Well I wasn't trying to say either is better than the other time will tell that one. As for all other things game on

 

You're comparing apples to oranges. Don't get me wrong, the cell tech is pretty bad ***, but you can't say that the PPC is tripple core and the cell is the same as eight cores just as you can't directly compare PPC to Intel chips, or even AMD chips. Different architecture is different architecture. Hertz ratings really provides no meaningful data cross architecture and provides only mediocre info for the same type of chip. Even in the same archtecure things such as FSB, cache levels and memory allocation can render the hertz ratings useless (take the AMD 64 FX for example which will whomp on a P4 of twice the hertz even though they are both x86 setups.) Is the Cell chip a good one, absoluely. Is the cell chip 267% the chip that the triple core PPC chip is, as you would suggest with your hertz ratings, hell no.

-Chris

 

Something I dont hear a lot of people talking about is the fact that the PS3 uses blu-ray discs while the 360 uses dual layer dvds. Blu-ray storage capacity is huge compared to dl-dvds (54GB vs 9GB) which means more space for sexy content.

http://hardware.gamespot.com/Story-ST-15016-1985-4-4-x

 

I agree. But the media (at least for the forseable future) for blue ray disks is a FORTUNE. This will inevitably lead to higher costs. I'll bet that since blu-ray is backward compatible with the DVD red ray tech, that most PS3 games will come on traditional red ray dual layer dvds, at least for the first few years.

-Chris

 

Yea games are going to be more expensive for sure. Media costs and more importantly game production costs keep going up.

 

thats why they measure it in the ammount of flops it can do, in this case it's teraflops
which is like a trillion operations per second

 

No kidding. With all the extra features which equals programming which equals man hours, can you imagine what the games for either of these systems are gonna cost? I'm going to have to work two jobs just to pick up some new games.

-Chris

 

arent they both ibm processors? and the cell processor has shown to have about 80 teraflops more of processing power. im not completely sure but they might both even be based of the powerpc architecture.

-jon

 

actually here is an interesting article http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/cell-1.ars

 

Yes and no. It is based on one PPC core with seven SPE cores, but has other associated equipment that really classfies it as its own chip. That is why I gave the example of the two x86 based chips being difficult to compare even thought hey are both x86. So many other factors have an influence that I just really dislike the whole 3.2ghz x whatever argument. That is, as you pointed out earlier, where teraflops come in to play. And to be honest, I can't argue about that because I haven't seen any solid numbers on the teraflop ratings for either of the EXACT ships used in either system. The only good ratings I can find for the Cell is for the 4ghz itteration that will be used in servers, not the 3.2ghz version used in the PS3, and it seems like different sites give conflicting ratings that seem more like speculation than fact. Then once, the CPU chip debate is out of the way, you then have to take in to effect how the GPU in wither of these units will handle the info the CPU thows at it. Not being a big Nvidia fan I was happy to see the xbox went with a custom ATI unit. The PS3, I think, is supposed to be faster with certain floating point graphics, but the ATI is reported to be amazing with shading and is so new no tests have yet been done on it. I think they should both prove to be bad ***. I just wish my game system of a few hundred dollars wasn't about to outperform my $2k+ computer. :/

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1727

-Chris

woops. didn't see your link which went over a lot of what I just did. my bad Nice to see a fellow chip nerd o the boards.

 

plus let's not forget transportation costs as gas prices go up, so do everything else ><

 

yeah, same here! i check slashdot and the chip page at geek.com multiple times per day.

 

All these new chips make my G5 look so last year. I was going to get the new Dual 2.7 PowerMac, but now that these Cell chips and multiple core PPCs have hit the streets I'm thinking I should hold off. Since Apple and Sony are increasingly in cahoots these days, I can't imagine it will be long before one of those chips makes its way macside. I'm thinking it will likely be the Cell that makes it's way to Apple as Sony, Toshiba, and IBM need to recoup some of those R&D costs. I personally can't believe Toshiba sunk so much money into a proprietary chip when there isn't much they can put it in (its PPC core eliminates the idea of them using it in their laptops). Sony has the PS3 and IBM has servers, so that makes sence. One thing I know, both of those systems are going to be stupid loud. Apple has a hard time keeping temps down, and therefore quiet, with my 2ghz PPC 970, I can't imagine how hot those systems are going to run.

-Chris

 

eh I thought i was a nerd and I only check slashdot rofl :-D nerds unite!



yeeee!


everybody type rm -rf / in their terminal!

 

Trust me people, don't type that.

-Chris