How important is system bandwidth

[Heclo]

Originally Posted by pApA SmerF01

Wait, let's get something clear here first. You said in the first sentence that the Xbox360 does NOT have a higher main memory bandwidth than ps3, then near the end, you say it has a slight advantage bandwidth-wise.

Which is it?

i said the xbox360's main memory bandwith is slower than that of the ps3, but architecture wise the xbox360 has an edge, because of that ultra fast 10MB of graphic operation storage. and also because of that unification of graphic and main memory, it gives the developers the freedom to choose how much they weight graphics vs. other aspects of games, where the ps3 only have those 256MB of "do with it what you like" memory, and 256MB of graphic memory which might very often not be used in its entiety.

[Romper Stomper]

Originally Posted by TRouBLe

Becasuse later on the make profits (huge profits)
Don't forget that the lifetime of a console is 4-5 years

How do they make huge profits later if the price of the 360 goes DOWN. From the rediculous amount we pay for games?

[ace2cloud]

I had no idea, thanks Citizen X.

[citizen X]

No problem

[Diamond]

Originally Posted by Grindstone

Uh, thank you Man Whore, for that forensic explanation and permanent image engrained in my head.

And thanks to citizen X, for skipping all toilet explanations and just providing the basic inforamtion that I needed.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm heading to the bathroom for some experiments on "teraflops" or is it tera-plops...?

Lol good one sir.

[Diamond]

Originally Posted by pApA SmerF01

just a quick correction, they're bragging about 2.18 teraflops.

which is basically the amount of floating-point operations the system does per clock cycle.

the only problem is that the 2.18 is what it "can" do running at 100% efficiency. but considering almost 70% of their flop count comes from the gpu, and it's only 55-70% efficient, my equations have given me the more realistic number of 1.543, .17 latent for error-correction efficiency.

with the 360, they underestimated their flop count, and with my calculations (seeing how with usa their gpu is 95-98% efficient) their actual Tflop count is 1.413,with .17 latent for error-correction efficiency.

you also have to look at this. floating point operations only count for about 20% of total system operations. the bulk of it is general and integer operations, which the xbox360 excels at.

at last calculation, the 360 is 3x more potent in general operations than the ps3 and almost 2x more efficient in its integer operations.

next time you come across a ps fanboy bragging about TFLOPS just repost this, lol.

Will do. In fact, I think it would be quite an idea to re direct people from other forums to this one. There are many, many, many forums out there with people fighting over this spec over that spec.

To tell you the truth, these forums are the best ones I've seen yet. Some people here are just brilliant. I haven't been into other forums where they can debate on issues by going into technical info and breaking it down to a nickel.

I'm considering the idea of posting a link to this thread in other forums, still at the 'caveman' stage of debating. I think by 'caveman', you all know what I really mean.

Good work everyone. I love reading all the tech specs. It's inspiring.

[Diamond]

Originally Posted by shaun

.. my bad on december, i meant november, thanks for the catch ..

I wouldn't say that sony NEEDS anything right now, look at the current market share.

Sony dwarfs microsoft when it comes to consoles.
6 months is nothing.

Sony had considered originally pushing the PS3 back, but the only reason I could see them doing that is to bring the console's price down, which I don't see as being that serious. Microsoft releasing a 399 console was a definate plus for Sony, that means that instead of selling at 299, they can do 399 and not lose near as much money.

I'm banking on a $300 PS3 though, I think Sony has enough money to sell at that, and if they release at $300, they'll murder XBox360's sales, even with a 6 month lead. You all know this.

This is getting EXTREMELY annoying.

The 400$ Xbox 360 IS THE PREMIUM PACK WITH EXTRA GOODIES

the 300$ Xbox 360 is the CORE SYSTEM WITHOUT THE EXTRAS

Whatever Ps3 is going to be will just be an ordinary CORE SYSTEM as systems always are when released!

Therefore if(big IF) Ps3 is out for 400$ IT IS STILL COMPARABLE TO THE 300$ XBOX 360 AS THEY WILL BOTH BE CORE TYPE RELEASES!

Poeple need to GET IT IN THEIR HEADS THAT THE 400$US VERSION OF XBOX IS THE PREMIUM PACK THAT COMES WITH EXTRAS!

STOP COMPARING THE EXTRAS PACK WITH THE PLAIN CORE TYPE SYSTEM THAT SONY ALWAYS RELEASES!

GEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZ!!!




The extras are always optional. NOBODY HAS TO BUY THE PREMIUM PACK! MS said the games were being designed so you don't NEED the hard drive or any extra ****. It's purely OPTIONAL. Buying the CORE SYSTEM is like buying any other console to date. When buying a regular system you get the Console, a Controller, and the hookup cables. THAT'S IT! Any releases that came with games or extra goodies were JUST THAT! EXTRAS! I bought the Holliday Pack when I got my Xbox. It came with Amped 2 and Topspin for an extra 20$. I could have bought my regular xbox without it.

The hard drive BEFORE was essential because that's how Xbox games were designed, therefore it was part of the system! But as I said, MS has states it's making SURE that all games can run optimally WITHOUT relying on a hard drive this time around! It's OPTIONAL THIS TIME. If anyone has a link to an article on that, please post it.

OK, THANKS FOR LISTENING EVERYONE... Now I'm gonna go eat like 5 Asprins.

[TRouBLe]

Originally Posted by Romper Stomper

How do they make huge profits later if the price of the 360 goes DOWN. From the rediculous amount we pay for games?

The price goes down but so does the production cost. So they make money from the difference.
Xbox is kinda an exception cause Microsoft was taking a big hit for each console and that's the reason it recently got out the "red" line.

(P.S. You're right that's why Xbox games are so **** expensive)

[daniel.isaac.h]

Here's a great read! It addresses how ****ing important system bandwidth is! How interesting the cell is. grrrr... Please read this Shawn


http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p2.html

[Diamond]

Daniel has a really good link. I read it from the PS3 Bashing thread. This entire debate about the hardware vs software capabilities between the Xbox 360 and the PS3 is broken down a nickle here, no screw it, I'm gonna say penny this time. This article is very interesting. You should all be sure to check it out. I think you'll be satisfied with what you see.

Which system do you think really comes out on top in the end? Check out his link!

Simply amazing.

[shaun]

The IGN article was interesting, but quite frankly it WAS a Microsoft report. Of course the XBox360 came out on top.

This has gone far beyond smart conversation, and quite frankly (as was stated two or three posts now), this is a PS3 bashing forum, and as such I won't be able to have an unbiased or even dually educated conversation.

The XBox360's SYSTEM bandwidth is NOT massively more than the PS3's. It's the god damned GPU's MEMORY bandwidth. Someone here needs to drive that into your heads.

Granted, the XBox has some strong points, but when you compare the two, it's like comparing the PS2 and Xbox. Xbox has a single 700mhz cpu, the ps2 has a 333(?)mhz processor, with some separate units for other calculations.

I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but this is my last post here, since from here will lose all logic, and begin fanboyness:

The XBox games don't look _that_ much better than the PS2 games, nor do they play much better. In all reality it'll come down to which games are developed best (which has been my main conclusion this entire time).

Who gives a flying **** that the XBox360's main system bandwidth (aka GPU to embedded GPU dRAM bandwidth) is ten times that of the PS3's system bandwidth (memory bandwidth). That's like saying my V6 has more power at the flywheel than your V8 does at the wheels....

Really, all games will be roughly the same, and contrary to PS3 and XBox360 fanboys, neither system will OMGWTFBBQ ROXOR UR SOXORS OFF and put the other out of business. Both systems will sell out at the holidays. Most of us will own both systems.

And yes, I'm quite aware the OMG OMGOGMOGMOGMGMWTFBBQLOL 399 XBox set is the SUPER DUPER LOADED BULL**** OVERHYPED **** version. Quite aware. Beyond me how a 20gb hdd and a wireless controller is worth $100, but more power to you.

And really, it's silly to say that Cell is "dumb". In actuality it's a much more powerful unit, but it has a specific use. I think it was silly to design cell for the PS3, but it will have its uses, and FAR more uses than Xenon will have.

I recall how much everyone said how bad Sony sucks for selling an HDD separete for the PS2, and yet everyone says "Oh, that's fine, it's a core system just like everything else. Of course it doesn't have an HDD."

...

And yes, I've heard reports from multiple sources that the PS3 will be 299, 399, 499 and even 549.

Guess what, none of you know. None of you know which will be better, and all speculation turns to name calling in forums.

Thanks for the brilliant conversation, those of you with an IQ, and thank you for the non-fanboy conversation from the abovementioned people. I'm simply trying to cut myself from this before it turns to namecalling.

If anyone cares to speak with me any further, email me or hit me up on my forums.

[daniel.isaac.h]

Originally Posted by shaun

The IGN article was interesting, but quite frankly it WAS a Microsoft report. Of course the XBox360 came out on top.

This has gone far beyond smart conversation, and quite frankly (as was stated two or three posts now), this is a PS3 bashing forum, and as such I won't be able to have an unbiased or even dually educated conversation.

The XBox360's SYSTEM bandwidth is NOT massively more than the PS3's. It's the god damned GPU's MEMORY bandwidth. Someone here needs to drive that into your heads.

Granted, the XBox has some strong points, but when you compare the two, it's like comparing the PS2 and Xbox. Xbox has a single 700mhz cpu, the ps2 has a 333(?)mhz processor, with some separate units for other calculations.

I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but this is my last post here, since from here will lose all logic, and begin fanboyness:

The XBox games don't look _that_ much better than the PS2 games, nor do they play much better. In all reality it'll come down to which games are developed best (which has been my main conclusion this entire time).

Who gives a flying **** that the XBox360's main system bandwidth (aka GPU to embedded GPU dRAM bandwidth) is ten times that of the PS3's system bandwidth (memory bandwidth). That's like saying my V6 has more power at the flywheel than your V8 does at the wheels....

Really, all games will be roughly the same, and contrary to PS3 and XBox360 fanboys, neither system will OMGWTFBBQ ROXOR UR SOXORS OFF and put the other out of business. Both systems will sell out at the holidays. Most of us will own both systems.

And yes, I'm quite aware the OMG OMGOGMOGMOGMGMWTFBBQLOL 399 XBox set is the SUPER DUPER LOADED BULL**** OVERHYPED **** version. Quite aware. Beyond me how a 20gb hdd and a wireless controller is worth $100, but more power to you.

And really, it's silly to say that Cell is "dumb". In actuality it's a much more powerful unit, but it has a specific use. I think it was silly to design cell for the PS3, but it will have its uses, and FAR more uses than Xenon will have.

I recall how much everyone said how bad Sony sucks for selling an HDD separete for the PS2, and yet everyone says "Oh, that's fine, it's a core system just like everything else. Of course it doesn't have an HDD."

...

And yes, I've heard reports from multiple sources that the PS3 will be 299, 399, 499 and even 549.

Guess what, none of you know. None of you know which will be better, and all speculation turns to name calling in forums.

Thanks for the brilliant conversation, those of you with an IQ, and thank you for the non-fanboy conversation from the abovementioned people. I'm simply trying to cut myself from this before it turns to namecalling.

If anyone cares to speak with me any further, email me or hit me up on my forums.

LMAO,

Yeah I can read, I know M$ published it. Just as unimportant as system bandwidth is you your eyes, CPU power is in Xbox fans eyes. lol.

While that report was by M$, Sony has not countered it with anything semi-intelligent. All they do is praise the Cell technology. In all fairness they have something worthy of praise.

Yes, I will own both systems.

"Who gives a flying **** about system bandwidth?"
I do! Anyone who made a computer will understand how truly essential it is. Alongside CPU performance! hehe.

I agree that the games will look totally about the same! lol. It will be a little harder for developers to make them for the Cell architecture. But not nearly as impossible as many have claimed. lol.

I think that anyone looking into the potentials of the next gen systems has to put emotions aside! Look at three things and see which one matches their liking...

1) Game Line-Up
2) The consoles target audience (The console is going to release games for one audience... cough cough gamecube)
3) The Console... Do you want a super uber media center/gaming/online system? Or just gaming?

At first when I read your little comment, I was pissed off. Then I thought about it and felt bad for you. Like I told my co-workers.

If you don't know what you are talking about don't be emotional.

lol. People just post really uninformed posts.

Like, "Cell is Dumb"
OMFG!
That is an amazing technology.

I would feel very awkward posting on a PS3 site.

Truth is, if you were looking to change our minds about PS3... It won't happen.

I still don't like Sony personally because:

1) They release defective systems that they don't acknowledge for about 6months.
2) They treat people like morons when you call.
3) Their online play sux!

I do like sony because...

1) They always are backward's compatible.
2) I like fires. lol.
3) The PSP! Dood it wrocks! No defects either!

[daniel.isaac.h]

Oh and yeah the PS2 has 294.912Mhz not 333 mhz

[Grindstone]

Originally Posted by shaun

I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but this is my last post here, since from here will lose all logic, and begin fanboyness:

And really, it's silly to say that Cell is "dumb". In actuality it's a much more powerful unit, but it has a specific use. I think it was silly to design cell for the PS3, but it will have its uses, and FAR more uses than Xenon will have.

And yes, I've heard reports from multiple sources that the PS3 will be 299, 399, 499 and even 549.

Guess what, none of you know. None of you know which will be better, and all speculation turns to name calling in forums.

Thanks for the brilliant conversation, those of you with an IQ, and thank you for the non-fanboy conversation from the abovementioned people. I'm simply trying to cut myself from this before it turns to namecalling.

I've edited your comments down to those that I wish to comment on.

First and foremost, too bad this is your last post, I hate it when people throw in the towel and give up. If you truely are concerned about name-calling and blatant fanboism (although this is planet xbo360, not PS3land), I can assure you that I will be monitoring this thread, and if such became a problem, it would quickly remedied by myself or one of my associates.

Anyone who has labeled the Cell tech as "dumb", is rather unlearned. The Cell is an impressive piece of hardware, but, we have yet to see how it will be successully utilized in a gaming console. It may have far more uses than the Xenon, but while it is stuck in a PS3, none of those uses may come to fruition. Stating that the Cell should not have been used in the PS3, however, does have some validation as an AMD or P4 may have been more appropriate considering the usage the Cell will get.

We have heard and read that the PS3 will be around $475 US dollars to make. Armed with that information, we can surmise that the price will be around there. I would stipulate that anyone anticipating a $299 launch is living in a fantasy world as even Ken K. has stated that it will not be cheap.

As to system bandwidth, well, as you may have already read- have you built a computer lately?

Nevertheless, bon voyage, may the PS3 live up to your expectations. Wouldn't hurt to have you visit again.

[Arqentus]

Originally Posted by shaun

Who gives a flying **** that the XBox360's main system bandwidth (aka GPU to embedded GPU dRAM bandwidth) is ten times that of the PS3's system bandwidth (memory bandwidth). That's like saying my V6 has more power at the flywheel than your V8 does at the wheels....

I'm amazed to read this from somebody claiming to be Editor in Chief.

While the PS3 & Xbox360 have about the same bandwidth from there GPU to there video memory ( or system ram in the xbox360's case ). That "flying ****" embedded memory has a advantage you can not underestimate.

By having that 10mb dram, you can do all those niftly little things like AA, zbuffer etc at a high speed, and widout even taxing the GPU -> video memory. While the PS3 needs to do all this in its video memory. The effect is, the xbox360 can offload a lot of bandwidth to this dram, while the ps3 can not.

All of a sudden, by just looking at the effect of AA ( and not even taking in account the other niftly things you can do ), will free up bandwidth.

So, the xbox's bandwidth to the system memory is maybe 90% when AA is active. While the ps3 is maybe 70%. These are just guess figures. But AA also takes a nice big chunck out of your memory requirements. If AA is done in advanced, you need less memory.


Also, the 100$ hd/wireless remark. Thats a special case, becouse its sata 2.5" hd's, and they do are expensive. My advice, get a core, and plug in a 3.5" IDE with a Sata converter or a Sata 3.5" hd ( if ofcourse thats possible aka, if MS hasent locked the console only to there hd's ). Sata hd 160GB: 60 a 70€'s + wireless controller = +- 30 a 40€ ... e voila. 8* more storage & all the benefits

"silly to design cell for the PS3". I agree here with you. The Cell is a multi media cpu and thats its weakness. A lot of its true power will never be used becouse of its design. Also, lets not forget, the cell becouse of its orthodox design is not exactly the most easy thing to program for.

I for one have some very big questions to Sony's desision to use 2 differende split memorys. 250MB video ram & 250MB system ram. I fear this is going to be a limiting factor. Yes, Sony said that the GPU can access the system ram for more storage, but at what cost? That means the access needs to take a detour, and i fear this means a hit on anything you place in the general memory.

Also, can the system access the video ram ( i have not seen any declaration from Sony on this ).

As you can tell, there are several design flaws that i my opinion will create problems in the future for the PS3. Where i most salute MS ( definatly NOT one of the things i like to do ) on the Xbox360's design, while it looks weaker vs sony's big number show, in reality it just might end up stronger as games get more & more heavy in the future.