Proof the RSX > 7800

[Lefein]

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2005/0722/kaigai02l.gif

The Evaluation system clearly shows that it was running a 7800 (512!) in this diagram from Sony. Since the 7800 was being used on the Beta kit, we can now comfortably say that the final SDK getting shipped this month will have a processor a step ahead of the 7800.

PS3 = NextGen.. period. Yes, it will have less RAM, but it will be a much faster architecture than even the 7800 512, apparently. This thing will be blistering in performance!

[markyp23]

I thought the evaluation system was a cell running at 2.4GHz. If that is true, your source is null and void :cry:

[WhatRuOn]

Ohhh, I like.
Let's just hope that developers will be able to adjust to take full advantage of this powerhouse.

[DDT]

yeah but at the time ps3 comes out something will come out for the pc which also is better than 7800, not that i care i just want the consoles to improve.

[arfi-gorgona-O]

There are more than 1 "evaluations" systems,the last one was the one lafein show to us,the previews one was the one with the 2.4ghz cell and the 2x 6800Gf...

DTT can you tell me how the PC is going to compete with CELL and RSX together?CELL alone is like 6x the power of a 7800 in many Gfx calculations.Im going to bet that even with the next next gen of PC cards we are going to play exactly with the same Gfx as now,only with better frame rates.

[Lefein]

Also, according to the diagram, the RSX will have a Flex I/O bridge with the Cell processor. This means that it will have a kind of "super SLI" function with Cell! This is probably why they had to balance the kit out with a 7800 512! It makes sense now, since both Cell and RSX will have access to the same pool of Ram. It all makes sense now!

[psyonic]

Take an look in the pics in this tread:
http://ps3forums.com/viewtopic.php?t=10136

Edit: got it, that pic is comparing an beta kit to an PS3.

[DDT]

Im not saying that the pc can compete im just saying the gpu will be just as good in the pc, and i dont trust any benchmark or anything about the cell before i see what it can do, it might be better than intel or amd or maybe of equal power. Ill problaly buy it anyways after playing god of war, unless its a complete failure which i dont think it will be.

[Raikoh]

A card like that shouldn't have any problem running any game. I wonder, however, if certian situations that arise, example for instance in Halo when you continually shot a dead alien, as the blood that came out started to build up, extreme lag followed to the point of practically nill fps. Now I understand that the PS3 is a Next Gen console, well the games for it are obviously Next Gen as well, so hey, as powerful as the card is, think it might actually have some flaws like that. Im sure it must, probally not THAT noticable unless you actually look for it but the trailers look good and the benchmarks are impressive so hell, go for it Sony.

[Nstriker20]

Is the RSX coming with 512MB of memory or 256MB of memory :?:

[Lefein]

It only needs 256 GDDR3 because it has access to the XDRAM via the Flex I/O bus. The 512 of GDDR3 was a necessity on the beta kit because they couldn't interface the 7800 via Flex I/O.. That's why I said "It all makes sense".. It gives the developers a better idea of the kind of resources they'll be able to use although the RSX won't be choked on a PCI slot :)

[SolidSnakeUS]

It is very nice, but even though I WILL BUY PS3, I'm not really a fan of nVidia, im more of a ATI guy, but screw X360, ATI for the PC is better.

[kudoshinchi]

I dont know about that though, maybe right now RSX > 7800 by 2007 or 2008 but then Nvidia probably have something greater then RSX graphic out in the market.

[arfi-gorgona-O]

If they have something more powerful than CELL+RSX combined with no Bandwidth limitations etc.And they manage to "produce" GfX comparable to a close system like PS3.Then we'll talk about it.I don't know why people compare a close system specialized only for games to the PC GfX cards....Its just not comparable,the PC has so many limitations.That problem applies only for the x360,cause this is a 1 way "architecture" similar to the PC and still it may be on top of them at least for 2 years,cause it has many advantages from its closed architecture that the PC's dont.

[Hunnter]

It is very nice, but even though I WILL BUY PS3, I'm not really a fan of nVidia, im more of a ATI guy, but screw X360, ATI for the PC is better.

I just hope you know that ATi will be makiing all their future chips the same way as they are in xbox360, unified
As will Nvidia soon when they see it necessary to change over

And PCs wont catch up that soon
PCs have way too much going on them to be able to even compare to the chips in PS3 an xbox360
The GPUs will be the only things that will catch up anytime soon, but CPUs will be held back because of OSs
And if Windows is stil the most popular gaming OS in 5-10 years, it doesnt look like it will get any easier with Vista possibly using more resources for the GUI (that im not sure of, but it looks like it might)

[Lefein]

Yeah, it would be silly to think that PC graphics cards won't catch up. My point is that the PS3 is totally keeping up with the PC curve up until 2006, which is AWESOME!!

Consoles don't have anywhere near the overhead that PCs do, so a console will make the best use out of anything you put in it. The PS3 will make some sweet games for a long time!

[residentfishface]

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2005/0722/kaigai02l.gif

why is this real proof and not a fake?

[Lefein]

It comes from PCImpress, which has been a very reliable source of information in the past. They dont just pull numbers out of their butt. Let me find the full article for you.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2005/0722/kaigai199.htm&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2005/0722/kaigai199.htm%26hl%3Den%26hs%3DKVX%26lr%3D%26clien t%3Dopera%26rls%3Den

I realize that this is old news, but its kinda hard to stay on top of this stuff lately.

[Hunnter]

One thing that confuses me though is the fact that the GPU in the evaluation system isnt connected to the CPU...

[Sct-I/On]

7800 GTX is ordinary GFX card so the CPU needs to communicate with it through bridges, although I suppose it uses/used (not sure if final devkits have been delivered..) PCI-E bus structure. The CPU is never tight coupled with GFX card in PC architecture.

http://www.gen-x-pc.com/pci_basic.htm

RSX is straight connected to Cell so they share same bus speed (3.2 GHz) and hence RSX has got cr*ploads of bandwidth and the possibility of help from Cell to be used in for example vertex shading operations.

[Hunnter]

Oh i seeeee now, thanks, just wondering, not too good when it comes to GPUs to be honest :lol:

Now i wonder why they didnt list the BD Drive on the evaluation kit.. maybe i should just find all the things making me think twice an list them...

*stares....eats some cheese macaronni "mmm"*

Cant see anything now...haha that plan backfired..

I was going to bring up that 64 bit to the XDR, but then my brain switched on, still would have been nicer if it was higher...meh not much of a problem though an it might increase price an heating issues

[lynux3]

Hell, look at the bus speed. From 2GB/s to 35GB/s, that alone explains why RSX will be better in performance.

[Steroyd]

what the hell an increase of 5Gb/s to 35Gb/s, and the Cell and 7800 wasn't even connected the same way RSX and Cell would.

i can see why Sony wouldn't let devs show their early work, the difference between kits is substancial can't wait until we hear from devs who finally have their hands on the final kits...

[Hunnter]

*dreams of MGS4*

Hideo will be in heaven when he gets a hold of the final kit :lol:
So would i mind you

[WhatRuOn]

*dreams of MGS4*

Hideo will be in heaven when he gets a hold of the final kit :lol:
So would i mind you

There is a thread in the games section about him receiving death threats for orginally not wanting to develop the game. You should check it out.

[Hunnter]

Yeh i know, that was pretty shocking
Just shows you how much his fans love him...slightly dodgy if you ask me :lol:

Although this is meant to be his last one for sure (well from what ive read, knowing me i dreamt it hehe)
Oh and Fatal Inertia, i wonder if they will be able to tweak that before release, that looks like one interesting game, and im saying this an i dont particularly like racers (i only prefer future/wacky racers cause why in hell would someone want to race in a real simulation...that sounds a little boring to me, but well we all have different tastes)

[Einz]

this is great news...especially the increase in bus speed of 5GB to 35Gb....!!!!!! :shock:

[Sct-I/On]

I was going to bring up that 64 bit to the XDR, but then my brain switched on, still would have been nicer if it was higher...meh not much of a problem though an it might increase price an heating issues

Higher? XDR is octal rate memory structure so efficient memory bandwidth here is more than GFX memory :)

Of course, as with every computing device, these bandwidth calculations and info that has been given to us are optimal situations and therefore only theoretical, but because optimal calculations have been proven to be quite close to the truth by years I can't personally but accept them :)

And then to the point: RSX with Cell is insanely fast.

So here XDR memory controller is coupled with Cell processor and it pushes data on 2x 32-bit data buses (2 channels × 2 devices per channel × 2 bytes per device), hence 64 bit effective rate, so theoretical bandwidth there is 25.6 GB/s which doesn't show in this picture.

VRAM access for RSX is "only" 22.4 GB/s = 128 bits × 700 MHz × 2 accesses per clock cycle, but nice thing here is that it's in the same bus as Cell so it in addition to this 22.4 GB/s has also got the XDR to use.

So RSX can access both (GDDR3) VRAM + XDRAM memory at the same time and this gives the RSX a data transfer rate of 48GB/s while sending data both in and out.

And that's some unbelievable bandwidth there :D This time bandwidth can't be on the way for data pushing between the processor and gfx card, that's for sure.

Normal PC situation is that there is either processor or GFX card blocking the overall performance so that games are either processor bound or GFX bound. PC's bus bandwidth capacity is also becoming a gapping limit so there is the jump into PCI-e buses. I wouldn't also mind if the operating system didn't took so much resources of mi PC :roll:

The only thing now is just have the nerves to wait for all this power to be released 8)

[Lefein]

Yeah, forget games, the first thing I buy for my PS3 will be mouse/keyboard and as big a hard drive as I can put my grubby little fingers on.

This thing makes my mouth water.

[Hunnter]

Oh i see so i guess it wouldnt need to be bigger
I never realised XDR worked that way, i need to do a little research on XDR to be honest

And also Cell has been shown to be very close to its theoretical limits in quite alot of situations, so im really hoping that this will continue on to RSX, but its a different company, different techniques.
Plus its a GPU, so..i dont know what that means, who am i kidding i dont know much about GPUs :lol:

All i know is that its going to be powerful, especially with Cell, cant wait to see them working together soon :D, its going to be goooood 8) (haha)

[arfi-gorgona-O]

The CELL will be more powerful than the RSX im many GfX tasks,im almost 100% sure about it.Thats why the PS3 will be away for PC's for a long time....People don't realise yet what CELL is capable for,but they will find out soon enough. :wink: Let them say that both systems are equal and its only hype yada yada...They will be really surprised in the end.As i said in another of my posts,the clues are here for everyone to see.Just look at the CELL medical videos and other staff about him.They just don't want to believe it,but they will be forced later.

[Damnit]

Oh i see so i guess it wouldnt need to be bigger
I never realised XDR worked that way, i need to do a little research on XDR to be honest

And also Cell has been shown to be very close to its theoretical limits in quite alot of situations, so im really hoping that this will continue on to RSX, but its a different company, different techniques.
Plus its a GPU, so..i dont know what that means, who am i kidding i dont know much about GPUs :lol:

All i know is that its going to be powerful, especially with Cell, cant wait to see them working together soon :D, its going to be goooood 8) (haha)

I'm confused about something in that comparison diagram. The GDDR3 in the 7800GTX Beta devkit is 256bit . While the GDDR3 for RSX in the final kit would be 128bit. How does that change the final kit from the others? Good or bad?

Also can we get Schmeh or Terrarim's opinion on that subject as well, please?

[Hunnter]

hmmm, i wonder why that is like that actually...

I know that diagram says PS3, but the final kit will probably be the same (plus the extra RAM)
Could be something to do with how RSX works maybe...i cant really think why else it would be lower :?
Im guessing it would be kinda good since its closer to the specs for PS3, and i cant think for the life of me why you'd need to do much debugging when it comes to a GPU
Oh well RSX actually has programmable shaders..who knows :?

Yeh wheres Schmeh and Terrarim, they know alot about this kind of stuff, im just barely learning about the hardware side with GPUs

[arfi-gorgona-O]

It is lower cause its sufficient for the job,no need to increase cost if its already ok.Don't mind about the Stupid GfX pc cards...that bandwidth there its for internal purposes,since the PCi-express transfer rate is way to low..they dont work the same way like a close system does.The only use i could think right now,is for using AA with super high resolutions.Thats my guess at least..

[DDT]

For the people saying that the cell is good at graphics its important to remember that there is a reason they chose nvidia instead of just putting lets say to cells in the ps3.

[Lefein]

For the people saying that the cell is good at graphics its important to remember that there is a reason they chose nvidia instead of just putting lets say to cells in the ps3.

Im not really sure that explains it. Perhaps they wanted to have access to the OpenGL APIs and have a GPU architecture that would be easy for developers to get a hold on. Cells performance certainly doesn't seem to be holding it back from anything. Perhaps the RSX is there to make things a little less headache-ridden since Devs still need to take the time to wrap their brains around the Cell anwyays.

It explains a lot, right?

[Obscene Truth]

For the people saying that the cell is good at graphics its important to remember that there is a reason they chose nvidia instead of just putting lets say to cells in the ps3.

Cost being number one, and the fact that it would make programing for the PS3 a lot harder. Thanks to Nvidia, dev's have themselves a much nicer system to develop for

[Steroyd]

yep developing for the PS3 will be like developing for a PC, which is great for Sony.

[arfi-gorgona-O]

Yes there is,cause now they have the best of the 2 worlds.IF you think that CELL isn't good at gFx you just kidding yourself...We saw many videos so far about it,medical videos,IBM's retracing real time landscape,videos in SONY's presentation,and some more i cant remember now.Where the CELL fails the RSX is there to forefil the gap and where the RSX fails the CELL is there to help it. :wink:

[Sct-I/On]

ATI 9800 GFX cards were prolly the first cards to utilize 256-bit data bandwidth, Nvidias first ones were 5900 series AFAIK. It's got mostly to do with the ability to transfer data over the bus, while if you have low clockrate you can transfer more data by upping the width of the databus, hence there could be even 512-bit wide buses if the bus clockrate would be (PC) low.

Now with RSX the bus clockrate is 3.2 GHz so it's far from slough and therefore 256 or more of bit bandwidth would be waste because more data can be transferred through bus even if it is more narrow than for example 256-bit wide.

[Lefein]

ATI 9800 GFX cards were prolly the first cards to utilize 256-bit data bandwidth, Nvidias first ones were 5900 series AFAIK. It's got mostly to do with the ability to transfer data over the bus, while if you have low clockrate you can transfer more data by upping the width of the databus, hence there could be even 512-bit wide buses if the bus clockrate would be (PC) low.

Now with RSX the bus clockrate is 3.2 GHz so it's far from slough and therefore 256 or more of bit bandwidth would be waste because more data can be transferred through bus even if it is more narrow than for example 256-bit wide.

Domo arigato! I was quite perplexed by that number as well. I think you explained that well, thank you.

[XSpike]

Alot of you probably seen the video which had spiderman 2 and the getaway 3 in it. When showing the landscape which was taken by satellite and what not, which i do add looked very awesome, they also said it was only using the cell and not the RSX meaning that the cell can even do grapfics rendering?? so maybe developers could use one of the 7 processings to just help the grapfics out even more adding effects? even thu it probably wouldnt relaly need it but if they wanted to exceed even more i guess they could (would someone comfirm that the cell could actauly do something like this?)

[arfi-gorgona-O]

Yes the CELL can do something like this,thats why the ps3 will be way more powerful than any rival system.The gap its going to be bigger as the time passes and not smaller.

[C64isStillTheBest]

It is very nice, but even though I WILL BUY PS3, I'm not really a fan of nVidia, im more of a ATI guy, but screw X360, ATI for the PC is better.

I just hope you know that ATi will be makiing all their future chips the same way as they are in xbox360, unified
As will Nvidia soon when they see it necessary to change over

And PCs wont catch up that soon
PCs have way too much going on them to be able to even compare to the chips in PS3 an xbox360
The GPUs will be the only things that will catch up anytime soon, but CPUs will be held back because of OSs
And if Windows is stil the most popular gaming OS in 5-10 years, it doesnt look like it will get any easier with Vista possibly using more resources for the GUI (that im not sure of, but it looks like it might)

I agree, in many cases the CPU is the bottleneck when dealing with graphic intensive PC games, and Windows is a resource hog. Every time a new POS version comes out it erases the performance improvements of whatever CPU is the fastest at that time thus there are almost no speed improvements. I want to upgrade my current 4 year old laptop to a desktop that is able to run Doom 3, Half Life 2 and Civ 4 well. After I got the PS2, I do most my gaming on the console and even with the lesser graphics and sometime annoying load times the console experience is better. Plus Square makes the best storylines of any publisher of RPGs, the last great great RPG that I played on the PC was the complete Baldur's Gate 2 saga which is the ultimate RPG for me, even better that Elder Scrolls.

With the unique Cell/RSX combo, I expect the PS3 to be my main entertainment hub when it comes out. The more specs that come out, the more impressed I am with the machine! I think the 20% power difference between the 360 and the PS3 that Carmack mentioned is greater, he tends to talk out of his behind from time to time.

[Steroyd]

speaking of loading times, i was surprised how long it took for PGR3 at the kiosks took to load a racing track.

didn't J Allard say consoles were so powerful there would barely be any existant loading times?

[Kejun]

For the people saying that the cell is good at graphics its important to remember that there is a reason they chose nvidia instead of just putting lets say to cells in the ps3.

Im not really sure that explains it. Perhaps they wanted to have access to the OpenGL APIs and have a GPU architecture that would be easy for developers to get a hold on. Cells performance certainly doesn't seem to be holding it back from anything. Perhaps the RSX is there to make things a little less headache-ridden since Devs still need to take the time to wrap their brains around the Cell anwyays.

It explains a lot, right?

Perhaps more to the reason that they didnt just throw Cell in alone is physics. If you dedicate a vast majority of Cell to graphics, what would have done the physics? Sure they could have just thrown another Cell in but that is where Lefein's explanation comes in.

[coolguy]

i think the RSX will be the G71 7800 512 of ram.
that will come in the ps3.
but anyways even if its the g-70 it will still be more power full then the 360.
A few devs where saying with the ps3 and the 360 haveing better
CPUS then gameing PC'S . that the PC'S will need a few years to catch up with the consoles. so they are saying that the consoels are better then pc's now

[Organic_Shadow]

Im still waiting for someone to give an official number on what the bandwidth will be like for Blu-Ray. I went to the official site and it didnt give any numbers, only numbers relating to capacity.

I just hope Sony doesnt trick us with the "1080p" thing, and getting us on a technicality because the CELL/RSX can handle a 1080p VIDEO FILE but the Blu-Ray cant.

I dunno, im getting so confused. I went to the blu-ray threads and nobody seemed to have any concrete numbers as to what the bandwidth of the 360 is, compared to blu-ray 1x and blu-ray 4x.

[lynux3]

For the people saying that the cell is good at graphics its important to remember that there is a reason they chose nvidia instead of just putting lets say to cells in the ps3.

Cell processor alone wasn't enough, that is why Sony went to NVIDIA for help.

I remember when everyone started saying that there was going to be multiple Cells for rendering, but that would have cost Sony a fortune and NVIDIA would have been a cheaper solution.

If PlayStation 3 came with 3-4 Cells, graphics would probably be comparable or exceed a 7800 GTX.

[The John]

The ps3 is a new breakthroug in console world i seriously can't wait for more information!

[wrathofall]

Here is an excellent article about what to expect at CES as far as Blue Ray announcements:
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The Blu-ray DVD group said on Tuesday it still planned to roll out a high-definition disc format in spring 2006, though members of the consortium led by Sony Corp. (6758.T: Quote, Profile, Research) said they would unveil specific launch plans at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in January.

"We're sticking with the spring time frame," said Andy Parsons, a spokesman for Blu-ray, at a demonstration of the new high-capacity DVD format.

Blu-Ray is vying with a competing format known as HD DVD, championed by a group led by Toshiba Corp. (6502.T: Quote, Profile, Research).

"At CES, you're likely to hear some announcements from a number of companies as to when you'll see our products on the market," Parsons told a group of analysts, industry members and reporters gathered at the product demonstration at News Corp.'s (NWS.N: Quote, Profile, Research) 20th Century Fox lot. The show is in Las Vegas.

Sony's Blu-ray disc technology appears to be the front-runner in the multibillion dollar race to develop the next-generation DVDs, which movie studios and consumer electronics manufacturers hope will ignite sales for the home video sector, which has shown signs of a slowdown recently.

Both formats provide high-definition versions of movies as well as interactive features.

Members of the Blu-ray camp, including executives from Disney Corp. (DIS.N: Quote, Profile, Research), Fox, Sony, Pioneer and Panasonic, attended the press briefing on Tuesday to show off Blu-ray's interactive features, which enable consumers to play games, connect to the Internet and select from various functions, such as subtitles and text, while still watching a movie.

Blu-ray has more major movie studios on its side, although some industry watchers have said the format will be more expensive to make. While HD DVD discs can be made with only minor tweaks to the standard DVD manufacturing process, Blu-ray discs require completely different equipment.

Members of the Blu-ray Disc Association consortium have said in the past that costs will come down quickly and be almost immediately competitive with those of HD DVD.

The consortium consists of various Hollywood studios, computer makers and consumer electronics manufacturers in the United States and abroad.

Executives said on Tuesday the format's flexibility gave them added revenue potential by eventually enabling consumers to order films or merchandise using the discs. "We do intend to be able to have that as an element in the next Blu-ray specification in terms of its being able to be used as a portal to make transactions," said Bob Chapek, president of Disney's Buena Vista Entertainment.

Richard Doherty, analyst with Envisioneering, cited a potential scenario in which a studio may one day pre-package a feature film disc with an additional movie or trailer that has not yet been released to the home viewing market and could be restricted or "locked" until the studio enables consumers to see it.

"There are lots of opportunities to merchandise between TV shows and movies. They could release movies on command ascribing to pay-per-view limits. The same disc enables many consumer experiences and profit possibilities," he said.

Members from HD DVD and Blu-ray tried earlier this year to find a unified front but failed, paving the way for a protracted format war and reminding many industry members of the battle between VHS and Sony's Betamax in the mid-1970s, which led to confusion among consumers and losses for the studios.

Sounds like blue ray will be far more than just HD quality video. CES is going to be awesome!

Here is the link:
Reuters (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2005-11-30T075144Z_01_HO028236_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-BLURAY.xml)

And for those of you looking for more technical Blue-Ray data:

Most recent white papers (http://www.blu-raydisc.com/assets/downloadablefile/1c_bdrom_physicalformatspecifications_may05-13060.pdf)

Far to technical for me to grasp, but maybe some of you can get something out of it.

Ooo! And another good find! (http://www.blu-raydisc.com/assets/downloadablefile/bdj_gem_application_definition_050307-12959.pdf)

[Terarrim]

Liynux wrote:


Cell processor alone wasn't enough, that is why Sony went to NVIDIA for help.

I remember when everyone started saying that there was going to be multiple Cells for rendering, but that would have cost Sony a fortune and NVIDIA would have been a cheaper solution.

If PlayStation 3 came with 3-4 Cells, graphics would probably be comparable or exceed a 7800 GTX.


Two cells would have been far more powerful than the RSX+Cell combo. Some graphical tasks would have been 10-12 times faster than the latest Nvidia card. Also the cell is relatively cheap to produce as Sony co-own the chip. There are two reasons why they didn't put two cells in which is what they originally intended to do.

1) They (Sony) wanted some hardware that Games developers could just run with i.e. NVidia GPU so at the start of game life cycles there wouldn't be such a huge learning curve for games developers.

2) While the Cell is extremely powerful having to do everything on the cell would increase production costs because of the complexity of programming on it. Having all programmers to do everything from scratch may have turned smaller companies without the programming resources off the PS3 and possibly pushed them into the arms of their competitors.

From what I have read the Cell can render TRUE Graphics in real time i.e. exact mathamaticly correct graphics like ray-tracing or the demonstration of the medical system by Mercury Systems show this. Graphics cards use lots of tricks to emulate realistic environments because speed (fps) is more important than having exact graphics like you would need in scientific environments etc.

Modern graphics cards also have bottlenecks in some ways.

The open GL is closed to graphics developers and some graphics designers are frustrated with the way that this works (they believe that there are programing bottlenecks). Graphics designers have to give the information to the GPU's and let them do their thing.

Cell is more powerful not only for its processing power because the programmer has complete control of what he\she wants to do with the graphics. For example if someone wants use 3d triangles to create a skin for a character model the designer may; Create the triangles, fill them with colour and program a lighting model for each triangle with one SPU, The other SPU can then actually use software compression on the triangles so that they can be streamed more effectively for storage or streaming. In other words the graphics programmers can use different programing tricks to get the most out of the hardware which is just not possible with current GPU's.

Damnit wrote


I'm confused about something in that comparison diagram. The GDDR3 in the 7800GTX Beta devkit is 256bit . While the GDDR3 for RSX in the final kit would be 128bit. How does that change the final kit from the others? Good or bad?

Also can we get Schmeh or Terrarim's opinion on that subject as well, please?


I didn't post yesterday went to Cardiff to help my brother get his 360 which he couldn't get of course because of the shortages.

As for commenting on the diagrams. I believe this was posted on the graphics or hardware sticky. If this is from this old article it is long Japanese article that uses information that was released about the cell and RSX and makes educated guesses on the gaps to give people some idea of how the RSX and Cell may work. Therefore while in all probability the diagram will probably be mostly accurate there might be some variations in some of the figures.

I don't know why they would change the pipes form 256 to 128 bits as this would normally make the processing between the RSX and the memory slower. Before i comment on this remember that Sony have taken the RSX off NVidia and had modified the processor. One of the reasons is that they can tie the RSX as tight as they can to the cell making sure that there are no bottlenecks between the two processors.

Ok these are just guesses and I might be wrong but here are some possible reasons:

They may have found that 128 bit pipes were a better balance due to the cells SPU's being able to write at 128 bits. Therefore 128 bit information being used between the GPU and the SPU. However this argument falls down somewhat because the XDR is at 64 bits.

I do believe that any changes are to do with balancing between the Cell and the RSX to be able to get them to work as closely as they can.

I personally don't think that the RSX is a 1.8 Terraflop chip on its own. I do believe however that we are seeing the first true marriage of CPU and GPU who can truly help each other and this combination may be why the RSX has been attributed with the 1.8 Tflop performance.

Sony has stated that the system has a 2.1 Tflop theoretical peak and the Cell has a 216Gflop rating. I cannot ever remember Sony ever stating the RSX is 1.8 Tflop this was assumed by everybody else (take the chip from the total limit to make 1.8 Tflops). For all we know its the ability of the Cell to do graphical pre or post processing that gives this 2.1 Tflop. Again this is just speculation on my part.

What does exite me is that PC enthusiasts have stated the PC will beat the PS3 if not as soon as it comes out then within three to six months. And they refer in particular to linked GPU's. However we know that there is still the x86 bottlenecks, OS bottlenecks and the fact that no one presently write specifically to take advantage of multiple GPU's on a PC board. This sharing of graphical tasks however still gives a huge performance boost in terms of FPS etc. This linking is effectivly what your getting with none of the bottlenecks and even more utility as programars will be writing specificly with both the graphics capability of the cell and the RSX in mind.

Remember that it has been shown that with proper programming the cell on some graphical tasks can do 5-6 times the speed of the 7800 GPU. So let us say then that a game heavily relies on this type of task. You could have 3 SPE's running this at 1.8 times faster than the 7800 and also the RSX Running this task (lets assume its more powerful than the 7800) is 1.2 times faster than the 7800 (1.2 being a complete guess could be more). In combination the RSX and Cell is running a graphical task 3 times faster than your 7800 GPU and still has 4 SPE and 1 PPE to run AI, Physics, Sound etc. You can start to see how the synergy of the two processor can work to give a overall speed.

When programmers now exactly what is best on the Cell what is best on the RSX and what is best shared between both we really are going to have a gaming and graphical revolution on our hands.

[left_senseless]

Sony release the RSX as having 1.8 teraflops of performance at the E3 conference. also gpus haven't benchmarked well in terms of efficiency (ie operating at 70% or what have you) but i believe this is because modern cpus just couldn't keep them busy. with the Cell i think that we might be seeing much higher efficiency out of the RSX (85-95% efficiency). in another thread it was stated that the Motorstorm demo was REAL TIME (it was in the Australian conference thread) and that pushes my theory about gpu efficiency especially considering the limited bandwith and the configuration of the Cell with the 6800GT SLI chipset.

[Damnit]

Thanks Terrarim and Sct-I/On. Both your responses were quite informative. That part about Cell being 6x that of 7800. Whoa! I'll definitely wait to see that pulled off in a videogame. It'd be fun(as well as mind-blowing) if we start seeing signs of the next-next-gen by the end of the now current-next-gen.

[Boogie Woogie]

Thanks Terrarim and Sct-I/On. Both your responses were quite informative. That part about Cell being 6x that of 7800. Whoa! I'll definitely wait to see that pulled off in a videogame. It'd be fun(as well as mind-blowing) if we start seeing signs of the next-next-gen by the end of the now current-next-gen.
I know its a little early to talk about this but all this Cell and RSX is making me wonder just how insanely powerful the PS4 will be . I mean this is new stuff to developers with immense power potential . PS4 could very well get dangerously close to photo-realism and Cell is the key , not only to this next generation with PS3 but beyond that . Microsoft doesn't just have a fight on its hands with PS3 , i believe they will run into a brick wall with PS4 , if not with PS3 . All this just goes to show that Sony looks to the future . Things will get better from here on out and . Let the good times roll :D

*Thanks Terrarim and Sct-I/On for your input . Thats why i love these forums , you always learn something new here . :D

[Pink]

Thanks Terrarim and Sct-I/On. Both your responses were quite informative. That part about Cell being 6x that of 7800. Whoa! I'll definitely wait to see that pulled off in a videogame. It'd be fun(as well as mind-blowing) if we start seeing signs of the next-next-gen by the end of the now current-next-gen.
I know its a little early to talk about this but all this Cell and RSX is making me wonder just how insanely powerful the PS4 will be . I mean this is new stuff to developers with immense power potential . PS4 could very well get dangerously close to photo-realism and Cell is the key , not only to this next generation with PS3 but beyond that . Microsoft doesn't just have a fight on its hands with PS3 , i believe they will run into a brick wall with PS4 , if not with PS3 . All this just goes to show that Sony looks to the future . Things will get better from here on out and . Let the good times roll :D

*Thanks Terrarim and Sct-I/On for your input . Thats why i love these forums , you always learn something new here . :D

Console power isnt everything. Nintendo is a pefect example of this.

[SE fanboy]

Well we don't know yet do we, Nintendo gamecube was much powerful than the PS2. Hmm... I guess I just contradicted myself. Developer Power is everything :lol:

[CashMoney]

Console power isnt everything. Nintendo is a pefect example of this.

agreed... xbox had the most power this gen, but it still didn't have fun to play games like the PS2 and Cube did...

though, this is Sony we're talking about with the power edge this time... Sony with it's regarded perfected gameplay... 8)

[Steroyd]

Console power isnt everything. Nintendo is a pefect example of this.

you give Nintendo the most powerful console and whoa!! :shock:

basically you need devs to break those limits, and put that power to good use, in MS's case the power went mainly to graphics.

This is Playstation we're talking about here, imagine the physics calculations on eye-toy, or the ability to manipulate your vocal sounds on Singstar, what about RPG's and devs can have living breathing worlds now.

If Playstation had the power and not the games, it'd be a different story it'd be like me predicting because Xbox was the most powerful hardware on the market so it was going to sell more than Playstation.

[Terarrim]

Its not just that the PS3 is more powerful its also has the most flexible programable CPU on the market. This means that games developers will be able to strech their imaginations on how they can achieve new and more expansive game play.

More powerful CPU + More flexible CPU = Less limitations on Gameplay.

[Hunnter]

More powerful CPU + More flexible CPU = Less limitations on Gameplay.

More powerful CPU + More flexible CPU = Less limitations on Gameplay and longer learning time...
Thats also one of the sad parts, but developers are smart cookies (well..most are :lol:)
It shouldnt take long for them to be pumping out games SO good that we will just cry with amazement :cry: hehe

Most games will probably be the same type of programming style when they are released because the limited number of tools and the fear of also going into unknown territory since most developers have never even touched a multi-core design before, nevermind Cell itself..

But even then, from what ive saw in some games, i dont give a smeg cause they seem to be handling it well enough for now :D wooooOOooo!
I cant wait for my PS3 (shame i cant get a final devkit along with it though :roll: )

[left_senseless]

with all of the development tools in the Reference Tool Sony has been working really hard to ensure that developers have the necessary means to utilize the PS3. just as developers surprised Sony with what the PS2 was capable of they will do it again with the PS3.

[Lefein]

Console power isnt everything. Nintendo is a pefect example of this.

The Xbox isn't in the same league as Nintendo. Nintendo is an actual gaming company that has been in the business far longer than the noobs at MS. It's almost insulting to compare the two.

[DDT]

Console power isnt everything. Nintendo is a pefect example of this.

The Xbox isn't in the same league as Nintendo. Nintendo is an actual gaming company that has been in the business far longer than the noobs at MS. It's almost insulting to compare the two.

Lol you are full of yourself aren't you, MS is as much a gaming company as Nintendo is, they have just different strategics towards there goals.

[Lefein]

Nintendo was making console games while Bill Gates was downloading Mac and Xerox source code onto floppies... Come on now!

[DDT]

Nintendo was making console games while Bill Gates was downloading Mac and Xerox source code onto floppies... Come on now!

Well you are right about that, i just hate when someone elevate a person or a company to the skies because of its former successes what matter isnt what Nintendo or MS has done but what they will do atleast for me.

oh and by the way i realise that my respond before might have been a bit harsh sorry didnt mean it that way

[Lefein]

There's never any harsh feelings with me. I like clowning just as much as the next man :)

My biggest problem with MS is that they never made a console game before making their own console system.. It seems like they really don't understand the business and resort to flinging poo at Sony when things look bad. But anyways, way off the main topic now ;)

One thing I've been wondering is whether or not the RSX is the G71 or if it's something else? If the RSX isn't the G71, then what will it be? Will there be any RSX-like technology on future Nvidia GPUs... It will be pretty cool to watch and see.

[left_senseless]

i think nVidia is just using their current top technology in the RSX. nothing that will not be reiterated or advanced by the time they release their successor to the 7800GTX 512MB.

[adamba4e]

If Nvidia keeps their promise about the RSX being the fastest GPU at the time the PS3 comes out then it will definately be more powerful then the GeForce 7800.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27463

[Steroyd]

i think nVidia is just using their current top technology in the RSX. nothing that will not be reiterated or advanced by the time they release their successor to the 7800GTX 512MB.

That cards already out though. :shock:

[HiX]

"The two products share the same heritage, the same technology. But RSX is faster"
http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2005/07/11/nvidia_rsx_interview/2.html

I have a feeling that he was comparing RSX to the 7800 series, not just a 7800GTX.

[Organic_Shadow]

i think nVidia is just using their current top technology in the RSX. nothing that will not be reiterated or advanced by the time they release their successor to the 7800GTX 512MB.

That cards already out though. :shock:

No he said the successor TO the 7800gtx 512. So far that's the best card out, so a successor has not yet come around to topple it. An 8800 would be the successor.

Speaking of which-- I sure hope nVidia has been spending their free time between 7800's and RSX to work on their next version of SLi. They need to hurry up and fix it to where you dont need two of the exact same card, and to get the quad-SLi stuff out and over to america!

Anyway, I think one of the biggest things that makes a numbers-to-numbers comparison of the RSX to a PC video card is the fact that the I/O bandwidths are different, and consoles have an almost 100% access to it's hardware resources whereas PC's have to make sure that the OS and background programs and what not all get their share of CPU/GPU attention. I see PCI-E not last as long as it was supposed to. Im sure a newer version of PCI-E will come out, like a 32x slot and 64x slot, so people wont have to have multiple videocards in their system.