So, why exactly are we comparing the cell, a CPU, (or whatever you want to call it) with a GPU?

in two three years we will see some crazy stuff on a PS3. Till then we will just have to do with normal games like MGS KZ2 and so on

If we only had a big selection of games to play on it . They say the ps3 is for the long haul but im sure xbox will have the 720 out by then.Give us some damn games to play instead of using it mostly for blue ray.

In laymans terms, it means that the ps3 will generate some EXTREMELY awesome graphics once people figure the hardware out a bit more.

One of the most powerful graphics cards for your personal computer on the market isn't as powerful as the brain in the ps3. Not even close.

Bear in mind that the card they are talking about costs as much as a ps3.

This is dumb .. "Oh, Cell beats a GPU on a rendering type GPUS aren't made for!!!!!! and nobody is going to use EVER in games." :/

microsoft and kidtendo wish they could add something as powerfull as this into their tweaked PCs and game cubes.

Could do magic tricks for all I care; we need Sony to drop the price of the machine because it doesn't matter if it had 100 Cell chips - it will not sell well at this current price because figures of CPU performance are not as impressive as potential sale figures IMO

I have a 360 and a Wii, and I would buy the PS3 if it had a better selection of games. Hopefully the developers will learn how to better utilize the power soon and produce some good addictive games, else this fine ship may sink soon

Your point is redundant.

It wasn't just g80 vs cell.

It was with opteron as well. And look how poorly that did, and as said alot of ppl using those processors for that type of work.

Even the much loved core duo 2 would have been crushed by cell, shame they didn't include it, but i know y:)

I also put a few things into perspective the other day in a thread, the ps3 using 3spu's and cell can be as good as a g80. U don't need 6spu's to do so.

SO yes in 2008 and much further, you'l be seeing many graphical and exciting games using cell.

That's all techo garbage to me but as a layman I do know that a cell is a normal general purpose cpu while a Nvidia chip is a graphics processor, as they are obviously very different things, does this not make the comparison moot?

Wouldn't it be much fairer to compare a cell to the Intel Quad core CPU and the Nvidia 8800 hip with the RSX in the PS3?

What do I know, I just like to play games, who really gives a crap about clock speeds, if a fun game comes from the hardware then why should anyone care?

again,and again we see comparison between oranage and apples on this forum, What does this have to do with anything??

are these articles intended to prove the developers stupid as they have this heavenly Cell that sony created from souls of angels and they cant take advantage of it?? get over it, overhyped (way overhyped) and underperfoms

*Waits for a game to use the power* anything good on tv today ?_?

everyone is right! Intel has done this study, written a 40 page white paper, and developed in depth data for some sony fanboys! Because the cell is G@Y and doesnt work like a gpu and will fail the nails in the coffin call the grave digger

/sarcasm

I could write here all day about people commenting without proper knowledge in a subject, but it doesnt matter, it wont ever stop. A hand full of trolls, a bus full of idiots, what's the difference. Sad thing is, it gives a spin on truth, but as I say to myself every night before i fall asleep, welcome to the real world

hope to see a day without STUPID intel CPU structure that is a STUPID bottleneck for other part of the system..

cant wait to see better physics and lighting in Console games than PC ones.. to show you EVEN without several GIGA BYTES of memory u can have a better quality picture..

may be some of You are noob in PC tech or MORE professional than me.. but Im sure PS3 is one STEP forward for new type of CPU-GPU optimized unit. AMD want to make this thing after 2010 but RIGHT now SONY-toshiba and IBM made it ...

it is CELL , all we need for really NEXT GEN graphics..

BTW : its a graphic Threat , Im so happy they used Opteron to show us it is NOT A general task .

and may be u say its a task only good for Cell.. so the only chip in this world that can render a 1024x1024 (including secondary rays) BUNNY ABOVE 30 FPS is F***ing CELL .

Like Ken Kutaragi said in his awful E3 speech, the PS3 owners are investing in "potential". Their games could (if the devs are able to succesfully squeeze the power out of it) be incredible. In the mean time the system is underperforming. But who knows what stands in the way of progress. It's not unknown for a Playstation console to be hard to program for. It's reknowned for such. Whether people will be able to draw good power from the machine until years down the line is unknown. Fingers crossed it won't be that long.

Rotfl i have both i think the ps3 is way better even with no games i have no problem waiting for games FLOKLORE SOON wooo O_O. no really whats on tv whats G4 doing?

it wont last long enough. poor planning.

If you even tried to push the 360 like this, it would explode in your face. The 360 is actually dangerous to your health.

All that shows that the CELL (actually the SPUs) are a well suitable hybrid, which lays right between a general purpose CPU and a specialized SIMD core. It is a beast in heavy data driven applications and can outperform both, traditional cpus and vector processors (which I would classify a GpGPU here).

Its still a long way to go, but despite one destination (or two - that is heavy multicore CPU on one end and hi performance vector/pixel processing on the other) there is a way in the middle.

The question will be, can the SPU ever exists without either one (cpu or gpu ?), if so, I'd guess id might be able to replace gpus some times.

At the end, I think the whole discussion is pure academic. The good thing is, it opens up ideas and new fields of research and will push technologies forward. And that is a good thing.

There will never be a 100% raytraced game on the PS3, though :) - but hey, that reminds me of a discussion I had once, where I had to convince someone to implement damage region rendering just because someone thought, we don't need that, because we gotta redraw every pixel anyway. BS.

Same thing will happen with raytracing. Nobody will ever render a whole scene with raytracing, if you can increase the performance by using selective shader models.

PS3 SUCKS BALLS G80 RUNS AT 600 MHZ CORE COMPARED TO 3.2 GHZ WOW AND ITS ONLY 5 TIMES MORE HOW PATHETIC, ID LIKE TO SEE SOME BENCHMARKS OF HOW CRYSIS RUNS ON BOTH.

if any one need a bubble and loves sony then just reply to my comment!!

have u heard that halo 3 disks get scratched and cause the x360 to have the ring of dead or fire i dont know what its called?

have u heard that halo 3 have sold money worth of 170M$ in USA only first day and probably they lost around 100M$ because of the problem i mentioned before?

admit it 360 fans u have a crap hardware that cant run ur software!!

I've seen your posts before, and I'm well aware you are not a PS3 fan. Regardless of this article, you should at least give the CELL credit for being a magnificent processor. All the studies done on it by countless companies yielding significantly dramatic results weren't all done by fanboys in disguise.

Comapring a CPU to a GPU?

That PS3 is not as powerful as 360?? Why isn't 360 up there with them? Oh well.

has started doing tasks that were normally reserved for the GPU. The PS3s architecture is a hybrid in the console industry.

sorry to say,but most of you guys are brainwashed ..do you really think the ps3 is that powerful? in a side by side comparison,the 360 is the slightly more powerful system overall,when it comes to raw processing power...sure the ps3 does some things better,but it has bottlenecked architecture,cant render true shaders and has a significantly weaker graphics card..you guys that still think games are going to look like that killzone cgi are way,way off...ps3 and 360 games well continue to look better and better,but you WELL NOT be able to the difference between ps3 games and 360 games...there well be no game that looks better than gears on the ps3,and that same can be said for the 360 as well...those that dream that the ps3 is this amazing machine that can crush the 360 graphically,need to wake up,and wake up fast..sony spent the money on blue ray,which has NOTHING to with how games look.....THIS IS THE TRUTH,TIME TO FACE IT..

I hope you play jazz better than you write comments.

"the 360 is the slightly more powerful system overall"
"ps3 and 360 games well continue to look better and better,but you WELL NOT be able to the difference between ps3 games and 360 games"
---but didn't you just say the 360 was the more powerful console??

"sony spent the money on blue ray, which has NOTHING to with how games look."
"there well be no game that looks better than gears on the ps3,and that same can be said for the 360 as well."

Just come out and say it. You think the PS3 is a pile of garbage. At least be honest, instead of beating around the bush.

Even though it's not out, from all the real-time videos, what game looks as good as killzone 2 right now? COD4 definitely seems to come close, but that game is almost out. Even the magazines said killzone 2 came close to the trailer, but now your saying (months after E3 07) that killzone 2 won't even come close? I don't think it matched the trailer, but I would be lying to say it didn't come close in many respects.

Look at ratchet and clank graphics?

Here was the kicker for me man: "there well be no game that looks better than gears on the ps3,and that same can be said for the 360 as well."

Didn't you read what EPIC has been saying about the unreal engine on the PS3? They said they have it working better now than they did for gears on the 360.

I think both consoles have their benefits (I honestly do), but don't be so close-minded about the PS3s (and even the XBOXs) potential. Developers have already stated that most deficiencies they thought the PS3 had initially, have been replaced by workarounds. Insomiac games has found all kinds of tricks to deal with any of the original problems. Honestly, most of the issues weren't real issues--it was a lack of understanding. Most people still don't realize the PS3 has 512 MB of RAM, but it's split in two: 256 for the CPU and 256 for the GPU.

why even compare a cpu with one?
it's comparing Apples to Oranges

Is it alright to compare a CPU/processor to a graphics chip? Shouldn't they compare RSX to G80!?

Ps3 is amazing piece of hardware and I can't wait for what's in store for us in the future.

lol I remember that bunny from my opengl programming days :)

Fanboys go worship your God of a console with your elementary friends, its past your bed time. Do you have to mess up every single news article in here.

hehe... I love these comparisons...
Hey! why not run a test between a CPU and a GPU on something that the GPU was not designed to do.... ask yourself this question before you get a hardon with this news... why do you think the PS3 has a GPU if the cell can do better than a GPU in all cases?

I know the cell is a beast. I don't know much about programming yet (about to start learning it) but it looks like a really powerful chip. The problem is, I haven't seen a good example of its power yet. When I do, the game is crap (Lair). I'll start looking at a ps3 seriously when the games justify my attention, the day when it can render every pore of a human or alien being's body and real life or fantasy environment not on CG or movie quality, but on real life quality like what I was being promised from day 1. Nothing cartoony, but REAL, all while bursting at the seams with fun. If it seems I'm demanding too much, then don't blame me, blame Sony. Each tech demo raises my expectations higher.

Ray tracing a rabbit means absolutely nothing in terms of real world performance. Anyone with half a brain would understand this, and the G80 totally crush what Cell and the PS3 have to offer. Lets put it this way, the 8800 GTX have 768 MB of RAM, PS3 have 512 MB of total system memory.

I think we're done here.

I'll be listening when you get some games to prove the point...

the ps3 so far, has been one of the worst consoles ever released..sony better hope blue ray isnt phased out due to costs..theve been paying a lot of money to get people on board,yet all the big companies think blue ray is useless and way,way too expensive..the ps3 is expensive because of the blue ray player..regardless the ps3 should get a couple good games by the end of this year,and id expect their first true killer app unreal...haze looks lame to me,especially the a.i...

"Ray tracing a rabbit means absolutely nothing in

terms of real world performance. Anyone with half a

brain would understand this, and the G80 totally

crush what Cell and the PS3 have to offer. Lets put

it this way, the 8800 GTX have 768 MB of RAM, PS3

have 512 MB of total system memory.

I think we're done here."

OK G80 is GPU and it's job is to do some specific

calculation like "raytracing" now the fact is Cell

can do it much better.

"the 8800 GTX have 768 MB of RAM, PS3 have 512 MB

of total system memory"

Ok then PS3 has just 512 MB of RAM but as you can

see Cell+PS# producting better performance.
wanna proof?

Killzone 2 engine uses indirect lightning on it's

real time gameplay, everybody who works in 3d

architecture understand that indirect lightning

needs a lot of CPU power.

Well that's it i'm not a fanboy

"the ps3 so far, has been one of the worst consoles ever released..sony better hope blue ray isnt phased out due to costs..theve been paying a lot of money to get people on board,yet all the big companies think blue ray is useless and way,way too expensive..the ps3 is expensive because of the blue ray player..regardless the ps3 should get a couple good games by the end of this year,and id expect their first true killer app unreal...haze looks lame to me,especially the a.i...'

Wait wait, the ps2 did the same thing as ps3 for now, even ps3 sell much better than ps2 in the begining then ps2 has sold yeah for about 12o milllions, well that's exectly what ps3 will do, being the champion once again.

i'm no fanboy i love all my all nintendo and sega consoles

I don´t know what the h*ll I´m agreeing/disagreeing on anymore, I don´t want to brag about my lack of knowledge on these things but I don´t understand any of this anymore! I´ve put together a couple of PC´s myself over the years but frankly I lost it when dual core was released and I´m too old to even begin to try and follow the evolution of gaming hardware.

What I do know is that I rely on Sony to put a machine together that has potential and will prove itself over the years to come!

Why the hell are they comparing a GPU to an SPU??? It's like comparing a Brain to a Heart (well not really but you get what I mean)

Just found this.

Halo3 is infact rendered at 640p, and then upscaled,lmfao. hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahah ahhahahahahahhahahahahahahah

http://games.blogo.nl/?comm...

I say again,hahahahahhahahahaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahhaa

are u that stupid? ... shame on u.. 360 fans said why compare CPU to GPU ( like bladestar (BTW he is a Moron 360 fan))

but why u say that? .. u know 5 years ago (or even more) SONY wanted to make a CHIP for Graphics and general processing .. but they couldnt do that perfectly .. and they realized that they need another chip (RSX) with huge PIXELshading power...

CELL can process both General and graphic tasks... u idiots see OPTERON (one of the most powerfull server CPUS) .. it cant even make 1 FRAME per second bunny with secondary rays..

ARE You BLIND? or idiot? its a Graphic threat.. only G80 and CELL can make some FPS in this section.. there is no other CPU or last gen GPU that be able to do that..

shame on u MK_Red ...

The logic that is suggested in this article and from the many PS3 fans in this comments section is questionable.

So as I see it this is an attempt to explain that the PS3 is struggling with current games because it is optimized for next generation meaning after this generation of games has had their run.

So is this another wait and see ploy? Or is this a true excuse for the PS3's shortcomings.

The Cell is used in many other fields of industry such as medical and science. The PS3 needs the GPU because Ken K. was a bit over ambitious when it came to the Cells true abilities in regard to video games development and the end product.

This article and you Sony fans banter does not make the PS3 look better this makes the PS3 look like a fish out of water. Kind of like a sucker that was dropped in the sand. It is still a sucker but it would taste much better if it were not covered in sand.

Just give up people. The winner of the console wars is decided already. It is we the gamers. The games are what matter not all this tech. mumbo jumbo.

Please stop spreading the rumors that the PS3 will be better in two years. You must be smart enough to tell that people will wait to buy it. The many developers who are making games for now need you PS3 fans to be spreading why the PS3 is worth it today. The need money to survive. That is why people are so exited about Halo 3. The game makes money.

I suggest you try another battle plan this looks like total B.S. Claming the 360 is tapped out will not work either. You people have to have some sort of physiological disorder or some sort of mental block. Seek help or go play some games that are truly worth it.

"In a memo to the console giant, San Diego based DFC Intelligence spelled out what gamers across the world must be thinking.

"Sony has done very little to justify why the system is worth a premium price for consumers that don't care about raw hardware performance", the memo read.

"Unfortunately we believe that represents over 90% of the consumers in the marketplace."

"It is almost as if Coca-Cola not only decided to go with a new formula, but also decided to exit the low brow soft drink business to go into high end wines," DFC wrote."

when it comes down to it...yourpaying for potential, hell even if it is 6 years down the road, the cell will be surpassed in 3 years.

if you like math i can do best.
cell vs G80 =cell
ps3 vs xbox360 =ps3
very simple
why are you making so HOT.

They say up, We say down. They say square, We say round! They say 360, We say PS3! They say software, We say hardware! They say core, We say Cell! They say DVD, We say Blu-Ray! They say 9 gigs, We say 50 Gigs! They say infa-red, We say Blue tooth! They say multi discs, We say one disc! They say Halo, We say Killzone 2! They say framerate, We say ports! They say LAN, We say Wi-fi! They say wires, We say wireless! They say High def, We say Higher def! They say games, We say Red Ring! They say Rumble, We Say Rumble-Axis! They say xbox, We say PS2! They say 33%, We say 1%! They say $50.00, We say Free!....Point is you can kick their ass in every feature with the PS3, BUT THESE MIND NUMB XBOTS WILL NEVER GET IT???

we say games,you say blue ray,and can store 40 hours of footage of us playing are games,while you watch....we say now,you say later...i say ps2 was utter hyped crap,and i know ps3 is the same utter crap...you believe sonys hype,i dont...we say exclusives,you say lost exclusives....unreal well be better on the 360 GUARENTEED,mgs well be better on the 360,final fantasy well be better obviously because of xbox live..gta gets extra online modes and a whole city that the ps3 version doesnt get..now im not braggin,because i hate final fantasy,and i enjoy splinter cell way more than metal gear.but the truth is that sony and the ps3 isnt as serious about games as microsoft seems to be...hate that all you want,but its the truth...almostr everygame that was once ps3 exclusives are multiport,and all the microsoft exclusives stay exclusive and better yet,microsoft is buying every sony 3rd party game too..

ps3 all the way.

You could put it another way.

If the ps3 sold at the same price as the 360.

And if the 360 and ps3 had exactly the same games. no exclusives whatsoever.

I wonder who'd be the dominent system.

I think you've got to say ps3, Has alot more to offer every consumer. I think thats what ppl need to understand, there aren't many games that are exclusive now.

Alot are multi.

The exclusives that are left are quite big ones, but an i.p can always switch onto another system as well. Its kinda like if microsoft came out of the console race altogether and the ps3 did sell even 50million, your telling me that halo wouldnt go ps3, same thing with ps3 exlusives.

My last thought is this.

The cell regardless of power, will soon be much much more understood. And while some complain its taken awhile, the 360 had no competition and had alot of time to get afew things correct, except hardware.

If the ps3 had launched when 360 did, and 360 when ps3 did. cell would be more or less known by now and some of the things possible on ps3 could not be done the same way on the 360.

I welcome the war:) well the console one that is, its better for consumers. Its a win win.