data wide.

    Facts:
    PS1: 132 MB/s peak bandwidth
    PS2: 48GB/s peak bandwidth (thousand times more than PS1)
    PS3: 76.8GB/s of peak bandwidth (little more than 30% gain over the PS2)

    Edit: And your figure of 40GB/s only includes the CPU to GPU and CPU to South Bridge which totals 40GB/s already. You seem too have forgotten there are actually FlexIO channels that link the IO devices to the south bridge. So my question to you is; where are the other bandwidth data (numbers) that are allocated for linking the Blu-Ray drive, Hard Drive, Bluetooth, and ECT just too the South Bridge. In other words you only factored in the CPU to GPU and CPU to South Bridge connections. You didn't factor in none of the connections that lye between the IO and South Bridge. And if you chose to believe, the ones between the CPU and two main IO devices (Blue-Ray and Hard Drive). Remember you said 40GB/s
     
    #170 "Nerve-Damage", Dec 11, 2005
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2005
  11. mckmas8808

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    6,744
    Likes Received:
    28
    So, "Nerve-Damage" you are telling me that the RSX can read from the system memory while at the sametime the CELL reads from the same system memory?

    And this can happen with the RSX accessing its own memory giving the RSX 48GB/s of total read and write speed for graphics?

    If this is true the PS3 doesn't seem so BW straved as people make it out to be.
     
  12. j^aws

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,915
    Likes Received:
    13
    Nope.

    FlexIO is a chip-to-chip interconnect bus. Your numbers above are still referring to the ISCC 2005 numbers, like they were referring to 4.6 GHz CELL clocks. The FlexIO B/W for PS3 are,

    CELL<->RSX 35 GB/sec (20+15)
    CELL<->I/O South Bridge 5 GB/sec (2.5+2.5)

    You're not comparing like-for-like here.

    Devises like the HDD, Blu-ray, network, basically I/O etc, connect to the South Bridge chip. This chip then connects to CELL via FlexIO.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    http://www.vgpub.com/screenshots/2374.html

    The 40 GB/sec number for FlexIO includes I/O southbridge and CELL-RSX.
     
  13. "Nerve-Damage"

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    14
    Do I believe it?

    Yes!

    It’s really no different than Nvidias up in coming Turbo Memory/Caching System…IMO.

    But if there is an actual physical link between the RSX & XDR memory module, that would reduce any possible latency problems that might occur if there was only a software driven allocated link.

    Real-world performance wise; I say at least 80% percent of that number. Like I said effective and real-world are miles away where graphics are concerned.

    I’m human just like anyone else…if I make a mistake then I will concede that I did. Anyhow, PS3 isn’t that alien (technological wise) compared to the PS2 hardware.
     
    #173 "Nerve-Damage", Dec 11, 2005
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2005
  14. "Nerve-Damage"

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    14
    Dude, you actually proved my point!?!

    You’re correct with the 40GB/s between the Cell & RSX and Cell & South Bridge combination.

    But there are physical connections (FlexIO channels) between the South Bridge and IO devices. How do you think the South Bridge receives or communicates with the other IO devices (through empty space)? There is a physical connection among the IO devices to the South Bridge. There is a data rate carried among them…….

    You see the orange/yellow arrows between the Blu-Ray Drive and Hard Drive connecting them to the South Bridge. Those are channels! You’re only stating the data rate between the CELL & Southbridge and Cell & RSX which total 40GB/s.

    But how are they connected my friend? :wink:
     
    #174 "Nerve-Damage", Dec 11, 2005
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2005
  15. j^aws

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,915
    Likes Received:
    13
    You're confused. The SB talks to CELL via FlexIO. The FlexIO is an interconnect bus FROM CELL TO RSX, and FROM CELL to SB. The HDD, Blu-ray etc. connect to SB with their own busses and DO NOT touch FlexIO. Again, FlexIO connects CHIPS, i.e RSX and SB.
     
  16. "Nerve-Damage"

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    14
    See thats where you are wrong....

    There is only one bus system in the PS3, while the XDR and GDDR have there own specific bus links. Sony stated all IO devices are interconnected by the FlexIO bus system, thus reducing latency seen with multiple bus systems.

    Give me a sec, I will find the article……..
     
  17. j^aws

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,915
    Likes Received:
    13
    Just look at a PC architecture. They have USB busses, SCSI busses, IDE busses etc, which connect to the SB. The SB and GPU communicate with the CPU on a PCI-E bus...
     
  18. scificube

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    9
    Well thanks...I actually tried to edit it but for some reason I couldn't. Glad it's official I'm stupid now :)
     
  19. "Nerve-Damage"

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    14
    Hence the reason why Sony didn’t go that route………

    Link:
    November 28, 2005

    Link:
    Link:
    Link:
    Link:
    Lets say for the sake of argument that I’m wrong with all my information.

    Where is Sony statement or an article stating that the PS3 total FlexIO is only 40GB/s of peak bandwidth. Or better yet an article stating the connections between the South Bridge and IO devices are only simple bus interfaces.

    Because all my data points to the FlexIO being the main interconnect among all the IO devices. Which makes sense...too improve bandwidth performance, versus using PC variant connections between the South Bridge and IO devices? Especially a System taunting high bandwidth data streaming from the Blu-Ray drive.

    Because I remember specifically reading or hearing Ken Kutagari stating that the PS3 FlexIO provides 70+ GB/s of data transfer during one of his press conference.
     
  20. j^aws

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    1,915
    Likes Received:
    13
    Yep, you're wrong.

    I've shown you TWO block diagrams from E3 2005.

    Again, the I/O devices DO NOT directly connect to CELL. They connect to SB. It's the SB that connects to CELL with FlexIO. The 6 UNIVERSAL_SERIAL_BUS devices connect to the SB, with their own busses. Your links have confused what FlexIO is. It's the equivalent of PCI-E. The PCI-E bus isn't going to replace USB nor is FlexIO, but they work together. This is basic stuff.

    Lets use another angle. COMMON SENSE.

    I say 40 GB/sec. You say 76 GB/sec.

    76-40 = 36 GB/sec

    There's no way that the HDD, network, Blu-ray, USB devices etc. are going to need MORE bandwidth (36 GB/sec) than CELL-RSX (35 GB/sec). I'm repeating myself now, so you can believe what you want if that makes you happy...
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...