A question PS3 fans, about technical details about the cell architecture..

 Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic.  But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

 My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self?  How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor.  Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

 Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores.  How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE?  Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

  Thanks in advance to any replies.

Honestly I think PS3's unique architecture holds some very promising suprises! :D

I also believe the 360 will continue to wow people and who knows...a hidden Ace perhaps? *cough* alan wake* Cough* :P

Edit: The PS3's Cell in some respects smokes many supercomputers...in other areas its average. PS3 relies on combination of the Cell and RSX for it's godlike DX11 quality grafix :P

Honestly I think PS3's unique architecture holds some very promising suprises! :D

I also believe the 360 will continue to wow people and who knows...a hidden Ace perhaps? *cough* alan wake* Cough* :P

NextGenNow

So can you ellaborate what this unique architecture is? 

 Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic.  But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

 My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self?  How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor.  Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

 Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores.  How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE?  Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

  Thanks in advance to any replies.

irvfatty

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

I'm not an expert or anything, so dont take my word for anything I further say. I read an article a while back that stated you simply cannot compare a console CPU to a PC CPU. Console CPUs are basically downgraded PC CPUs....AH! I cant explain this right, I will look for the article.

[QUOTE="NextGenNow"]

Honestly I think PS3's unique architecture holds some very promising suprises! :D

I also believe the 360 will continue to wow people and who knows...a hidden Ace perhaps? *cough* alan wake* Cough* :P

Arsuz

So can you ellaborate what this unique architecture is? 

I think it focuses heavily on Dividing RAM and Vector math..I wont say anymore at the uber risk of a massive hermit stampede! lol!

I'm no expert but I understand it like this. The cell is a processor made up or 1 general purpose processor and the 8 spe's, the spe's are alot omre simple than a standard general purpose processor and as sutch have limited capability, they need the contolling general purpose processor to assign tasks to them, they then carry out that task and hand the finished result back the the controller that then does the required task with that information. As a whole the cell is very powerful and extremely effecient at certain tasks ( calculations for example, like with the folding project) but your software has to be specifically designed to make best use of this architecture which makes programming harder and increases the chance of lost efficiency due to programming.

The 360 basically has 3 standard duel core processors that are all as fully capable as a standard processor, as sutch it has 3 times the general processing capabilty of the cell and the cpu naturally can share any task between these as it see's fit because thay can all perform all function a processor needs to reducing the need for specific programming.

The cell's spe's are basically used to offload workload from the main general processor that contols the whole thing and are specifically designed to speed the capabilites far beyond that of a normal processor but its still only one processor, so while it will kill the 360 with some functions there are some the 360 will be better suited to. Imagine it like this, you go shopping and have to bring the goods in, you have 3 men on one team doning the job ( 360 cpu) but the other team has 1 man but 8 kids helping him ( the cell ), obviously there will be cases where 3 men are better tahn 1 and 8 kids for carrying goods, but there will be time when the reverse is true. The area the cell rules is in floatin point calcs (double that of the 360 cpu's combined) but for everything else is pretty much a match, so the which is a better games machine will come down to how floatings point calcs are needed in games, well cpu wise anyway. (other variables include different ram setup and different gpu's but i'll leave that for now)

Hope that helps a bit.

I have to wonder how simple Ps3 fans would know anything about working with the Ps3 hardware..hmmm.jechtshot78

They dont.  There are only around 5 people that know anything about architecture on these boards. 

the cell is a single core with 9!! spe's

ps3 only uses 6 for sound Gfx physics n others people say in later years the other spe's will b unlocked and b using 8 spe's at a latar Date!!

The Cell can calculate quicker then the Xenon cpu. is the Gfx that powerful on a 360 4 sure some people say yes some people might say no considerin the cell can act as both cpu and gpu does it really need RSX to render? i believe ps3 has alot pf potential dispise the weak Gpu but could that Gpu b better then the 360 no1 knows until the power pf the ps3 can actually be realised and btw 360 has limits to its cpu the cell doesnt

 Cell is a 9 cores CPU (with 8 ready on the PS3)  //  Xenon is a 3 Core CPU

Cell has 2.8 MB of the internal memory  // Xenos has 1.06 Mb

Cell generate 218 GFlop // Xenos 100 Gflops

Cell has 9 threads.. with 8 fisical cores to do this. (like 9 CPUs of the 2.8 Ghz for eaxh thead) ( // Xenos has 6 threads and has 3 cores to do this (like 6 CPus of the 1.6 Ghz to do each thread)

CELL completly Owned the Xenon  

People need to stop doubting the Cells power, it's the PS3's GPU that's bottle necking the Cell.miss_kitt3n

no its not bottlenecking its better tbh when ur lookin into  the later yrs games on the ps3 could turn out to look like dx10 once fully optimized with the cell and the rsx the devolopers knows its hard to program cos its something to them its more powerful but it could help them out in the future

the cell is a single core with 9!! spe's

ps3 only uses 6 for sound Gfx physics n others people say in later years the other spe's will b unlocked and b using 8 spe's at a latar Date!!

The Cell can calculate quicker then the Xenon cpu. is the Gfx that powerful on a 360 4 sure some people say yes some people might say no considerin the cell can act as both cpu and gpu does it really need RSX to render? i believe ps3 has alot pf potential dispise the weak Gpu but could that Gpu b better then the 360 no1 knows until the power pf the ps3 can actually be realised and btw 360 has limits to its cpu the cell doesnt

Whiteknight19

[QUOTE="irvfatty"]

 Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic.  But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

 My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self?  How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor.  Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

 Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores.  How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE?  Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

  Thanks in advance to any replies.

greg_splicer

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

Listen to this guy, he knows what he is talking about.  I know this because he uses a lot of exclamation marks!!!!!

 

 Cell is a 9 cores CPU (with 8 ready on the PS3)  //  Xenon is a 3 Core CPU

Cell has 2.8 MB of the internal memory  // Xenos has 1.06 Mb

Cell generate 218 GFlop // Xenos 100 Gflops

Cell has 9 threads.. with 8 fisical cores to do this. (like 9 CPUs of the 2.8 Ghz for eaxh thead) ( // Xenos has 6 threads and has 3 cores to do this (like 6 CPus of the 1.6 Ghz to do each thread)

 

CELL completly Owned the Xenon  

 

XINTSUAI2

 

 Cell is a 9 cores CPU (with 8 ready on the PS3)  //  Xenon is a 3 Core CPU

Cell has 2.8 MB of the internal memory  // Xenos has 1.06 Mb

Cell generate 218 GFlop // Xenos 100 Gflops

Cell has 9 threads.. with 8 fisical cores to do this. (like 9 CPUs of the 2.8 Ghz for eaxh thead) ( // Xenos has 6 threads and has 3 cores to do this (like 6 CPus of the 1.6 Ghz to do each thread)

 

CELL completly Owned the Xenon  

 

XINTSUAI2

The Cell does not have 9 cores, it has 9 SPE's (and as you noted not all are active in the PS3).  There is a HUGE difference between a Core and an SPE.  Each SPE acts like one "thread".

 The Xenos actually has 3 cores on one CPU, each having 2 threads.  Meaning the Xenos has 6 threads vs. the Cell's 8 threads.

And isn't the Xenos a 3.2ghz CPU?

Besides, these specs don't even really matter since both architectures are so dramatically different, AND they are both coupled with equally different GPU's.

There is no "ownage" by either console.

[QUOTE="miss_kitt3n"]People need to stop doubting the Cells power, it's the PS3's GPU that's bottle necking the Cell.Whiteknight19

no its not bottlenecking its better tbh when ur lookin into  the later yrs games on the ps3 could turn out to look like dx10 once fully optimized with the cell and the rsx the devolopers knows its hard to program cos its something to them its more powerful but it could help them out in the future

Thanks man I just lost 10 IQ points and the ability to punctuate after reading your post

[QUOTE="Whiteknight19"]

the cell is a single core with 9!! spe's

ps3 only uses 6 for sound Gfx physics n others people say in later years the other spe's will b unlocked and b using 8 spe's at a latar Date!!

The Cell can calculate quicker then the Xenon cpu. is the Gfx that powerful on a 360 4 sure some people say yes some people might say no considerin the cell can act as both cpu and gpu does it really need RSX to render? i believe ps3 has alot pf potential dispise the weak Gpu but could that Gpu b better then the 360 no1 knows until the power pf the ps3 can actually be realised and btw 360 has limits to its cpu the cell doesnt

the1stmoonfly

Limitations to Harddrive and has bn  been out 4 a year and just started using Streaming textures oh and the 360 is really that that powerful people rather read rubbish information about the specs of both consoles i dont c them using fraps in console games do u? ps3 games r has started to look like some of the 360 games and has yet to use streamin textures how would u know that 360 will stay on top of ps3 in gfx people just jump to conclusiion

[QUOTE="greg_splicer"][QUOTE="irvfatty"]

 Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic.  But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

 My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self?  How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor.  Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

 Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores.  How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE?  Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

  Thanks in advance to any replies.

Rosencrantz

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

Listen to this guy, he knows what he is talking about.  I know this because he uses a lot of exclamation marks!!!!!

Additionally the Xenos graphics processor is able to directly lock the cache of the CPU in order to retrieve data directly from it without it having to go to system memory beforehand. The purpose of this is that one (or more, if wanted) of the three CPU cores could be generating very high levels of geometry that the developer doesn't want to, or can't, preserve in the memory footprints available on the system when in use. High-resolution dynamic geometry such as grass, leaves, hair, particles, water droplets and explosion effects are all examples of one type of scenario that the cache locking may be used in.

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/articles/4/3

Better now ? Link and no exclamation marks

They are processing elements and have a degree of independence from the PowerPC core, but they still need input from time to time to continue functioning..so they are not fully independent, not sure if that answers your question or not.

Regarding the Xenon I'm fairly certain that they are more in line with a desktop processor (except cut down in several ways) it seems to have a fairly typical multi-core architecture.

The Xenon cores are supposedly more powerful in some select areas such as AI (although its not great here either) but overall weaker than the SPEs. 

They are processing elements and have a degree of independence from the PowerPC core, but they still need input from time to time to continue functioning..so they are not fully independent, not sure if that answers your question or not.

Regarding the Xenon I'm fairly certain that they are more in line with a desktop processor (except cut down in several ways) it seems to have a fairly typical multi-core architecture.

The Xenon cores are supposedly more powerful in some select areas such as AI (although its not great here either) but overall weaker than the SPEs. 

Runningflame570

Weaker but FAR FAR better for game code

[QUOTE="the1stmoonfly"][QUOTE="Whiteknight19"]

the cell is a single core with 9!! spe's

ps3 only uses 6 for sound Gfx physics n others people say in later years the other spe's will b unlocked and b using 8 spe's at a latar Date!!

The Cell can calculate quicker then the Xenon cpu. is the Gfx that powerful on a 360 4 sure some people say yes some people might say no considerin the cell can act as both cpu and gpu does it really need RSX to render? i believe ps3 has alot pf potential dispise the weak Gpu but could that Gpu b better then the 360 no1 knows until the power pf the ps3 can actually be realised and btw 360 has limits to its cpu the cell doesnt

Whiteknight19

Limitations to Harddrive and has bn  been out 4 a year and just started using Streaming textures oh and the 360 is really that that powerful people rather read rubbish information about the specs of both consoles i dont c them using fraps in console games do u? ps3 games r has started to look like some of the 360 games and has yet to use streamin textures how would u know that 360 will stay on top of ps3 in gfx people just jump to conclusiion

 Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic.  But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

 My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self?  How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor.  Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

 Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores.  How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE?  Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

  Thanks in advance to any replies.

irvfatty

All you need to know about the cell you can find in the lin in my sig. I'll even PM it to you just so you get it;)

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

greg_splicer

Ignore this guy, his post is full of misinformation and exaggerations.

The Cell does not have 9 cores, it has 9 SPE's (and as you noted not all are active in the PS3). There is a HUGE difference between a Core and an SPE. Each SPE acts like one "thread".

The Xenos actually has 3 cores on one CPU, each having 2 threads. Meaning the Xenos has 6 threads vs. the Cell's 8 threads.

And isn't the Xenos a 3.2ghz CPU?

Besides, these specs don't even really matter since both architectures are so dramatically different, AND they are both coupled with equally different GPU's.

There is no "ownage" by either console.

Bgrngod

The Cell has one in-order PowerPC Core and 8 SPEs, one is reserved for redundancy and one is supposed to be reserved for the OS, that effectively leaves 6 active.

The SPEs are dual-issue so they can both send and receive input simultaneously. The PowerPC Core is also dual-issue.

The XENON has three PowerPC cores which are slightly more robust than the one in the PS3 but also in-order. They are more general purpose than the SPEs (but also fairly limited) so they are better for some code but MUCH worse for some other kinds.

The XENON is running at 3.2Ghz but so is the Cell (and IBM actually broke speed records with it..its just limited for the purposes of increased yields and decreased power consumption).

The architectures are very different but its pretty much agreed upon that the Cell is harder to work with but considerably more powerful than the XENON overall.

The XENOS (360 GPU) is thought to be a bit more powerful than the RSX. These are all things that I have read from developers, console and otherwise and from the white papers and news articles regarding the Cell/RSX and Xenon/Xenos.

Weaker but FAR FAR better for game code

greg_splicer

BS, developers are still arguing over which is actually better for game code, but judging by the thread count about the Cell BE at Beyond3D most of them seem to favor the Cell.

Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic. But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self? How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor. Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores. How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE? Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

Thanks in advance to any replies.

irvfatty

[QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

Runningflame570

Ignore this guy, his post is full of misinformation and exaggerations.

The Cell does not have 9 cores, it has 9 SPE's (and as you noted not all are active in the PS3). There is a HUGE difference between a Core and an SPE. Each SPE acts like one "thread".

The Xenos actually has 3 cores on one CPU, each having 2 threads. Meaning the Xenos has 6 threads vs. the Cell's 8 threads.

And isn't the Xenos a 3.2ghz CPU?

Besides, these specs don't even really matter since both architectures are so dramatically different, AND they are both coupled with equally different GPU's.

There is no "ownage" by either console.

Bgrngod

The Cell has one in-order PowerPC Core and 8 SPEs, one is reserved for redundancy and one is supposed to be reserved for the OS, that effectively leaves 6 active.

The SPEs are dual-issue so they can both send and receive input simultaneously. The PowerPC Core is also dual-issue.

The XENON has three PowerPC cores which are slightly more robust than the one in the PS3 but also in-order. They are more general purpose than the SPEs (but also fairly limited) so they are better for some code but MUCH worse for some other kinds.

The XENON is running at 3.2Ghz but so is the Cell (and IBM actually broke speed records with it..its just limited for the purposes of increased yields and decreased power consumption).

The architectures are very different but its pretty much agreed upon that the Cell is harder to work with but considerably more powerful than the XENON overall.

The XENOS (360 GPU) is thought to be a bit more powerful than the RSX. These are all things that I have read from developers, console and otherwise and from the white papers and news articles regarding the Cell/RSX and Xenon/Xenos.

Weaker but FAR FAR better for game code

greg_splicer

BS, developers are still arguing over which is actually better for game code, but judging by the thread count about the Cell BE at Beyond3D most of them seem to favor the Cell.

At least i gave a link that shows 360 tramps PS3 in every way, including CPU, memexport and direct CPU cache access + unified ram + 6 threads of GENERAL PURPOSE code instead of one on PS3, that has to handle the 5 SPE's, that do not even have branching prediction

Additionally the Xenos graphics processor is able to directly lock the cache of the CPU in order to retrieve data directly from it without it having to go to system memory beforehand. The purpose of this is that one (or more, if wanted) of the three CPU cores could be generating very high levels of geometry that the developer doesn't want to, or can't, preserve in the memory footprints available on the system when in use. High-resolution dynamic geometry such as grass, leaves, hair, particles, water droplets and explosion effects are all examples of one type of scenario that the cache locking may be used in.

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/articles/4/3

Better now ? Link and no exclamation marks

Better now ? Link and no exclamation marks

greg_splicer

No not better, that article is all about the Xenos and I've conceded that its the better GPU thats not really being argued on any substantial level at this point. The Xenon is the 360 CPU, not the Xenos and the Cell is the PS3's CPU not the RSX. 

[QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

Better now ? Link and no exclamation marks

Runningflame570

No not better, that article is all about the Xenos and I've conceded that its the better GPU thats not really being argued on any substantial level at this point. The Xenon is the 360 CPU, not the Xenos and the Cell is the PS3's CPU not the RSX. 

You should really read the paragraph i posted above, it refers to the CPU and one basic next gen function it has, which is 360 ONLY !!!

You should really read the paragraph i posted above, it refers to the CPU and one basic next gen function it has, which is 360 ONLY !!!

greg_splicer

Yeah the thing is that cuts the CPU down to 2 cores for actual games and the PS3 does something similar with the Cell too. 

[QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

You should really read the paragraph i posted above, it refers to the CPU and one basic next gen function it has, which is 360 ONLY !!!

Runningflame570

Yeah the thing is that cuts the CPU down to 2 cores for actual games and the PS3 does something similar with the Cell too. 

Where does it say that ?????? Games uses all 3 cores/6 threads on 360

Cell has 1 PPU and 8 (7 working) SPUs. The PPU divides tasks amongt the SPUs which are very powerful for floating point caculation, which are most of what physics and geometry consist of. As long as code is optomized for it (will only get better and better as we go along)... the Cell is capable of far more than just general CPUs.

And the "3 times general proccessing power" is just a line from MS. All it really mean is that unaltered game code designed for PC processors would have 3x the availiable power if none of the SPUs were used....

The Cell has an onboard memory controller, something that xenos doesnt have. We still havent seen the real deal stuff on ps3 yet, its waaaay tooo early.

Where does it say that ?????? Games uses all 3 cores/6 threads on 360

greg_splicer

Well I didn't think about it properly before. If it is indeed drawing directly from the CPU cache (which while we're at it is far from ideal for in-order designs) then at the least it will drop the performance on the Cores by a certain amount as it will take them longer to access vital data, if they are using system memory as cache (which judging by how it reads, it isn't) then that will be slower and less beneficial than CPU cache and I would guess of little value for the most part.

Besides, given the internal bandwidth of the EDRAM compared to the data thoroughput from the CPU to GPU (22.4Gb/s I believe) that feature is effectively worthless. Never before now have I even heard that MENTIONED much less by a developer so apparently it isn't interesting enough to mention or it just isn't used.

 

 Cell is a 9 cores CPU (with 8 ready on the PS3)  //  Xenon is a 3 Core CPU

Cell has 2.8 MB of the internal memory  // Xenos has 1.06 Mb

Cell generate 218 GFlop // Xenos 100 Gflops

Cell has 9 threads.. with 8 fisical cores to do this. (like 9 CPUs of the 2.8 Ghz for eaxh thead) ( // Xenos has 6 threads and has 3 cores to do this (like 6 CPus of the 1.6 Ghz to do each thread)

 

CELL completly Owned the Xenon  

 

XINTSUAI2

nice information, i always thought that Cell is much powerful, just not sure by how much. :wink:

Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic. But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self? How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor. Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores. How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE? Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

Thanks in advance to any replies.

irvfatty

What I've heard time and time again: The PS3 is better at making more floating-point calculations, and the 360 is....better at HDR and blury graphics, ROFL!  No, seriously, the PC is the best game processing machine to boot, ok?  Ok! 

[QUOTE="irvfatty"]

Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic. But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self? How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor. Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores. How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE? Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

Thanks in advance to any replies.

greg_splicer

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

One core should not "bottleneck" it. The cell was designed so the the SPEs will do most of the work, and the core moniters the SPUs... something like that 

[QUOTE="greg_splicer"][QUOTE="irvfatty"]

Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic. But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self? How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor. Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores. How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE? Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

Thanks in advance to any replies.

ChopperDave1

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

One core should not "bottleneck" it. The cell was designed so the the SPEs will do most of the work, and the core moniters the SPUs... something like that 

Actually nothing like that

The core is the one programming and executing the general code, SPE's can't do that, theur are totally useless, unlike the 3 cores of 360

One core should not "bottleneck" it. The cell was designed so the the SPEs will do most of the work, and the core moniters the SPUs... something like that

ChopperDave1

That's the basic premise.  The main PPE is meant to really just supervise an orchestrate the efforts of the PPE's where all of the heavy calculation is meant to done. The analogy would be to a factory supervisor and a bunch of assembly line machines:  the supervisor is much "smarter" than the machines, but the machines can do their tasks much much quicker than than the supervisor could.  

[QUOTE="Runningflame570"]

[QUOTE="greg_splicer"]

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

greg_splicer

Ignore this guy, his post is full of misinformation and exaggerations.

The Cell does not have 9 cores, it has 9 SPE's (and as you noted not all are active in the PS3). There is a HUGE difference between a Core and an SPE. Each SPE acts like one "thread".

The Xenos actually has 3 cores on one CPU, each having 2 threads. Meaning the Xenos has 6 threads vs. the Cell's 8 threads.

And isn't the Xenos a 3.2ghz CPU?

Besides, these specs don't even really matter since both architectures are so dramatically different, AND they are both coupled with equally different GPU's.

There is no "ownage" by either console.

Bgrngod

The Cell has one in-order PowerPC Core and 8 SPEs, one is reserved for redundancy and one is supposed to be reserved for the OS, that effectively leaves 6 active.

The SPEs are dual-issue so they can both send and receive input simultaneously. The PowerPC Core is also dual-issue.

The XENON has three PowerPC cores which are slightly more robust than the one in the PS3 but also in-order. They are more general purpose than the SPEs (but also fairly limited) so they are better for some code but MUCH worse for some other kinds.

The XENON is running at 3.2Ghz but so is the Cell (and IBM actually broke speed records with it..its just limited for the purposes of increased yields and decreased power consumption).

The architectures are very different but its pretty much agreed upon that the Cell is harder to work with but considerably more powerful than the XENON overall.

The XENOS (360 GPU) is thought to be a bit more powerful than the RSX. These are all things that I have read from developers, console and otherwise and from the white papers and news articles regarding the Cell/RSX and Xenon/Xenos.

Weaker but FAR FAR better for game code

greg_splicer

BS, developers are still arguing over which is actually better for game code, but judging by the thread count about the Cell BE at Beyond3D most of them seem to favor the Cell.

At least i gave a link that shows 360 tramps PS3 in every way, including CPU, memexport and direct CPU cache access + unified ram + 6 threads of GENERAL PURPOSE code instead of one on PS3, that has to handle the 5 SPE's, that do not even have branching prediction

Additionally the Xenos graphics processor is able to directly lock the cache of the CPU in order to retrieve data directly from it without it having to go to system memory beforehand. The purpose of this is that one (or more, if wanted) of the three CPU cores could be generating very high levels of geometry that the developer doesn't want to, or can't, preserve in the memory footprints available on the system when in use. High-resolution dynamic geometry such as grass, leaves, hair, particles, water droplets and explosion effects are all examples of one type of scenario that the cache locking may be used in.

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/articles/4/3

Better now ? Link and no exclamation marks

I think you're quite confused about what "cache" means.  CPU cache is visible only to the CPU, not to the GPU or even to the programmer.  It's just a means of reducing costly access to the actual memory.  You should start using the word "memory" rather than "cache", its severely misleading. 

I'm no expert but I understand it like this. The cell is a processor made up or 1 general purpose processor and the 8 spe's, the spe's are alot omre simple than a standard general purpose processor and as sutch have limited capability, they need the contolling general purpose processor to assign tasks to them, they then carry out that task and hand the finished result back the the controller that then does the required task with that information. As a whole the cell is very powerful and extremely effecient at certain tasks ( calculations for example, like with the folding project) but your software has to be specifically designed to make best use of this architecture which makes programming harder and increases the chance of lost efficiency due to programming.

The 360 basically has 3 standard duel core processors that are all as fully capable as a standard processor, as sutch it has 3 times the general processing capabilty of the cell and the cpu naturally can share any task between these as it see's fit because thay can all perform all function a processor needs to reducing the need for specific programming.

The cell's spe's are basically used to offload workload from the main general processor that contols the whole thing and are specifically designed to speed the capabilites far beyond that of a normal processor but its still only one processor, so while it will kill the 360 with some functions there are some the 360 will be better suited to. Imagine it like this, you go shopping and have to bring the goods in, you have 3 men on one team doning the job ( 360 cpu) but the other team has 1 man but 8 kids helping him ( the cell ), obviously there will be cases where 3 men are better tahn 1 and 8 kids for carrying goods, but there will be time when the reverse is true. The area the cell rules is in floatin point calcs (double that of the 360 cpu's combined) but for everything else is pretty much a match, so the which is a better games machine will come down to how floatings point calcs are needed in games, well cpu wise anyway. (other variables include different ram setup and different gpu's but i'll leave that for now)

Hope that helps a bit.

the1stmoonfly

1. The 3 processors in the 60 are dual-THREADED, not dual-core.  Dual-core implioes that each of the 3 processing cores has two processors on it, much like an Athlon X2.  They do not.  Each has two threads on which to do work, which has been happening since the P4 days.  If the processors were dual-threaded, they'd actually have 4 threads.

2. Processing tasks cannot be shared between the 3 cors in the 360's cpu.  They can share information between the cores, yes, but actually tasks cannot be carried out on multiple cores at a time.  This is why early 360 games were said to be only using one core.  There have been worries that this could lead to bottlenecks in the 360's cpu.  If one task requires heavy cpu usage, and it takes up a whole core, and other tasks running at the same time take up very litte power, then it leads to one core being maxed out and losing efficiency, and the other cores barely being used. 

[QUOTE="the1stmoonfly"]

I'm no expert but I understand it like this. The cell is a processor made up or 1 general purpose processor and the 8 spe's, the spe's are alot omre simple than a standard general purpose processor and as sutch have limited capability, they need the contolling general purpose processor to assign tasks to them, they then carry out that task and hand the finished result back the the controller that then does the required task with that information. As a whole the cell is very powerful and extremely effecient at certain tasks ( calculations for example, like with the folding project) but your software has to be specifically designed to make best use of this architecture which makes programming harder and increases the chance of lost efficiency due to programming.

The 360 basically has 3 standard duel core processors that are all as fully capable as a standard processor, as sutch it has 3 times the general processing capabilty of the cell and the cpu naturally can share any task between these as it see's fit because thay can all perform all function a processor needs to reducing the need for specific programming.

The cell's spe's are basically used to offload workload from the main general processor that contols the whole thing and are specifically designed to speed the capabilites far beyond that of a normal processor but its still only one processor, so while it will kill the 360 with some functions there are some the 360 will be better suited to. Imagine it like this, you go shopping and have to bring the goods in, you have 3 men on one team doning the job ( 360 cpu) but the other team has 1 man but 8 kids helping him ( the cell ), obviously there will be cases where 3 men are better tahn 1 and 8 kids for carrying goods, but there will be time when the reverse is true. The area the cell rules is in floatin point calcs (double that of the 360 cpu's combined) but for everything else is pretty much a match, so the which is a better games machine will come down to how floatings point calcs are needed in games, well cpu wise anyway. (other variables include different ram setup and different gpu's but i'll leave that for now)

Hope that helps a bit.

makingmusic476

1. The 3 processors in the 60 are dual-THREADED, not dual-core.  Dual-core implioes that each of the 3 processing cores has two processors on it, much like an Athlon X2.  They do not.  Each has two threads on which to do work, which has been happening since the P4 days.  If the processors were dual-threaded, they'd actually have 4 threads.

2. Processing tasks cannot be shared between the 3 cors in the 360's cpu.  They can share information between the cores, yes, but actually tasks cannot be carried out on multiple cores at a time.  This is why early 360 games were said to be only using one core.  There have been worries that this could lead to bottlenecks in the 360's cpu.  If one task requires heavy cpu usage, and it takes up a whole core, and other tasks running at the same time take up very litte power, then it leads to one core being maxed out and losing efficiency, and the other cores barely being used. 

So, what you suggest is that ... they made a 3 CPU core system .... that only one thread in one of the cores can be used at all in any given time ??? So, they could as well put there just half one of the CPU's and have the same results

 In all honesty, i think you have no idea what you are talking about

[QUOTE="irvfatty"]

Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic. But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self? How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor. Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores. How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE? Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

Thanks in advance to any replies.

greg_splicer

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

ok, now prepare to be punched in the stomach:

first of all, the Cell is a great general purpose CPU. major Nelson said the contrary, and it seems you believed him.

go to http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~samw/projects/cell/CF06.pdf to see the Cell destroying AMDs and Intels processors in a rate of even 8x faster. Go see that on table 4 in the link.

I'm sorry, but i couldn't find the article on IBM's site where they benchmark the Cell against all other CPUs that were out one year ago, and it beat every single one of them in every task. general purpose or not. and in some cases it was more than 15x faster. well, just go look for that article, you could be luckier than me finding the article again, just type Cell BE benchmark on google.

now go here: http://icl.cs.utk.edu/projectsfiles/iter-ref/pubs/ut_cs_06_580.pdf to find out that the Cell is a multicore, parallel process based processor. Go to subject 1.4 to see it's multicore, go to 2.2 to see the SPE Parallelization.

Parallelalization is good for games, but only once Devs get the use to it. until then, it's going to be a disadvantage, since it makes games harder to make without taking the benefit it offers. But once devs learn how to extract the power that parallelization offers, games' quality will skyrocket for sure.

if you don't want to trust these links, i can show you a lot more. and anyway, the results will come eventually, since devs are going multicore now that PCs are using Dual or even Quad core CPUs, and there's no escape on utilizing it's qualities.

EDIT: go to table 5 on the first link i provided to see the Cell beating out the nowadays leading processors in single precision and double precision tasks as well.

[QUOTE="makingmusic476"][QUOTE="the1stmoonfly"]

I'm no expert but I understand it like this. The cell is a processor made up or 1 general purpose processor and the 8 spe's, the spe's are alot omre simple than a standard general purpose processor and as sutch have limited capability, they need the contolling general purpose processor to assign tasks to them, they then carry out that task and hand the finished result back the the controller that then does the required task with that information. As a whole the cell is very powerful and extremely effecient at certain tasks ( calculations for example, like with the folding project) but your software has to be specifically designed to make best use of this architecture which makes programming harder and increases the chance of lost efficiency due to programming.

The 360 basically has 3 standard duel core processors that are all as fully capable as a standard processor, as sutch it has 3 times the general processing capabilty of the cell and the cpu naturally can share any task between these as it see's fit because thay can all perform all function a processor needs to reducing the need for specific programming.

The cell's spe's are basically used to offload workload from the main general processor that contols the whole thing and are specifically designed to speed the capabilites far beyond that of a normal processor but its still only one processor, so while it will kill the 360 with some functions there are some the 360 will be better suited to. Imagine it like this, you go shopping and have to bring the goods in, you have 3 men on one team doning the job ( 360 cpu) but the other team has 1 man but 8 kids helping him ( the cell ), obviously there will be cases where 3 men are better tahn 1 and 8 kids for carrying goods, but there will be time when the reverse is true. The area the cell rules is in floatin point calcs (double that of the 360 cpu's combined) but for everything else is pretty much a match, so the which is a better games machine will come down to how floatings point calcs are needed in games, well cpu wise anyway. (other variables include different ram setup and different gpu's but i'll leave that for now)

Hope that helps a bit.

greg_splicer

1. The 3 processors in the 60 are dual-THREADED, not dual-core.  Dual-core implioes that each of the 3 processing cores has two processors on it, much like an Athlon X2.  They do not.  Each has two threads on which to do work, which has been happening since the P4 days.  If the processors were dual-threaded, they'd actually have 4 threads.

2. Processing tasks cannot be shared between the 3 cors in the 360's cpu.  They can share information between the cores, yes, but actually tasks cannot be carried out on multiple cores at a time.  This is why early 360 games were said to be only using one core.  There have been worries that this could lead to bottlenecks in the 360's cpu.  If one task requires heavy cpu usage, and it takes up a whole core, and other tasks running at the same time take up very litte power, then it leads to one core being maxed out and losing efficiency, and the other cores barely being used. 

So, what you suggest is that ... they made a 3 CPU core system .... that only one thread in one of the cores can be used at all in any given time ??? So, they could as well put there just half one of the CPU's and have the same results

 In all honesty, i think you have no idea what you are talking about

I said that each core has two threads, and any single task can only be performed on one of the cores.  For instance, the ai can only be done on one core, and the physics can only be done on one core at a time.  They can't be done on whatever bit of space is left on each core, like the guy i quote said could happen.

Here's what the guy said, "the cpu naturally can share any task between these as it see's fit because thay can all perform all function"

[QUOTE="greg_splicer"][QUOTE="irvfatty"]

Maybe this is a wrong place to ask, since I've come to the conclusion that a lot of users on this board seems to consist of the younger age demograhic. But some of you seem to project that you know the techincal aspects of the processors.

My question is are the Cell's separate processing engines considered a processor in it self? How does one of the SPE compare to say a Pentium 4 porcessor. Is it like a Dual Core processor but with 7 cores, or are the SPEs a totally diferrent concept that I have yet to understant?

Also I understand the Xbox360 has 3 cores. How does one of the Cores compare to a SPE? Are the SPE and Cores considered a processer like the traditional Pentium 4?

Thanks in advance to any replies.

SambaLele

PS3 has ONE core, one general purpose core, when 360 has 3 running 6 threads !!! Cell is really powerfull when game code is not needed, which of course is bad for games, it is good for parallel stuff like decoding video etc

The fact that has ONE core, really makes anything else bad and bottleneck

Also SPE 's to do not have general code funtionalities and also do not have branching prediction used for physics etc

Plus 360 GPU can directly access the 360 CPU cache !!!! from the GPU, something not possible on PS3

ok, now prepare to be punched in the stomach:

first of all, the Cell is a great general purpose CPU. major Nelson said the contrary, and it seems you believed him.

go to http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~samw/projects/cell/CF06.pdf to see the Cell destroying AMDs and Intels processors in a rate of even 8x faster. Go see that on table 4 in the link.

I'm sorry, but i couldn't find the article on IBM's site where they benchmark the Cell against all other CPUs that were out one year ago, and it beat every single one of them in every task. general purpose or not. and in some cases it was more than 15x faster. well, just go look for that article, you could be luckier than me finding the article again, just type Cell BE benchmark on google.

now go here: http://icl.cs.utk.edu/projectsfiles/iter-ref/pubs/ut_cs_06_580.pdf to find out that the Cell is a multicore, parallel process based processor. Go to subject 1.4 to see it's multicore, go to 2.2 to see the SPE Parallelization.

Parallelalization is good for games, but only once Devs get the use to it. until then, it's going to be a disadvantage, since it makes games harder to make without taking the benefit it offers. But once devs learn how to extract the power that parallelization offers, games' quality will skyrocket for sure.

if you don't want to trust these links, i can show you a lot more. and anyway, the results will come eventually, since devs are going multicore now that PCs are using Dual or even Quad core CPUs, and there's no escape on utilizing it's qualities.

EDIT: go to table 5 on the first link i provided to see the Cell beating out the nowadays leading processors in single precision and double precision tasks as well.

go see this for more: http://www.mc.com/uploadedFiles/CellPerfAndProg-3Nov06.pdf

in the first table, the cell beats a Xeon by an average rate of 20x it's speed. 

well this has decended into typical system war banter, the TC only asked for an explanation of how each cpu works and how they differ, and yet again we have a 'mine is better than yours' fight. And to all those saying the cell beats the 360 cpu by 20x, I would ask, why dont ps3 games look 20x better. I dont by the old excuse of devs are not used to it, if it was 20x better even the first game would have looked better than gears, they,re just looking at speed charts which only have the cpu'd oing tasks that give the cell the advantage by running programms designed to use its superior functions, when it comes to normal work, like gaming, its still unknow as to whether it will beat the 360 as alot of devs admit.

This thread should be locked now, the tc has all the info he needs.

moonfly, the Cell CPU has some graphics processing capabilities (mainly assisting with shaders and such) but the GPU is still primarily responsible for graphics.  THAT is why that entire post is essentially irrelevant, nobody has said that overall it is 20x faster than Xenon but there are a handful of tasks where it has a similar advantage over Xenon and it is known to be the better CPU so get the heck over it.