The cell really is pretty nifty

Am playing the Infamous and Motorstorm demos. I know fanboys will disagree but I don't think PC's or the 360 can do this. Killzone is the same thing. The cell is different than normal PC architecture where it can handle many tasks at once why you see so much going on on screen. It's a different architecture much like RISC processors back in the day. It excels at certain kinds of gaming. Coupled with Blu-Ray and the ability to stream large amounts of media that can be incorporated into games. Yes standard PC architecture with a great GPU and loads of bandwith also has a huge advantage when pumping lots of textures in a huge open world environment. But it reminds me of back in the day when playing games on a game machine like an Amiga and then the PC came into the mix.

I've said this before and been told I have no clue what I'm talking about but I'm actually correct. The spe's in the cell allow it to handle many processes at once. Why you see certain special effects in games like Killzone, Infamous, Motorstorm, Uncharted that you don't see elsewhere. Is it as strong with certain textures? No.

Is it great for gaming? Yes

Celtic_34

What effects that the DX10/DX11 GpGPU enabled PC can't do?

AMD's Ultra-Threads and NVIDIA's Giga-Threads technology enables the GpGPUs to run hundreds of threads.

DX11 GPUs(AMD/NV) supports the latest BC6 (HDR) and BC7(LDR) texture compression formats.

Unless you guys want me to keep handing out the suspensions, I'd suggest you guys stop insulting the TC. If you want to prove him wrong go for it, but you'll have to do it without the personal attacks.

TC you wanta try harder? There are more games sold on Pc then all consoles combined. 04dcarraher

try again.

http://www.vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="Celtic_34"]

I would venture there aren't more high end pc's in peoples homes than ps3's being sold. Maybe there are more PC's in offices. If high end pc's are being sold they aren't for home use or gaming.

Celtic_34

Um in 2010 there was more Direct x 11 gpu's sold then both consoles combined... So I would say there are more Pc 's more powerful then magical PS3.... then your forgetting all Pc's made for gaming since 2006 which still out do the PS3. AKA The Geforce 8's to GTX 500's and AMD's 3000's to 6000's......

Yeah but what's your point? more games still sold on the consoles. A developer is going to be much more inclined to try to max out the consoles than they are a pc. The pc is somewhat irrellevant. They haven't even maxed out these consoles yet. Yes the PC can display things at a much high resolution and give you a crystal picture in certain scenarios and you can run games at a higher res. I'm not disputing that. I'm also not disputing the PC has advantages as far as certain kinds of games. It absolutely does. Consoles are bad for gaming in ways. But as far as actual game design it's pretty much irrelevant. Certain games are just going to suck on the PC and vice versa. I remember for years fighting games on the PC were just horrible because they aren't designed for it. Street Fighter IV is the first fighting game that was designed with PC's in mind. More power to you, but it's not a norm.

It's just more efficient to design games for proprietary hardware sometimes.

End of thread

04dcarraher

Unless you guys want me to keep handing out the suspensions, I'd suggest you guys stop insulting the TC. If you want to prove him wrong go for it, but you'll have to do it without the personal attacks.

Teufelhuhn

:lol:

:roll:

Right, let's keep a ridiculous thread alive for no reason in particular. But hey man, whatevr, you've got the all powerful button-o-supension

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

End of thread

Teufelhuhn

that guy thinks a pentium 4 is stronger than the cell, and also he never wants to aknowledge the cells spe's.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

End of thread

Teufelhuhn

No not really they are going by instructions per second not sheer number crunching. and yes the 360 cpu is stronger in some ways then the PS3 Cell.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

End of thread

theuncharted34

that guy thinks a pentium 4 is stronger than the cell, and also he never wants to aknowledge the cells spe's.

OMG No a pentium 4 is faster then the PPE(main processor of the Cell) not the whole darn chip with the SPE's get it right already..... Also tests were done in linux with cell and Pentium 4 and the pentium kicked the Cell's butt....

If developers are designing for the ps3 architecture and then porting to the pc you are going to run into problems.

Developers hate it for that reason. You basically have to design games specifically for it. When porting it's an odd duck. Either way the port goes.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="Celtic_34"]

I would venture there aren't more high end pc's in peoples homes than ps3's being sold. Maybe there are more PC's in offices. If high end pc's are being sold they aren't for home use or gaming.

Um in 2010 there was more Direct x 11 gpu's sold then both consoles combined... So I would say there are more Pc 's more powerful then magical PS3.... then your forgetting all Pc's made for gaming since 2006 which still out do the PS3. AKA The Geforce 8's to GTX 500's and AMD's 3000's to 6000's......

Yeah but what's your point? more games still sold on the consoles. A developer is going to be much more inclined to try to max out the consoles than they are a pc. The pc is somewhat irrellevant. They haven't even maxed out these consoles yet. Yes the PC can display things at a much high resolution and give you a crystal picture in certain scenarios and you can run games at a higher res. I'm not disputing that. I'm also not disputing the PC has advantages as far as certain kinds of games. It absolutely does. Consoles are bad for gaming in ways. But as far as actual game design it's pretty much irrelevant. Certain games are just going to suck on the PC and vice versa. I remember for years fighting games on the PC were just horrible because they aren't designed for it. Street Fighter IV is the first fighting game that was designed with PC's in mind. More power to you, but it's not a norm.

It's just more efficient to design games for proprietary hardware sometimes. The ps3 is at an advantage because it has a central processor with multiple spe's and it is coupled with blu-ray.

If developers are designing for that architecture and then porting to the pc you are going to run into problems.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]TC you wanta try harder? There are more games sold on Pc then all consoles combined. Celtic_34

try again.

http://www.vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php

VG charts come on.... Its takes all consoles to even get close to Pc game sale numbers.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

End of thread

Teufelhuhn

p.s. anyone tried running Linux on a PS3? the OS runs better on a Pentium 4. why? because CELL is designed for other things.

If developers are designing for the ps3 architecture and then porting to the pc you are going to run into problems.

Celtic_34

Actually, it helps the PC GPUs e.g. Fold @ Home i.e. PS3's R&D helped Fold @ Home GPU2 clients. SPE's 256KB limitation helps PC's CPU's cache management i.e. less work for X86 CPU's pre-fetch hardware. Also,Intel Core i3/i5/i7 has 256KB L2 cache.

Alright I need to eat something. It's been fun.

thanks to the mods too for hearing me out. I didn't report anyone either. I'm glad this was allowed to go on. It was all in good fun and was a good discussion.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

End of thread

CwlHeddwyn

p.s. anyone tried running Linux on a PS3? the OS runs better on a Pentium 4. why? because CELL is designed for other things.

Actually its not all because the Cell is made for other things its because each SPE has to coded"told what to do all the time" or they idle do nothing, the PPE in the Cell is a slow processor compared to even a Pentium 4 . Which is why the PS3 lagged behind the 360 until 2008-2009. Because the Dev's werent using the SPE's correctly. But for instructions per second the 360 cpu beats the Cell the cell sucks as a generalCPU, but as a gpu or number crunching its pretty good

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

The fact that that chart puts the Xbox 360's CPU at double the PS3's should tell you how incredibly lol-worthy and misleading it is.

04dcarraher

that guy thinks a pentium 4 is stronger than the cell, and also he never wants to aknowledge the cells spe's.

OMG No a pentium 4 is faster then the PPE(main processor of the Cell) not the whole darn chip with the SPE's get it right already..... Also tests were done in linux with cell and Pentium 4 and the pentium kicked the Cell's butt....

the hell? you just told me that's not what you said and then you turned around and said it :lol:

I know you know about these sorts of topics, so you're just lying to yourself buddy.

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="Celtic_34"]

You basically have the cell with it's 7 spe's, blu-ray, the rsx and low bandwith. It's a vector processing core. For certain tasks it's perfectly fine and has advantages.

Celtic_34

no it doesn't have any advantage over a high-end PC from 2006.

are you an expert? lol. What's funny is I had this same argument with a bunch of people a couple years ago that were all experts and I was a moron. I later read an article from the designer of both the 360 and ps3 who said exactly what I was. I'd tend to believe him.

SPE ISA is based on IBM's PowerPC VMX (aka Motorola's PowerPC Altivec). Both SPE and PPC uses 3 operands format.

AMD Radeon HD GPUs (ALU.[a.b.c.d]) and AMD Bulldozer uses the superior 4 operands format.

AMD/NV GpGPUs includes superior register count i.e. several thousands vs CELL's few hundreds. Register storage is the fastest storage method.

[QUOTE="Celtic_34"]

If developers are designing for the ps3 architecture and then porting to the pc you are going to run into problems.

ronvalencia

Actually, it helps the PC GPUs e.g. Fold @ Home i.e. PS3's R&D helped Fold @ Home GPU2 clients. SPE's 256KB limitation helps PC's CPU's cache management i.e. less work for X86 CPU's pre-fetch hardware. Also,Intel Core i3/i5/i7 has 256KB L2 cache.

The PS3 even lags behind a 8600GT or even a Q6600 at Folding

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

that guy thinks a pentium 4 is stronger than the cell, and also he never wants to aknowledge the cells spe's.

theuncharted34

OMG No a pentium 4 is faster then the PPE(main processor of the Cell) not the whole darn chip with the SPE's get it right already..... Also tests were done in linux with cell and Pentium 4 and the pentium kicked the Cell's butt....

the hell? you just told me that's not what you said and then you turned around and said it :lol:

I know you know about these sorts of topics, so you're just lying to yourself buddy.

Come on now look back I explained it then and now, you had what I said wrong in your memory.

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

OMG No a pentium 4 is faster then the PPE(main processor of the Cell) not the whole darn chip with the SPE's get it right already..... Also tests were done in linux with cell and Pentium 4 and the pentium kicked the Cell's butt....

04dcarraher

the hell? you just told me that's not what you said and then you turned around and said it :lol:

I know you know about these sorts of topics, so you're just lying to yourself buddy.

Come on nowlook back I explained it then and now, you hadwhat I saidwrong in your head.

look at your post again.

Linux OS would have to be rewritten to take advantage of the CELL SPEs. That explains poor performance against a P4.

PC has been more powerful than PS3 for years so I don't agree on that. I do think PS3 is more powerful than 360 though.BigBoss255

You might be right............. if we compare cell to a cpu from 2007.

Look above on another post I explained why lol. 04dcarraher

so let's get it straight then. you're saying the pentium 4 is stronger than the cell *single* core, but the entire cell processor (including spe's) is stronger than the pentium 4?

Oh and btw graphs are silly. Look at it this way. None of those systems are going to pushing those numbers anyways. You PC guys are stuck in this world of popping in a graphics card and suddenly the game runs better. Vs a game that is actually designed for that graphics card specifically. 90% of this hardware is completely useless and it's basically how you design for it.

Developers are developing specifically for the ps3. If you port those games you are going to run into issues. There are more developers designing games and trying to fully utilize it than a PC. If you port you are going to have issues.

What you guys are missing is I'm basing my argument on many factors including the real world.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Look above on another post I explained why lol. theuncharted34

so let's get it straight then. you're saying the pentium 4 is stronger than the cell *single* core, but the entire cell processor (including spe's) is stronger than the pentium 4?

Pretty much lol, now you understand yay :)

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Look above on another post I explained why lol. theuncharted34

so let's get it straight then. you're saying the pentium 4 is stronger than the cell *single* core, but the entire cell processor (including spe's) is stronger than the pentium 4?

Oh and btw graphs are silly. Look at it this way. None of those systems are going to pushing those numbers anyways. You PC guys are stuck in this world of popping in a graphics card and suddenly the game runs better. Vs a game that is actually designed for that graphics card specifically. 90% of this hardware is completely useless and it's basically how you design for it.

Celtic_34

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Look above on another post I explained why lol. 04dcarraher

so let's get it straight then. you're saying the pentium 4 is stronger than the cell *single* core, but the entire cell processor (including spe's) is stronger than the pentium 4?

Pretty much lol, now you understand yay :)

I always knew that's how it was, the P4 is slightly stronger than the cell PPE but the cell as a whole is significantly stronger. what I was trying to understand was your posts :P

[QUOTE="Celtic_34"]

Oh and btw graphs are silly. Look at it this way. None of those systems are going to pushing those numbers anyways. You PC guys are stuck in this world of popping in a graphics card and suddenly the game runs better. Vs a game that is actually designed for that graphics card specifically. 90% of this hardware is completely useless and it's basically how you design for it.

EdenProxy

PC GPUs are designed to run Direct3D virtual machine as fast as possible.

Oh and btw graphs are silly. Look at it this way. None of those systems are going to pushing those numbers anyways. You PC guys are stuck in this world of popping in a graphics card and suddenly the game runs better. Vs a game that is actually designed for that graphics card specifically. 90% of this hardware is completely useless and it's basically how you design for it.

Developers are developing specifically for the ps3. If you port those games you are going to run into issues. There are more developers designing games and trying to fully utilize it than a PC. If you port you are going to have issues.

What you guys are missing is I'm basing my argument on many factors including the real world.

Celtic_34

What issues are they? Are they compute horse power issues?

There's nothing magical about cut-down/kit-bash PowerPC VMX.

[QUOTE="Celtic_34"]

Oh and btw graphs are silly. Look at it this way. None of those systems are going to pushing those numbers anyways. You PC guys are stuck in this world of popping in a graphics card and suddenly the game runs better. Vs a game that is actually designed for that graphics card specifically. 90% of this hardware is completely useless and it's basically how you design for it.

EdenProxy

Whatsome dont understand is that alot of the hardware based in the PS3 such as its gpu the RSX is based off Pc hardware. Pc users tend to know about how far hardware can go. Its like saying a gimped much slower Geforce 7800 can out process or out do a 7800GTX just because devs have the magic finger tips. Wrong they ethier take shortcuts or tone the quality down because optimization does not defy the limits of the hardware's abilities.

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

The fact that that chart puts the Xbox 360's CPU at double the PS3's should tell you how incredibly lol-worthy and misleading it is.

04dcarraher

that guy thinks a pentium 4 is stronger than the cell, and also he never wants to aknowledge the cells spe's.

OMG No a pentium 4 is faster then the PPE(main processor of the Cell) not the whole darn chip with the SPE's get it right already..... Also tests were done in linux with cell and Pentium 4 and the pentium kicked the Cell's butt....

probably only one instruction per clock cycle, not 8.

pentium can do one thing at a time, cell can do quite a few.

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

that guy thinks a pentium 4 is stronger than the cell, and also he never wants to aknowledge the cells spe's.

lespaul1919

OMG No a pentium 4 is faster then the PPE(main processor of the Cell) not the whole darn chip with the SPE's get it right already..... Also tests were done in linux with cell and Pentium 4 and the pentium kicked the Cell's butt....

probably only one instruction per clock cycle, not 8.

pentium can do one thing at a time, cell can do quite a few.

The PPE in the Cell is a single core also. Why do you think early console games on both the 360 PS3 and PC where only using one cpu or core for games and all the way into 2007? Multicore cpu's didnt really start being used correctly until 2007....

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

that guy thinks a pentium 4 is stronger than the cell, and also he never wants to aknowledge the cells spe's.

lespaul1919

OMG No a pentium 4 is faster then the PPE(main processor of the Cell) not the whole darn chip with the SPE's get it right already..... Also tests were done in linux with cell and Pentium 4 and the pentium kicked the Cell's butt....

probably only one instruction per clock cycle, not 8.

pentium can do one thing at a time, cell can do quite a few.

The thing is the pentium is a great chip. It's probably the best chip intel ever designed. That architecture lasted how long?

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

OMG No a pentium 4 is faster then the PPE(main processor of the Cell) not the whole darn chip with the SPE's get it right already..... Also tests were done in linux with cell and Pentium 4 and the pentium kicked the Cell's butt....

Celtic_34

probably only one instruction per clock cycle, not 8.

pentium can do one thing at a time, cell can do quite a few.

The thing is the pentium is a great chip. It's probably the best chip intel ever designed. That architecture lasted how long?

Um... about 1.5 years. The Pentium -> Pentium Pro was a pretty radical architecture shift. Pentium 2 was a more refined Pentium Pro, but Pentium 3 in '99 was again a radical shift. Netburst with Pentium 4 was a huge design change. Anyway its irrelevant, the Cell has little to do with those "nifty extras" you were talking about in the first part. Static background such as those you mentioned tax CPU's very very lightly, its mostly a artistic/GPU thing.

A PPE being outperformed by a pentium chip isn't a bad thing. It would probably outperform the 360's cores as well. The difference is the 360 has 3 of them. They probably aren't quite as good as pentium 4 chips. The p4 kept up with the core duo for a while and was better at certain tasks.

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]

OMG No a pentium 4 is faster then the PPE(main processor of the Cell) not the whole darn chip with the SPE's get it right already..... Also tests were done in linux with cell and Pentium 4 and the pentium kicked the Cell's butt....

Celtic_34

probably only one instruction per clock cycle, not 8.

pentium can do one thing at a time, cell can do quite a few.

The thing is the pentium is a great chip. It's probably the best chip intel ever designed. That architecture lasted how long?

[QUOTE="lespaul1919"]

probably only one instruction per clock cycle, not 8.

pentium can do one thing at a time, cell can do quite a few.

The thing is the pentium is a great chip. It's probably the best chip intel ever designed. That architecture lasted how long?

[QUOTE="PC_Otter"][QUOTE="Celtic_34"]

The thing is the pentium is a great chip. It's probably the best chip intel ever designed. That architecture lasted how long?

Cali3350

By all means, the thread ended here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTFQp625FqI

After this every thing was basically buffer overflow, garbage data.

Also, good job by the mods on NOT checking the veracity of the OP's claims and instead modding the guys calling him out on that. If saying that somebody is a troll because he is repeating the same facts without proof is liable to moderation, then the rules of the site are a bit f***ed up imo.

OP is well behaved, I agree, but nonsense and untruth is still nonsense and untruth.

[QUOTE="KiZZo1"]

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]

"transistor count" is not at all equivalent to "performance".

Teufelhuhn

It's not, but it's strongly correlated as very clearly shown by the graph.

Not directly.

Transistor count vs Performance

Everyone knows PC couldnt possibly run KZ3, this is basic fact.

it has something to do with the billboards in mlb the show.

Not sure why this concept is so difficult to grasp for PC gamers.