Dude i dont think its melting they wont change it, theyll fix it,game develeposr are already making games for theysystem, to late to change the cpu now. Remember they annowneced the specs at e3? I think the chip use to be meltion, not anymore. IF you can give me the website you got that from, please post it, kinda intresting to know if its still meltiong or not.
*grumbles*, kookoo, prepare for lots of lectures. ok i admit you know a *little* but not much more than that. the 7800GTX is the YOUNGER BROTHER of the RSX which is LOTS MORE POWERFUL THAN THE 7800GTX (which will probably make you happy). the ATI GPU in the xbox is flamin ancient and sucks ass and hasnt got many pipelines and shitty clockspeeds, features and memory speed (compared to todays GOU's), NO WONDER 7800GTX is way faster as its on of the best cards out today. the xbox gpu is like 5-6 years old. note that the standard ATI X1800XT (brand new, out end of nov.) is faster than the standard 256mb 7800GTX (even the overclocked 7800GTX's). and both X1800XT and 7800GTX are YOUNGER BROTHERS of the console counterparts. DIDNT YOU SEE WHAT I SAID ABOUT PIPELINES IN ANY OTHER POSTS, JESUS YOU ARE ONE HYPOCRIT. MY ATI GTO2 EXAMPLE (READ IT AGAIN, IN MY LAST POST) SHOULD HAVE BEEN ENOUGH. THERE ARE NO SUCH THINGS AS WEAK AND POWERFUL PIPELINES, FFS. THEY ARE JUST PARTS OF THE CARD. AND also, WHATS THE MOST IMPORTANT COMPONENT IN A PC/CONSOLE FOR RUNNING GAMES IS IT A) THE GRAPHICS PROCESSING UNIT (GPU) OR 2) THE CENTRAL PROCESSING UNIT (PROCESSOR) IF YOU DONT KNOW THIS THEN GO BACK TO NEVER NEVER LAND. I TRIED TO BE NICE BUT UR LAST POST (AFTER MINE) WAS VERY HOSTILE, SO RIGHT BACK AT YA. THE ANSWER TO the question is A. its the GPU. so even IF the PS3 has the best CPU (which it wont, but many seem to think that it is) the 360 will have better images, better looking and sharper graphics when running a game, and better framerates and rendering. mmwhaaaaa. if you didn't know that then u picked a war with the wrong guy. you dont know sh*t about GPU's compared to what you think. you even thought that the RSX was weaker than the 7800GTX, WTF, TOTALLY WRONG (as i already said above). the X1800XT is better than the 7800GTX and the new ATI card (in the 360) is very darn powerful. better than the RSX. ATI cards have always beaten nvidia cards when it comes to image quality, i know that for a solid darn fact, so if they got better image quality and better fgramerate (more power) then nvidia have LOST the GPU war. although the GTX IS VERY FKING POWERFUL ITSELF (regardless of it been the weaker one)and will blaze through all of the newest games for the PS3. once multi threaded games are made, then all 3 360's cores can kick in and the PS3's SPE's and they can boost performance by a lot. currently games are single threaded therefore only 1 core is being used to power games and tell the GPU what to do, and because for 360 its only 1 3.2GHZ core the CPU will be a really big bottleneck, limiting the GPU of its potential (the same will be for PS3), this will only be solved when multi-threaded games are out, so all of the cores can tell the GPU what to do at once, (and render the physics beter in the game) and it can run at its peak effiency (the GPU that is). READ ALL OF THAT!!!
Look, my point was not to base everything off of one damn article. Stop worrying about my name and start worrying about being taken for a ride every time you go to a website. OH LOOK AT ME! I can find a website that proves you wrong with a lot more analysis than your beloved gamespot article: http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html
wtf? you expect me not to care? wtf are you talking about, Was i soppose to say nothign to taht?? wtf are u thinking? Mabey you should know that everything was based 6 months ago w. the ps3 LMAo, that website was when the xbox360 was suppose to have 4cores at 3.5 ghz. And wtf i didnt base it off everyartle, all them sais the same thing. Look what the new ign ones have to say If you are so smart, why you only saying shit about me, and not debating? thetruth man.IPELINES DO NOT MATTER! hf And why you brinign CPU in this conversation??its graphics! im not going to debate this shit anymore, you can say w.e you want , your still wrong Your telling me that ps3 cpu aint stronger than xbox360? So if you said that Grass is red, I am suppose to believe you? Where are your facts if every page you went to tottaly said that ps3 cpu is stronger than ps3.? lmao, howabout you go to many of those websites and tell them off if you are so "smart" Oh mabey you should of mad eaa website aswell, since you know, you know more than g.s's journalists.Are you a Jernalist?. You are a person, not an engenier of ps3 or the xbox360. You wouldnt know. fusk. Get over it, everyone knows that ps3's cpu ios way stronger than xbox 360 cpu. IM not goignt o debate over the gpu anymore because you are just goign to post the same thing over and over. PIPELINE DONT MATTER.expecially if they are weak. dude, i suggest you watch both xbox 360 se3 and ps3 e3 thing, then read this article. http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/22/news_6128031.html
kookoo theres no such thing as weak pipelines theyre a part of the chip, dont trust every article u read man c'mon. not only do u gotta learn about electronics consules, and well pipeline you gotta learn about sarcaim its a problem youve had in every thread dude.
? Did you read why i said that? i'm not argueing this point anymore. You say w.e you want to say, you will see. watch both xbox 360 se3 and ps3 e3 thing, then read this article. http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/22/news_6128031.html Look at the differences in graphics. And then read this DIFFERENT ARTICLE. Dont think its the same one. Its just something to point out. It sais that the e3 presentation used a way weeker chip than sony's rsx, and used a computer with 2.5ghz shit. Somthing you should consider while compairing the two, with the e3 presentation. Ps3 's graphics are goign to be whatever % they said there better than what was on sony ps3 E3 presentation. ALSO NOTE THAT:"While the exact technical specifications of the GPU remain a secret," is Writen on that article. So i think we were argueing about nothing but rumers?? http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/22/news_6128031.html http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/22/news_6128031.html NOT THE SAME ARTICLE CLICK IT YOU WILL SE WHAT IT IS ABOUT. its not even compairing two systems.
dude the entire ps3 presentation was fake totally fake. at e3 ms was using an alpha chip kookoo wtf?? get facts that r up to date jeeze no wonder why your still a newb
What how is it fake? Again with your oppinions? It used a weaker chip, So those who thaught the ps3 graphics are better thann xbox 360 graphics, they compaired it to somthing week. Rsx is goign to run i think 25% better. +YOU CANNOT TALK ABOUT ps3 graphics anymore because Sony hasnt announced the GPU specs.
Kookoo: Yeah, we've already been over this. My point was to not to base your entire argument over one article. It didn't even have any convincing technical analysis in the first place. um... "The Xbox 360's CPU has more general purpose processing power because it has three general purpose cores, and Cell has just one." It says that multiple times. It's hard taking you seriously when you don't even put in the time to read the damn article. I'm pretty sure I gave you a website that effectively counters your argument. But then again, you didn't even bother to read it... Also, the E3 presentation was "fake" in that it was cut-scene, not actual in-game footage. I'm pretty sure there are now game-footage videos around, but the E3 wasn't a genuine depiction of how games will look while you are playing. Finally, it isn't the GPU that will run 25% better, it's the Cell's processor.(CPU) I'm basing this of course on the article you cited numerous times in one of your previous posts. And now we can't talk about sony's graphics anymore? WTF have you been doing this entire time, then?
THE CELL HAS 8 CELLS RUNNING AT 3.2 GHZ fusk. the cell proscessor doesnt use CORES it uses CELLS AND 8 OF THEM. WHIch WOULD MAKE PS3'S CPU MORE EFFICIENT AND have MORE GENERAL PURPSE OF PROSEESING. YOU SAID"the 360's cpu has three gerneral purpose cores." THE CORES WORK INDIVIDUALLY.!!@! and let me remind you. CORES ARE NOT CELLS.!!@! I DIDNT ONLY USE ONE ARTICLE!!I just didnt put all the websites i isited because they said THE SAME SHIT. fusk MAN DID YOU READ M POST? I DIDNT USE ONE ARTICLE LIKE I SAID IN MY PREVIOS POST. the cell has 8 cells each running at 3.2ghz!! YET AGAIN I HAVE TO SAY THE CELL DOES NOT USE ONE IT USES 8 NOT ONE !!NOT ONE not one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OMFG UR FUNNY, I READ THAT WEBSITE WHEN I FIRST HEARD ABOUT THE XBOX360 AND PS3 SHIT!FFS I READ IT WHEN THE WEBSITE CAME OUT!YOU JUST FOUND IT NOW. THAT WEBSITE WAS WHEN IGN THAUGHT THE XBOX 360 HAD 4 CORES AT 3.5 GHZ??DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT I SAID ABOVE ?? THE XBOX 3560 ACTUALLY HAS 3 CORES AT 3.2GHZ, SO YOU CANNOT USE THAT WEBSITE FFS, because it was using WRONG SPECS. THAT WEBSITE U POSTED WAS USING WRONG SPECS! the website you were using had the wrong specs.imma repeat this soo manny times till you get it. THE WEBSITE FROM IGN U WERE USING, BASED IT ARTICLE ON THE WRONG SPECS, SO IT IS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!If the article was suing correct spesc and really the xbox360 had 4 cores running at 3.5 ghz, yea the xbox 360 will be better , BUT ITS NOT , XBOX360 USES LIKE 50% OF THAT. ABVIOSLY U DIDNT READ MY POST. well cLeArLy you didnt read the article correctly , you just skimed it. THE E3 PRESENTATION WASNT USEING THE NVIDEA RSX WHICH IS PS3 GPU, THEY WERE USING A WEEKER ONE WHIHC WILL MAKE THE PS3 GRAPHICS STRONGER THAN THE ONE AT E3 PRESENTATION.smart @$$
The all-caps wasn't necessary. It just makes you look obnoxious and immature. It's your fault there is a misunderstanding with your sources. Whenever a debate came up, you only cited the same article over and over. Apparently, though, it is a misunderstanding so lets just bury that issue. If you use more than one source, then cite it please. It cill only add to your credibility. Your liberal use of "cells" make it quite obvious that you don't know anything about "The Cell" The Cell has one PPE and 8 SPE's. It does not have "8 cells". That doesn't even make sense. One of the SPE's will most likely be disabled to improve yield and reduce cost. The PPE is the only part of the Processor that can handle General Purpose processing. (I use "general processing" freely, because it is basically a controller for the SPE's) The 7 SPE's do work individually, but are not independent. They can only process what the SPE gives to them. This makes general processing extremely efficient, yes, but it is still one processor. Not 8 individual "cells". It doesn't have as much general purpose processing power because the SPE's are designed for vectorized floating point code execution, whereas in the 360, each "core" can independently process general-purpose code. Just for the record, I think the PS3's CPU is much better suited for video games (contrary to the article) and will be work better than the 360's CPU. I don't exactly know why we're debating the CPU because I thougth the issue was the GPU. I already said that I think PS3 has stronger CPU. (But weaker GPU) If the article I posted was written when IGN thought the 360 had 4 cores, then the article would've reflected that notion. However, the article states numerous times that the Xbox 360 has 3 cores. That's right, it does. The article says this multiple times. I have no idea how you manage to argue this, because the article is based off of accurate 360 specs. Try reading it, instead of playing it off like a coward. You are making yourself look extremely ignorant, especially to the people who have actually read the article and know that it is based off the 360 having 3 symmetrical cores. Here's another quote from the article that will hopefully shut you up: "Lastly, we were sent updated spec numbers on the Xbox's numbers, and we spoke with Microsoft's Vice President of hardware, Todd Holmdahl, about the Xbox 360's final transistor count." But you know, it's all based off the 360 having 4 cores, right? No I'm pretty sure I did. You said that the RSX would run 25% better. The article makes it clear that it is talking about the processor's clock speed. The 25% difference is in the 2.4 ghz opposed to the 3.2 ghz final system spec. The GPU is clocked at 550mhz. Therefore, the article is obviously talking about the CPU. There isn't a percentage of how much better the RSX will be compare to the Geforce card the PS3 was using at E3. I wasn't trying to being a smart ass at all. You were misleading everyone about the graphic capabilities with the 25% figure.
oo i completly forgot about this thread. O yea about the cell thing, i was just reading another thread and the ppl kept saying that the cell has 8 cells in it, and completly forgot about it having spes, so I sued Cells to Replace spe, sorry bout that my bad. I still ment SPE. O gosh dindt realize how rude i was being..sry bout that And i ment to say the cpu was 25% better, What I ment about the graphics was that the e3 presentation was using a weeker GPU than the actuall RSX< so the graphics actually being produced with the actual Rsx will be better than the one shown on the presentation. Im still sticking with pipeline dont matter
I have also heard that The ps3 GPU is combined with its CPU, making The gpu verystrong, and i think thats why pipeline doesnt mean nothing either when compairing the two systems. Actually its even said on gamespot,IGN and many other websites.
I always look at these threads and wonder where these poeple get their info, and where they get the qualifications to compare. IGN and Gameinformer, and all other gaming mags can shove their comparisions and analysis, because they are the CS or CE drop-outs who couldn't make it in the professional and scientific fields. Lol, I just love reading these threads though, "CPU combined with the GPU" lol, lol. Whenever what's on tv gets dull these threads can replace the void of laughter.
KOOKOO THE CELLS ARE SPECIALISED TO DO ONLY FLOATING POINT CALCULATIONS, WHICH EXPLAINS WHY THE PS3 HAS 1.8 TERAFLOPS OF FLOATING POINT PERFORMANCE AND XBOX HAS ONLY 1. THEY ARE NOT GENERAL PERFORMANCE TIT. AND AS I SAID AGES AGO, GAMES ARE 70% GENERAL PERFORMANCE WHEN IT COMES TO PROCESSORS, AND COS OF THE 360 GENERAL PERFORMANCE CORES IT OWNS THE PS3 IN THAT FACTOR, MEANING THAT COS GAMES ARE 70% GENERAL PER. IT BEATS THE PS3, ONLY 30% OF GAMES PERFORMANCE IS PRIMARILY FLOATING POINT (IN TERAFLOPS). PS3 LOSES, AND IT HAS THE WORSE GPU. PIPELINES DO MATTER U FOOL. heres another example. take the 7800GTX (standard) and a 6800Ultra. ok the gtx and the ultra both have EXACTLY THE SAME CORE SPEED AND THE SAME MEMORY FREQUENCY, BUT THE GTX HAS 24 PIPELINES UNLIKE THE ULTRAS 16. AND THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PERFORMANCE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO, THE GTX CAN BE UP TO 70% FASTER. the gtx also has got a few other things which are better about it, but performance wise its main difference is its pipelines, and its much faster than the 6800 MAINLY BECAUSE IT HAS GOT MORE PIPELINES. I SHOULD THINK THAT MANY OTHER PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY KNOW THERE GPU TECH VERY WELL (UNLIKE U) WILL AGREE THAT MORE PIPELINES = BETTER PERFORMANCE. I ALREADY GAVE U THAT GTO2 EXAMPLE AND THAT WASNT ENOUGH FOR YOU, JEES. MORE PIPELINES = BETTER, SIMPLE AS.
K, why is this all in caps? AND NO PIPELINE DONT MATTER IF IT THE XBOX360'S PIPELINE COMPAIR WEEK O THE pixel AND VERTEX PIPELINES. 2ND:THE PS3 HAS 51-billion-dot-product-operations per second COMBINEED WITH GPU. XBOX 360 HAS 31.SOMTHING BILLION DOT PRODUCT OPERATIONS PER SECOND. NO NOT ONLY FLOATING POINT OPERATIONS. PER SECOND. yES THEYMIGHT BE SPECIALIZED FOR THAT, B UT NOT ONLY THAT. iT ASLO FOR PHISICS AND MOVING OBJECTS.Whic as u said is 70% of the Games and 30 for flops. more pipeline dont matter. Im like gonna unsuscribe form this post soon if you keep ssaying that more pipeline matters. So the 1.8 tflop of the ps3+ general processing power of the ps3 will have a better impact on games than what the xbox 360 tflop +general proformence of the procesor will have. no ps3 does not loose, and NVIDEA'S SPECS ARNT EVEN RELEASED YETT, HOW IN THE WORLD WOULD YOU KNOW HOW THE PS3 GPU IS GOIGN TO BE LIKE? iF SONY REALEASED THE SPECS FO THE GPU , WELL THEN MABEY YES YOU CAN COMMENT, BUT THEY DIDNT SO SHUTUP. gosh your more of a m$ fanboy, than i am a sony fanboy shit. SIMPLE. ps3 cpu>xbox360 cpu ps3 gpu?<>?xbox360 gpu ps3 1 xbox 360 0 http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3145154 ps3 sales will probably have more than xbox360 ps3 2 xbox360 0 WEll yea, but if the Gtx were to have 16, the Gtx will still be better because its pipelines will compair better to the pixel and vertex pipelinem than what the ultra's would compair.
ok kookoo, ive calmed down now, but u still dont know what you are on about, but i will give u this, i will admit that u definately know how to put up a good fight, commendable of you, but if only you would acknowledge the facts. i was talking about the floating point performance of the processor, not the GPU but still you said after talking about the processor, that pipelines dont matter, jees that alone proves that you dont know what you are talking about properly, aww man what do i have to do to make you understand graphics cards properly. ill say it one more time, pipelines do mattter, and there are no such things as weak pipelines. (Please dont say that they dont matter again, for e.g. - its like trying to be a parent of a child who wont accept his own name, bloody stupid and very hard).they really do matter. and yes dude, that card will be UPTO (that doesnt mean will always be) 2x faster than 2x 6800Ultras put together, but that doesnt suprise me as the standard 7800GTX is UPTO 70% faster than a single ultra, so as the RSX being the 7800GTX's older brother that wouldn't suprise me, although sony always brag a little more than what they can achieve though. u quoted this. 2ND:THE PS3 HAS 51-billion-dot-product-operations per second COMBINEED WITH GPU. XBOX 360 HAS 31.SOMTHING BILLION DOT PRODUCT OPERATIONS PER SECOND end of quote DUDE DOT SHADER POINT OPERATIONS PER SECOND ARE FLOATING POINT CALCULATIONS, THATS WHAT THEY ARE MEASURED IN, JEES, SEE U DIDNT KNOW THAT THEREFORE IT HAS BACKFIRED ON U. And as u know ONLY 30% of what games fun on are FLOATING POINT calculations (when it comes to the processor), so that doesnt matter, its general performance that counts, and as u know 360 has MUCH better general performance. + the better GPU (dude it IS better than the RSX, BUT i WILL admit that overall it is only like 10 % faster than the RSX, and still the RSX is UNBELIAVEBLY POWERFUL, its just that the 360 ATI card has better features, like it can render HDR Lighting WITH ANTI-ALIASING, which ALL nvidia cards, including the RSX CANNOT DO. (however this may be the 'one' thing sony minght change, so the card can do it) but as we know and sony is unlikely to change, as they have never changed anythings specs once they have announced them on any of their products (gaming wise), so ATI can have HDR with anti-aliasing, whicb i tell u will be REALLY REALLY SWEET, the new X1800XT cards can to that 2, so graphical image wise (basically the graphics quality) will be higger on the ATI card(s) - if u incluse the new pc ones too. if u dont know about HDR, then find out about it, its the future of game lighting effects on all the next gen games (or will be eventually) so this feature that ATI cards have got is a MAJOR advantage over the nvidia card(s).
kookoo76 You need to clean up the language and quits the all caps posts NOW. Our forums aren't the place for fouth mouthed little prats to throw temper tantrums so if you can't intelligently argue a point I'll show you the door.
