Final Fantasy 13 to Use "Nearly 100%" of PS3

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

utgardaloki

Distinguished
Mar 18, 2009
22
0
18,560
0
Frak... RAM is cheap and PS3 isn't setting any memory bandwidth records. See the first part of my previous message for the rest.
The PS3 doesn't have the fastest RAM speed. But it still has the fastest bus between CPU and GPU on the home market. The fastest PC (Pci-e 2) isn't even close. The future Pci-express 3 (32 GB/sec) will come close but still won't reach the speed of PS3. The problem for PS3 is it can't hold all info in video RAM as well as main RAM needed to get the same graphical quality as the PC. In other words it can't store all readily available info needed to render a single frame. So in a situation where the PS3 needs more info to render a scene as intricate as what you'll find on the most powerful PC the memory runs out and it has to resort to read from the much slower HD.

On the physics side the PS3's CPU Cell crushes any CPU on the PC side. You need a GPU on the PC side to compete with cell in this regard (and a new GPU is considerably more powerful than Cell here).
 

option350z

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2009
11
0
18,560
0
[citation][nom]utgardaloki[/nom]The PS3 doesn't have the fastest RAM speed. But it still has the fastest bus between CPU and GPU on the home market. The fastest PC (Pci-e 2) isn't even close. The future Pci-express 3 (32 GB/sec) will come close but still won't reach the speed of PS3. The problem for PS3 is it can't hold all info in video RAM as well as main RAM needed to get the same graphical quality as the PC. In other words it can't store all readily available info needed to render a single frame. So in a situation where the PS3 needs more info to render a scene as intricate as what you'll find on the most powerful PC the memory runs out and it has to resort to read from the much slower HD.On the physics side the PS3's CPU Cell crushes any CPU on the PC side. You need a GPU on the PC side to compete with cell in this regard (and a new GPU is considerably more powerful than Cell here).[/citation]

Great view indeed but we are talking of something that has components soldered to the board directly instead of through a slot or grid array. Its obviously faster as you stated, but to believe that a CPU with a set up of something similar to a GPU is faster, I really don't see that happening. Looking at the i7, it's still faster than the cell.

"Cell was not built to be the most powerful processor, it was built to offer as much theoretical power per transistor, as a result it IS a compromised design since engineering trade-offs were made, it lacks in order processing, branch prediction, and its SPEs have limited functionality. Its main PPC based CPU is also stoneage compared to something like the Core 2.
If i remember correctly Intel showcased a design similar to Cell at one of the IDFs, to show they could do similar stuff...though such a processor is pointless if it cant reach its max capability in a variety of situations."
http://futuremark.yougamers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=95229&page=2

Cell is one clever solution to the transistor count problem, but thats it, its not the Messiah of processors.
http://futuremark.yougamers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=95229&page=2
 

option350z

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2009
11
0
18,560
0
Just a tack on same site though.

"The PS3 does not have 8 cores, it has only one full function core, then there are 8 SPEs, two of which are not used for processing in games. The SPEs are more like co-processors, they arent autonomous and they dont have the same instruction set as the main core nor do they even have a cache.
The main core is also an in order unit, with multithreading, its more comparable to the Intel Atom than the more sophisticated Phenom and Core 2 processors."

This is exactly how I look at it. The cell takes on a complicated task and breaks it down upon the separate SPEs. Thats some what of how a GPU works. Not a CPU.
 

utgardaloki

Distinguished
Mar 18, 2009
22
0
18,560
0
Looking at the i7, it's still faster than the cell.
I definatelly believe you're right in a general purpose environmet but I was talking about physics. The kind meant for gaming. Havoc, PhysX and so on.

The Cell might not be a very powerful CPU but it can be a very powerful processor in some more narrow applications. Cell isn't a perfect processor in anyway but it makes small work of even i7 regarding simple aproximated physics. Run say PhysX on i7 and it works. Somewhat. Frame rates are terrible because it can't keep up. Run it on a GPU or Cell and things all of a sudden become much more speedy and the number of things that can happen at the same time while still maintaining very good frame rates goes up alot.

A GPU is even more simple in design than Cell from a CPU point of view. But regarding this narrow physics application the GPU never the less beats Cell by quite a margine, not to mention i7.
 
G

Guest

Guest
lol dude what your saying is useless, it has already been said paying extra money just to skip disk changes is stupid? it takes like not even 30seconds to change a disk.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
J Streaming Video & TVs 2
E Streaming Video & TVs 2
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 4
G Streaming Video & TVs 8
G Streaming Video & TVs 4
G Streaming Video & TVs 16
G Streaming Video & TVs 33
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 33
tuanmai Streaming Video & TVs 21
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 76
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 36
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 34
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 16
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 30
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 28
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 21
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 24
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 33
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 20

ASK THE COMMUNITY