PC vs PS3 Hardware

Some kid I know is claiming that graphcailly the PS3 is stronger than the PC, in hardware nothing can match "TEH POWER OF TEH CELL!!!111oneone".

THis is wrong right, PS3 only has total 512meg of RAM?

And also, what exactly does the cell do? Why does it need 8 processors, when its only going to be running about 2 apps at once (in game XMB and the game probably)?

The Cell's strength as a CPU (in some tasks better than most PC CPUS) often falls outside the areas useful to gaming. Dual Cores and Quad Cores are more practical and thus more powerful for gaming. The Nehalem is coming too.

That and it can't make up for the GPU and RAM in the PS3.

Some kid I know is claiming that graphcailly the PS3 is stronger than the PC, in hardware nothing can match "TEH POWER OF TEH CELL!!!111oneone".

THis is wrong right, PS3 only has total 512meg of RAM? Yes, it has 256MB of VRAM and 256MB of System RAM. Consoles do not have the task of running a heavy OS however (Among other programs), so that amount of RAM isn't as bad for a console as it obviously would be for a PC.

And also, what exactly does the cell do? Why does it need 8 processors, when its only going to be running about 2 apps at once (in game XMB and the game probably)? The Cell doesn't have 8 processors, it has 8 Processing Elements, only 6 of which can be used for games, the SPU (thats the actual processor in the Cell) has Hyper-Thread technology, all of the SPE's have 1 thread per core. This is actually hard to explain, but thats about the basics as far as The Cell goes.

PS,

Your friend is an idiot, slap him and call him Susan.

ClawKiller

PC>PS3 Hardware.

Simple as that.

[QUOTE="ClawKiller"]

Some kid I know is claiming that graphcailly the PS3 is stronger than the PC, in hardware nothing can match "TEH POWER OF TEH CELL!!!111oneone".

THis is wrong right, PS3 only has total 512meg of RAM? Yes, it has 256MB of VRAM and 256MB of System RAM. Consoles do not have the task of running a heavy OS however (Among other programs), so that amount of RAM isn't as bad for a console as it obviously would be for a PC.

And also, what exactly does the cell do? Why does it need 8 processors, when its only going to be running about 2 apps at once (in game XMB and the game probably)? The Cell doesn't have 8 processors, it has 8 Processing Elements, only 6 of which can be used for games, the SPU (thats the actual processor in the Cell) has Hyper-Thread technology, all of the SPE's have 1 thread per core. This is actually hard to explain, but thats about the basics as far as The Cell goes.

PS,

Your friend is an idiot, slap him and call him Susan.

Nagidar

WAs Hyperthreading iwhat the Intel Prescott Processors(haha reminds me of a British minister lol) were doing around 2004, when AMD were going 64 bit and all the multiple core nonsense wasnt happening?

And theoretically, if all were running MS-DOS again, and could play modern games, would we need MUCH less RAM then we have now, for example, only a gig of ram to run Crysis on high or something, cos didn't MS-DOS only run the programme, and not the OS in the background?

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="ClawKiller"]

Some kid I know is claiming that graphcailly the PS3 is stronger than the PC, in hardware nothing can match "TEH POWER OF TEH CELL!!!111oneone".

THis is wrong right, PS3 only has total 512meg of RAM? Yes, it has 256MB of VRAM and 256MB of System RAM. Consoles do not have the task of running a heavy OS however (Among other programs), so that amount of RAM isn't as bad for a console as it obviously would be for a PC.

And also, what exactly does the cell do? Why does it need 8 processors, when its only going to be running about 2 apps at once (in game XMB and the game probably)? The Cell doesn't have 8 processors, it has 8 Processing Elements, only 6 of which can be used for games, the SPU (thats the actual processor in the Cell) has Hyper-Thread technology, all of the SPE's have 1 thread per core. This is actually hard to explain, but thats about the basics as far as The Cell goes.

PS,

Your friend is an idiot, slap him and call him Susan.

ClawKiller

WAs Hyperthreading iwhat the Intel Prescott Processors(haha reminds me of a British minister lol) were doing around 2004, when AMD were going 64 bit and all the multiple core nonsense wasnt happening? Yes, the Prescott processors had HT technology.

And theoretically, if all were running MS-DOS again, and could play modern games, would we need MUCH less RAM then we have now, for example, only a gig of ram to run Crysis on high or something, cos didn't MS-DOS only run the programme, and not the OS in the background? How much RAM is needed is dependant of course, on the game and how much RAM the computer you are running it on has free, Crysis on my PC (Vista) takes up around 1.3GB of RAM, BUT, I have 4GB of RAM (3.5 recognized by my OS) and my OS with all the running applications, takes up about 1GB of RAM. Basically, it all boils down to how much available RAM you have to run an application.

PC>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>PS3.

Ur friend's a n00b.

You could ask the question of a Death Star vs a Tank and it would be far less one-sided....

/Exaggeration

It's no secret the PS3 and 360 are far behind the 360. My Devil May Cry with 8x AA and maxed settings @ 140 FPS could have told you that.GodLovesDead

I'm sure you meant PC. But yeah. PC>>>>>>>>>>>>PS3

The Cell's strength as a CPU (in some tasks better than most PC CPUS) often falls outside the areas useful to gaming. Dual Cores and Quad Cores are more practical and thus more powerful for gaming. The Nehalem is coming too.

That and it can't make up for the GPU and RAM in the PS3.

Danm_999

This /THREAD

In gamming a Quad-core andeven a Dual-core shows its leading edge, the RSX is slower than a 7900GTX by a fairly large amount (half ROPs, half VRAM bandwidth). RAM, well streamming will enver make up for 2GB system RAM and 512MB video RAM.../end

I don't even need to consider it, PC > PS3, not all PCs however. My current Laptop I certainly know its worse than a PS3. 512 RAM, a celeron 1.5 CPU and intergrated graphics card. So yeah, but most decent PCs are far better than the PS3

The Cell Broadband Engine is nothing more than a hybrid CPU/GPU whilst it can improve performance if used correctly you wont see any drastic improvements... they perform slightly worse than the average Quad Core which at most can improve a games performance by 5-10 FPS.

The only problem is that will developers drasticaly increase the development time and spend more money just to get a slight boost in performance?... the short answer is no.

Some kid I know is claiming that graphcailly the PS3 is stronger than the PC, in hardware nothing can match "TEH POWER OF TEH CELL!!!111oneone".

THis is wrong right, PS3 only has total 512meg of RAM?

And also, what exactly does the cell do? Why does it need 8 processors, when its only going to be running about 2 apps at once (in game XMB and the game probably)?

ClawKiller

PS3 has 256 MB of ram.. Even lower then 512 xD. Welleverything is weaker with the PS3...

Well.. there isnt exactly 8 processors in the PS3, there are 8 processor cores, the difference is that the Cores can work togheter on one application, thus giving the Cell quite some potential. Its far from as good as a decent PC processor though.. Also no develoeprs really know how too make use of that many cores in a good way, meaning that they won't live up too their potential, never ever..

Some kid I know is claiming that graphcailly the PS3 is stronger than the PC, in hardware nothing can match "TEH POWER OF TEH CELL!!!111oneone".

THis is wrong right, PS3 only has total 512meg of RAM?

And also, what exactly does the cell do? Why does it need 8 processors, when its only going to be running about 2 apps at once (in game XMB and the game probably)?

ClawKiller

You can't really compare a PS3 to a PC. It would be more prudent to akin it to a Mac since both use proprietary hardware, but even then, comparisons would be very flawed. Lets just stick to say that the PS3 is a games console and a PC is just that.