INTRODUCTION

This is an article to refute and dispel the negative comments circulating around based on commments from worst anti-sony man JOHN CARMACK .
CARMACK was bashed back in 2005 when he said "Doom 3 is not possible on ps2". Gaffe proved him wrong by bringing GOD OF WAR --one of the technical and graphical marvel of LAST GEN.

as for doFrad it doesnt even know what it is talking about. Its editor was a former MS employee just like JON HANNIBAL of arsenetica. HANNIBAL was also a former MS employee

**********************************************************

CELL vs XENON vs QUAD CORE

CELL is around 4--5x as powerful as the QUAD CORE processor. Anyone who runs FOLDING HOME project will notice that CELL dissipates 250GFLOPS of energy per sec

However lets get down to the benchmaks
*********************************************************


IN RAW FLOPS crunching CELL is 3x as XENON

http://members.forbes.com/global/2006/0213/070A.html

However XENON cant do any of procedural sysnthesis of PROFX

http://www.psu.com/4D-Graphics--A-reality-only-for-PlayStation-3-Feature--a1063-p0.php

Neither can it do TRE,RAYTRACING,RAYCASTING ,Linear matrices at 256k etc



*********************************************



IBM's take on XENON and CELL.


Note:- IBM is the maker of both CELL and XENON

Speed Thrills: Cell Zaps Rivals
Cell
IBM, SONY, TOSHIBA
Transistors
(mil)
234
Performance
(gigaflops)
230
Xbox 360
processor
IBM
Transistors
(mil)
165
Performance
(gigaflops)
77
Pentium 4
Extreme Edition 840
Intel
Transistors
(mil)
250
Performance
(gigaflops)
26

Sources: Microprocessor Report; IBM.



IBM themselves are stating that CELL is 3x as powerful as XENON in raw flops crunching. NOTE :- this report was released prior to the release of OCTOPILER ----the default compiler for CELL.

**************************************************

Here are the complete list of Benchmarks for Cell .
NOTE:- all these were released before the advent of OCTOPILER.

BUT according to these benchmarks a CELL is around 20x as powerful as any of the High end DUEL -CORE desktop processors including XEONS and OPTERONS


Cell beats 7800gt by 6:1 .This should give people an idea about why KZ2,LAIR and other ps3 titles look wayy better than anything available on any other platform. Cell's ability to carry out Graphical tasks are also consolidated with this benchmark

http://www.gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/2005/11/30/gpus-vs-cell/

****Now MC systems take on Cell

http://www.mc.com/uploadedFiles/Cell-Perf-Simple.pdf

http://www.mc.com/microsites/cell/demo.aspx

http://www.mc.com/uploadedFiles/Cell-WP.pdf

RESULT:- Cell murders PC cores


********************************************************
Now lets see what UC@ Berkeley had to say on CELL

http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~samw/projects/cell/LBLTalk.pdf

http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~samw/projects/cell/EDGE06_abstract.pdf

RESULT :- in SP calculation (which is related to gaming ) a Cell is a minimum of 10x as powerful as the most powerful OPTERON available today. The margin shoots to 60x in some perf like TRE and STENCIL

******************************************************


This is IBM's take on CELL.
NOTE :- the becnhmarks were released prior to the release of OCTOPILER

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/power/library/pa-cellperf/

RESULT :- Cell murders competition

*****************************************************

MIT ---world's no 1 university in engineering is claiming that the performace of CELL could be multiplied even by 6x/7x with the release of a bypass multipurpose and multiphase COMPILERS

http://cag.csail.mit.edu/crg/papers/eichenberger05cell.pdf


******************************************************

CELL vs QUAD CORE

a CELL processor is roughly 5x as powerful as 2X QUAD CORE setup.

http://forums.gametrailers.com/showthread.php?t=125691


thanks to BEYOND 3D and PSU

************************************************

Unlike normal processors a Cell do do full fledged raytracing at 720p @ 30fps

IN RAYTRACING a CELL is 130 x as FASTER as XENON /any duel core processor available today

VIDEO :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLte5f34ya8

VIDEO :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr-R4bUZIQw

****JALWA of FULL FLEDGED RAYTRACING

a CELL beats 8800 GTX in RAYTRACING by 5:1

http://gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/?p=187

http://www.power.org/swsummit/download/SW_Summit_PS3_Experience_Joaquin.pdf


http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/~benthin/cellrt06.pdf


http://gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/2006/06/19/ray-tracing-receiving-new-focus/


http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1995.tb06861.x********************************************************

NOW lets head to GPU.

there has been common misconception all around that RSX is weaker than XENOS which is utter BS

Lets take down the benchmarks of the 2

**********************************************

PS3 can do 51 billion dot products per second

XENOS can do 33 billion dot products per second

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6125087/index.html?type=tech

NOTE :--although RSX is 7800gtx/7900gtx based ..Its architecture has been tweaked later by NIVIDIA

Proof:-

7800gtx has 24 pixel shaders .
RSX has 28 pixel shaders . 24 of them are active and 4 are partially disabled at the moment


XENOS on the other hand is R420 based.

Here is anandtech's take on XENOS

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453&p=7

The unified shader thing is a hoax and unlike the dedicated shaders of RSX xenos' unified pipelines are indeed very weak


RSX has a texel filrate of 13.2 g/s
XENOS has a texel filrate of 8g/s

RSX can do 136 shader ops per second
XENOS can do 96 shader ops per second

RSX has 32 dedicted pixel shaders and 8 vertex shaders
XENOS has 48 unified shaders

RSX has a clock freqency of 550 HZ
XENOS has a clock frequency of 500MHZ


RSX is DX 9 compatible but supports all future revisions of OPEN GL
XENOS supports DX 9 C+ and supports OPEN GL till 2.0 ONLY

RSX has a diameter of 258mm^2 and is a 90nm chip
7900gtx has a diamter of 196mm^2 and is also a 90nm chip
Xenos has a diameter of 160mm^2 for the mother die and 100mm^2 for the daughter die

http://forums.e-mpire.com/showthread.php?t=65446

PS3 has a total bandwidth of 22g/s + 28g/s ( video + system)
XENOS has a total bandwidth of 22g/s (unified).the edram bandwidth of 256g/s is irrelevant at resolutions above 720p.

even at lower resolutions it makes up for the lack of 360s total bandwidth . However this theory fails in games which reqires intrinsic data processing eg UT3 and DEAD RISING


****************************************************

CONCLUSION:_ BY all means a CELL thx to EDGE and iRT is a minimum of 10x as powerful as the XENON. However the margin shoots up in some applications as revealed by the benchmarks.

The CELL excels in anything that requires heavy processing. A QUAD CORE to some extent can do those calculations at a much slower speed . However the XENON cant do any of the HEAVY INTRINSIC PROCESSING as in PROCEDUAL SYNTHESIS of PROFX (see above)

The RSX is also significantly more powerful than XENOS but not as efficient at the moment . BUT things would change just like the way it had after the inclusion of EDGE,iRT and RAPIDMIND SDK for PS3.


******************************************************

The RAPIDMIND SDK is just a tweaked version of SDK that is normally used with supercomputers.

[url]https://developer.rapidmind.net/hidden/news/2007/rapidmind-and-terra-soft-partner-to-unleash-playstationae-3-for-linux-developers[/url]

******************************************************


FINAL WORDS:- BY all means a CELL is wayy more powerful than not just XENON but naything available in the market today.
RSX is also more powerful than XENOS but we will have to wait a little more to see the JALWA
games like LAIR do consolidate this claim even as of today.