I'm so tired damn tired of you idiots preteneding to be experts. Rajeev84
Quite ironic considering your one of them.
There's plenty of misconceptions about the cell and what it is. Firstly, for any CPU enthusiast the Cell is a beautiful design. The PPE itself, which is the core of the cell is not shabby at all for branched coding. Infact, in unomptimised benchmarks designed for x86 architectures, the Cell ranks with a 2.6GHz P4. And that's just the PPE!!!
Err, who said they were designed for x86? In order to run on Cell in the first place they need to be designed to run on PPC. And no, it doesn't rank with a 2.6Ghz P4. Its generally slower, quite a bit slower in many cases but its also a lot faster in some niche cases bringing its overall average up to around the level of a 2.4Ghz P4 or about a 1.4Ghz Core 2.
Each SPE itself, in max theoretical power, is almost 15 to 20 times more powerful than a 3.2GHz P4. In all the Cell is atleast 100 times more powerful compared to a 3.2Ghz P4. The 360 CPU is nowhere close that, probally clocking in at a max of 10 times the power of a P4, at most.
Laughably absurd. For a start each SPE in the PS3 is capable of 25.6 GFLOPs single precision or about 2.5 GFLOPs dual precision. That compares to a 3.2 Ghz P4 (incidentally, now an old CPU) with 12.8 GFLOPs SP or 6.4 GFLOPs DP. And there is FAR more to performance than just floating point power which is the only thing an SPE is any good at anyway.
So yes, your "15-20 times more powerful" is utter rubbish At best its twice in one single measure and slower in many others.
Now, how does this help with the graphics? Well a lot is not known about the interface between the Cell and RSX. However, I can tell you it is a much closer relationship than what PC CPU's have with their GPU. Infact, many speculate the Cell can assist the RSX in rendering many effects, boast its fill rate etc.
There's no speculation about it. Its a well known fact that Cell can help RSX with graphics, but no, it won't be "boasting its fill rate" any time soon. Cell will aid RSX with vertex/geometry work and post processing effects mainly. Fill rate would not be affected.
On thing many are forgeting as well, is that while the XB360 has a more elagantly designed GPU, meaning it allows more flexability to developers. It lacks the brute force of the RSX, which can infact have almost double the theoretical power.
No it doesn't, not in any measure. RSX has a little more brute power in shaders and texturing but thats about it.
So why aren't PS3 games looking better than 360 games right now.
1. Developer tools are nowhere near the stage of microsofts tools, even at the 360 launch. Sony is getting there slowly, but its going to depend more upon the developers at this stage.
2. It is a simple fact that the 360 is easire to get high performance out of, than the PS3. A lot more work has to be done by the devs, but in the end it would pay off.
3. Most laucnh titles where developed for the 360 and then ported to the PS3 for laucnh. Ports always suck, but what one should notice is that these ports aren't half bad at all. For launch game ports, these ports are almost undestinguishable from 360 games. That alone speaks for the PS3s power.
4. Like the PS2, the PS3 has even more hidden powah!
Give the PS3 sometime. A year from now, there will be no doubt which system has the better graphics.
Log in to comment