Sony Technical Information on PS3

[OrangeSoul]

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/20060329/3dps3.htm

* PPE has 128 VMX registers

* Memory Latency to cell:

1) Register: 1 Cycle

2) L1 Cache : 8 Cycles

3) L2 Cache : 32 Cycles

4) Main memory: 140 Cycles

* Overall Cycles: 500, same as Xbox 360

* 6 SPEs reserved for games, 1 SPE reserved for Operating System

* RSX is based on N47 Nvidia Architecture = Nvidia 7800 GTX

* RSX is 384 Flops per Clock at @550 Mhz, Nvidia 7800 GTX is 728 Flops per Clock @430 Mhz

* SPEs cannot access main memory directly

2)

[jerry]

* RSX is 384 Flops per Clock at @550 Mhz, Nvidia 7800 GTX is 728 Flops per Clock @430 Mhz

I thought RSX was just a G70 @ 128bit, if that is true its a downgrade from what I assumed it to be.

[5u6z340]

* Memory Latency to cell:

1) Register: 1 Cycle

2) L1 Cache : 8 Cycles

3) L2 Cache : 32 Cycles

4) Main memory: 140 Cycles

* Overall Cycles: 500, same as Xbox 360

Not overall cycles. Xbox 360 main memory have 500+ cycles latency, with latency lower is better.

Anyway most of this is already know before.

[OrangeSoul]

Sony upgraded the VMX registers on the PPE from 64 to 128

I thought RSX was just a G70 @ 128bit, if that is true its a downgrade from what I assumed it to be.

it shouldnt have been a surprise. GTX has more memory bandwidth than RSX. even X1900 has more memory bandwidth than the Xenos in Xbox 360

[jerry]

it shouldnt have been a surprise. GTX has more memory bandwidth than RSX. even X1900 has more memory bandwidth than the Xenos in Xbox 360

No, my point was that I expected RSX to turn out the same number of flops per clock as a regular G70 but it would have less memory bandwidth (128bit).

According to your specs, you have the the RSX at lower flop per clock performance. <- Where did you get that figure btw? :huh:

[OrangeSoul]

No, my point was that I expected RSX to turn out the same number of flops per clock as a regular G70 but it would have less memory bandwidth (128bit).

According to your specs, you have the the RSX at lower flop per clock performance. <- Where did you get that figure btw? :huh:

RSX

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/2...329/3dps309.jpg

G70(7800 GTX)

http://www.pcperspective.com/images/review.../g70summary.jpg

[5u6z340]

RSX flops was shown at E3 yes? I am going to try look for slide.

Never mind. :p

[tHa_vIlLaMaN]

Dun dun dun DUUUUUUUNNNN!!!

:unsure:

[AlphaPrime]

Why is there a '2)' at the end of your post?

[OrangeSoul]

Why is there a '2)' at the end of your post?

that was the slide i posted

[AlphaPrime]

You posted a slide? Was it an image or did you just type it out from an image? I still don't get why there is a '2)' there, lol.

[DeadOnArrival]

personally I dont think it really matters, does it? I mean if the programmers can take full utilization from the cell, couldn't they really just render most of the stuff needed on the processor subtract textures-fillings-etc? If so this would take the load off of the gpu, and allowing the gpu to do all textures-hdr-bumpmapping-etc..?

[tHa_vIlLaMaN]

So if the cell only has 6 usable SPEs and it's supposed to do some graphics, all those kick-ass physics and whatnot -- whats going to run the gamecode? :blink:

People have to realise that the Cell isn't some super processor (outside of the usual marketing speak ofcourse). There has to be balance somewhere. It may be able to do alot of things but surely it can't do them all at once and do them well :rolleyes:

[velocity3k]

So if the cell only has 6 usable SPEs and it's supposed to do some graphics, all those kick-ass physics and whatnot -- whats going to run the gamecode? :blink:

People have to realise that the Cell isn't some super processor (outside of the usual marketing speak ofcourse). There has to be balance somewhere. It may be able to do alot of things but surely it can't do them all at once and do them well :rolleyes:

The RSX takes care of the graphics the Cell does everything else as far as i know.