YTSEJAM Digest 7148 Today's Topics: 1) Xbox 360 rocks (and so is the PS3) ... and maybe Nintendo Revolution as well by "Sigit Prabowo" 2) Re: Xbox 360 rocks (and so is the PS3) ... and maybe Nintendo Revolution as well by Eduardo Ojeda 3) Space shuttle computers by Steve Chew 4) RE: Space shuttle computers by "Niall Connaughton" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:12:40 +0700 From: "Sigit Prabowo" To: Subject: Xbox 360 rocks (and so is the PS3) ... and maybe Nintendo Revolution as well Message-ID: <024601c55b92$31c9d1b0$040110ac@sgt> > Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 21:35:13 +1000 > From: "Niall Connaughton" > To: > Subject: RE: New Xbox 360 Rocks > Message-ID: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ytsejam@torchsong.com [mailto:ytsejam@torchsong.com]On Behalf Of >> email_address_removed >> Sent: Tuesday, 17 May 2005 9:21 AM >> To: Multiple recipients of list >> Subject: Re: New Xbox 360 Rocks >> >> >> I have a feeling that the PS3 will be much better than that. I play >> gaming systems for their game lineup and have sworn by sony forever. >> The Ps3 has a multicore chip on it. That is all that has been revealed. >> According to an article, it was revealed that 1 of those chips alone >> has the power of the slowest supercomputer. With Nvidia's emotion It's been confirmed that the PS3 will use a rather ambitious multicore architecture with 1 main core and 8 subcores (termed SPEs, 7 used, 1 reserved for redundancy). Also, Sony claimed overall system performance of 2 TFLOP, against Microsoft's earlier quoted 1 TFLOP. I know that amounts to next to nothing, because of the architectural difference. I can't figure out yet what FLOP should stand for, but along the same line I do remember MIPS as Misleading Information about Processor Speed. :) It will all depend on the games. Oh, BTW, Nintendo Revolution is rumored to use a 4-way multicore running @ 2.5 GHZ (MS and Sony: 3.2 GHz). One thing that PS3 has more is resolution, which goes up to 1080p, while both Microsoft and Nintendo has 1080i. But again, it will depend on the games. So far all the games I see are all developed for 720p. Another thing I like about PS3 (and also Nintendo) is the capability to use off-the-shelf memory cards, such as CF I/II, SD/miniSD, MemStick etc. Microsoft strangely seems to opt for a proprietary format. Oh, and one more thing. PS3 is the only one that will be able to play BLU-RAY DVDs! Wow .... However, it seems like I will end up buying both, as is the case with PS2 and Xbox :) Now I am running to buy a PSP, since it will be compatible with the PS3 .... both as a controller and other purposes not yet known ............... cheers, ---sgt--- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 10:32:34 -0300 From: Eduardo Ojeda To: ytsejam@torchsong.com Subject: Re: Xbox 360 rocks (and so is the PS3) ... and maybe Nintendo Revolution as well Message-ID: > It's been confirmed that the PS3 will use a rather ambitious multicore > architecture with 1 main core and 8 subcores (termed SPEs, 7 used, 1 > reserved for redundancy). Also, Sony claimed overall system > performance of 2 > TFLOP, against Microsoft's earlier quoted 1 TFLOP. I know that amounts > to > next to nothing, because of the architectural difference. I can't > figure out > yet what FLOP should stand for, but along the same line I do remember > MIPS > as Misleading Information about Processor Speed. :) > It will all depend on the games. Oh, BTW, Nintendo Revolution is > rumored to > use a 4-way multicore running @ 2.5 GHZ (MS and Sony: 3.2 GHz). Well actually, FLOPs (which mean Floating Point Operations per second) is probably the best way to quickly compare two different architecures, short of complete benchmarking. I'm not saying it's a GOOD way to do it, it's just the best, considering MIPS or Ghz amount to nothing. PS3 will use the Cell chip, that means a Motorola G5-like chip and 8 hefty vector units. Sounds much powerful than the Xbox's hardware. And from the screenshots I've seen, the PS3 will kick the XBOX's ass, as far as graphics go. You should really look at those pics if you haven't. Even if you have never played a game before, your jaw will drop. - Edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:25:53 -0400 From: Steve Chew To: ytsejam@torchsong.com Subject: Space shuttle computers Message-ID: >> >> I have a feeling that the PS3 will be much better than that. I play >> gaming systems for their game lineup and have sworn by sony forever. >> The Ps3 has a multicore chip on it. That is all that has been revealed. >> According to an article, it was revealed that 1 of those chips alone >> has the power of the slowest supercomputer. With Nvidia's emotion >> engine.... I think PS3 will win this one on capabilities. X-box is >> using ATI. Good company.... they used to be #1 in my book. But that >> changed with the newer nvidia cards on the market. But the new PS3 is >> supposed to be revealed on Wednesday at E3 i heard. > >Pfft, the power of the slowest super computer, what a load of carp. What >does that actually mean? There were supercomputers in the 60s, I'm sure the >PS3 would be faster than one of those, so is my mobile phone. > >Sounds like marketing crap to me... if game consoles, sold for a few hundred >dollars were as fast as super computers, we'd be seeing the CIA purchasing >bulk orders of PS3s and super computer manufacturers scratching their heads >wondering where they went wrong. Now that sounds like fun. We could have >NASA controlling the space shuttles with gamepads! > Yes, it's marketing crap and makes no sense. But on the other hand, the fastest super computers today are just made up of thousands of parallel CPUs that aren't any faster than the PS3. The key is that those supercomputers allow the CPUs to communicate quickly for parallel computation. Also, if you think the space shuttle has "fast" computers then you're way off base. They're running hardware from the late 70s that couldn't even compare to today's CPUs. Here's some info on what the shuttles use: http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2005/04/21/comp_space/1.html Steve ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 10:24:43 +1000 From: "Niall Connaughton" To: Subject: RE: Space shuttle computers Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: ytsejam@torchsong.com [mailto:ytsejam@torchsong.com]On Behalf Of > Steve Chew > Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2005 4:19 AM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Space shuttle computers > > Yes, it's marketing crap and makes no sense. But on the other > hand, the fastest super computers today are just made up of thousands > of parallel CPUs that aren't any faster than the PS3. The key is that > those supercomputers allow the CPUs to communicate quickly for parallel > computation. It's a bit more complex than just throwing a thousand cpus into a box :P > Also, if you think the space shuttle has "fast" computers then > you're way off base. They're running hardware from the late 70s that > couldn't even compare to today's CPUs. Here's some info on what the > shuttles use: > http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2005/04/21/comp_space/1.html > I know the shuttle uses old computers, I was merely making a joke :P I'm very impressed by how much grunt these things have, especially when all the old consoles were only able to play games at decent speeds because the code for the games was hacked to all hell to optimise it. These things sound seriously fast, but "supercomputer"... Sony need to take their hand off it :P Superconsole, maybe :P ------------------------------ End of YTSEJAM Digest 7148 ************************** === Contributions to ytsejam: ytsejam@torchsong.com === === Send requests to: ytsejam-request@torchsong.com === === More information at: http://www.dreamt.org/local/ytsejam.php === === Brought by the ghost of ytsejam@arastar.coms past === === Reach the owner of this list at: ytsejam-owner@torchsong.com ===