We have no idea what iteration of Cell or number of them will be in PS3. We still don't know if the PS3 cell is gonna have to do vertex work and the nvidia silicon is just a pixel processor. Nor do we know if the Xbox360 is gonna have a tri-core PowerPC or dual-core and a PPU. This is all speculation right now. Hype and Rumors are not worth the energy. (256Gflops = Pixar quality on the ps2 = Hd Era = BS from both sides) I still think RAM will be the deciding factor between them. Personally I see the technology difference being similar to the Genesis vs. Super Nintendo. I see the launches as being similar too.
ps3 much more powerful than xbox 360?
- Thread starter bigpapasmurf
- Start date
- Status
Pozer said:
If hype and rumors weren't worth the energy, then how would forums like this survive?
On a more serious note though, I think it's safe to say that the Cell in PS3 will have between 6 and 8 SPE's, and that the 360 CPU will be tri-core, sans PPU. No, I don't have any inside info or anything, I just think it's 'safe to say,' considering the evidence out there. The biggest question mark I suppose would be the possible inclusion of a PPU for the 360, but I just think that for cost and over-specialization reasons, as well as time contraints, it is more likely than not that we will not see anything like that in there.
Who says Sony has an advantage when it comes to hardware? The PS3 will most likely be extremely difficult to develop for in the beginning and that will probably keep away a few developers (maybe 2%). Hardware has barely ever been an advantage in the console world.
Look at the PS2, it is a crappy piece of hardware that had outdated technology when it was released but it still has managed to hold off competition of superior systems.
The PS3 will be obviously better in terms of hardware power in the CPU side. We still need to know more aobut the Nvidia system to truly know the graphical power of the system.
Physics are becoming more important and I do think that we will have plenty of processing power in the next generation on all three of the systems.
Look at the PS2, it is a crappy piece of hardware that had outdated technology when it was released but it still has managed to hold off competition of superior systems.
The PS3 will be obviously better in terms of hardware power in the CPU side. We still need to know more aobut the Nvidia system to truly know the graphical power of the system.
Physics are becoming more important and I do think that we will have plenty of processing power in the next generation on all three of the systems.
Actually it doesn't. Genesis had a faster cpu (motorola 68000 7.14mhz) compared to the SNES (65816 3.58MHz). Lots of sports games ran alot better on the Genesis like Madden. The SOnic speed effect could have never been done on the SNES. 95% of everything else was superior though. Genesis had an edge when speedy gfx were needed. But SNES looked alot prettier, just slower.
pc999 said:Just a question for the tech heads
If you can chosse betwen a 1 PPE+8 SPus cell or a 9 PPE, which one would you prefer
Performance in Gflops would be a little slower, but not much Right
You more or less require the PPE, so at least as far as the PS3 goes, I don't think that the 9 SPE is an option, even theoretically.
EDIT: Sorry, I misread and thought you meant 9 SPE's rather than PPE's.
I disagree. And to a degree MS seems to emphasize X360 as a value proposition than with hardware superiority (plus historically consoles coming out later are more powerful). Add to that ramblings are not only stating that the PS3 is more powerful but that both CPU/GPU are more powerful to their counterparts in X360.
What kind of question is that?
If I had a choice of 1PPU+8SPE or 9PPU, I'd take the 9PPU any day. (With cache of course.) Much better instruction set, much more flexibility, much easier to program.
And give me 24GB of memory. All with 2000 GB of bandwidth. And throw a quantum processor in there as well.
Now, 3-4PPU vs 1PPU+8SPE... that's a much harder question to answer.
pc999 said:
Uh, no. 1 PPE + 8 SPU is not the same chip area as 9 PPE. No way not even close.
I thought 1 PPE is about twice the chip area as an SPU. From this die image, 1PPE + 512 KB cache is nearly as big as 4 SPUs.
Point being, SPUs are castrated and optimized for specific tasks. That is why they're small, and that's why you can fit so many onto the die.
If the choice is 1 PPE vs 1 SPU, no other considerations, I'd take the PPE any day.
PC-Engine said:
I'm not gonna argue with you there I was just playing devil's advocate. If they had to just crunch numbers the Genesis would win. But to be picky some of the SNES games used addon chips that weren't part of the shipping hardware but in the game cart. If your counting addons then you have to count the 32x and that makes the Genesis way more powerful... Hehehe Just kidding with ya. It took devs a couple of years though to learn the SNES hardware especially for sports games. The first few years of SNES MAdden weren't good. But I'll retract my original statement.. 99% of the time SNES was better.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked