Calculations...

[Stelio]

First off, I would like to apologize if this has been discussed before.

I read a magazine called "Pure" (published in the UK) and noticed an interesting little comparison of the PS3 and the XBOX 360...the following has been copied directly from the mag:

PS3:________________________XBOX 360:

CPU = Cell___________________CPU = Xenon
3.2 GHz_____________________3.2
218 GFLOPS_________________115

GPU = RSX__________________GPU = Xenos
300.4 million transistors_______ 338 million (inc. eDEAM)
550 Mhz (clock)______________500 Mhz
136 (shader ops p/cycle)______160
1.1 (billion vertices p/second)__1.5
211.2 GFLOPs________________240
1080p______________________1080i


My question here is how on earth did SONY come up with their 2 Teraflop performance, and Microsoft with their own 1 Terflop performance figures?

As you can see the math doesn't add up...which calculations/formulas/drugs, do u think they used?

[VG Aficionado]

Just ignore all those figures, they couldn't be further from the truth. The real performance of Cell (under certain circumstances, that is), is around 135 GFLOPS and Xenon's around 70, if I remember correctly from what I read on the internet :dur:

The RSX-Xenos figures are quite off as well. Xenos doesn't have a concrete shader ops or vertices per second figure since it has a unified shader architecture, which means that they used both theoretical maximums for both figures ignoring that it can't do that much at once, but pretty much half of it (assuming half of the unified resources are dedicated to pixel shading and the other half to vertex processing).

I hope I made some sense :tardbang: All I know for sure is that we won't see any teraflops around anytime soon.

[xbdestroya]

Yeah Stelio... don't worry about that TerraFLop stuff. It's bogus on both sides.