More Articles on Xbox 360
XNA Creators Earn Up To 70% On GamesXbox 360 Division In Yearly ProfitE3'08: What Microsoft Didn't ShowE3'08: Microsoft Unveils Dash Revamp & Content PartnersMicrosoft Chops US 360 Premium Price Latest News
SCEE "Looking Into" Wipeout HD Epilepsy ReportsIwata Apologises For E3XNA Creators Earn Up To 70% On GamesBanjo-Tooie Heading to XBLA Too???The Battle Of Destiny Arrives In LondonUser Reviews
There are currently 3 User Reviews for Xbox 360Write your own review for this game today and you will receive 100 Gamer Points.
Click here to register
Playstation3 vs Xbox 360: Round Two News
Chris Leyton
07/06/2006
A source suggests to TVG that the CELL isn't as flawed as recent reports suggest...
Following The Inquirer's less then favourable look at RSX and CELL statistics divulged at DevStation, a TVG reader privy to the information was keen to set the record straight.
Arguing that the 500 million triangles p/second figure for the Xbox 360 is simply more "overkill" then that offered by the Playstation3, and that these kind of figures are never the true bottleneck in a real videogame application, our source rightfully indicates that a Playstation3 title would need to push 4 million polygons for every frame at 60FPS to reach this upper limit. The G70/71 family from which the RSX is based all operate at one triangle setup every two clock cycles (250 million triangles/s at 550Mhz), which TVG's source suggests has never been cause for developers to complain in the past.
Regarding the issue of memory constraints allegedly imposed on the CELL processor, and the way that developers will have to work around the system, our source indicated that the 16MB/s is tied only to the CELL's access to GDDR3 memory. The CELL's limited access to GDDR3 is countered by the CPU's full access to XDR memory as noted in the first column of the slide, which TVG learns is all the CELL needs to supply it and keep it going. Limited CPU access to video memory is nothing new, with the exception of the unified memory structure employed in the Xbox 360, and is indicative of the priority that the RSX holds because of its bandwidth requirements; as our source indicates the design suggests a "GPU-orientated" stance towards memory access, which we're reliably informed, is "a very good thing". The design implication is that anything read from GDDR3 to the CELL, must be sent to the RSX first or to the XDR memory, from where the CELL processor can sequentially read it at full speed.
Further still our source pointed to the latency involved with CELL's access to XDR as approximately 400 cycles, which compares favourably to the 500-600 cycles required for Xenon's access to main memory in the Xbox 360.
From what we can gather it's going to be hard to distinguish between the two formats in most cases, with the odd occasional title maximising the strengths on each system. Still hardware debates are nothing new and unlikely ever to disappear, even though the gauge in differences constantly changes.
Anonymous
Date Added:Thu 24th Jul 2008 10:21
Anonymous
Date Added:Thu 24th Jul 2008 10:21
Anonymous
Date Added:Thu 24th Jul 2008 10:13
Anonymous
Date Added:Thu 24th Jul 2008 09:41
Anonymous
Date Added:Mon 21st Jul 2008 08:38
Anonymous
Date Added:Mon 21st Jul 2008 07:07
Anonymous
Date Added:Sun 20th Jul 2008 20:45
Anonymous
Date Added:Sat 19th Jul 2008 06:26
coruscant
Date Added:Fri 18th Jul 2008 12:21
gfh-77
Date Added:Thu 10th Jul 2008 07:03
Date Added:Wed 9th Jul 2008 17:52
gfh-77 i can't believe you're still on here babbling on.Why don't you give M$ a ring & see if they'll sell you a life with a dual core processor ha ha.I bet your still a virgin.Nerd!
IP Address: ***.... [ Read full comment... ]