引用:

原帖由 RestlessDream 于 2007-8-10 16:36 发表


S系的“堆多边形”从来就没在Xbox系主机面前胜出过

参见行货PS2宣传单上的7500万多边形，大赞

公正的评价？文章出处是哪里？C1多边形更强？C1的US全做VS也比不上CELL+RSX啊，况且一般是16US做VS，32US做PS。至于Shader性能说C1更强完全就是胡扯了。

引用:

原帖由 zhangjingy 于 2007-8-10 16:38 发表
公正的评价？文章出处是哪里？C1多边形更强？C1的US全做VS也比不上CELL+RSX啊，况且一般是16US做VS，32US做PS。至于Shader性能说C1更强完全就是胡扯了。

看来只有你认为在胡扯啊，看来NV用统一渲染架构是错误啊

以下对比图来自PCinlife，请点开看大图

那张图数据本来就有错误，早就被纠正了。

c1：500MHz x 48 x (4x2+1) = 216GFLOPS  （以前的240GFLOPS是错误的，xps_3_0的scalar根本没有mad这个指令，只有add/mul。具体参看MSDN：http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb313879.aspx，Microsoft的paper里也写得很清楚是216GFLOPS。）

RSX:（PS）0.5x 24 x(([3+1+2+2]x2+1)+7(nrm_pp} = 0.5x24x17 or 0.5x24x24 =    204GFLOPS or 288GFLOPS  

（VS）0.5x8x10 = 40GFLOPS

引用:

原帖由 zhangjingy 于 2007-8-10 16:51 发表
那张图数据本来就有错误，早就被纠正了。

c1：500MHz x 48 x (4x2+1) = 216GFLOPS  （以前的240GFLOPS是错误的，xps_3_0的scalar根本没有mad这个指令，只有add/mul。具体参看MSDN：http://msdn2.microsoft.c ...

请给出证据，谢谢

C1到CPU的上下行才10GB/S，比RSX的写15GB/S、读20GB/S差很远。

不信的可以问问某些专业人士。

引用:

原帖由 zhangjingy 于 2007-8-10 16:53 发表
C1到CPU的上下行才10GB/S，比RSX的写15GB/S、读20GB/S差很远。

问题是，单纯的20GB带宽，你的处理速度跟得上么……？也不看看RSX内部带宽瓶颈是多少

引用:

原帖由 zhangjingy 于 2007-8-10 16:53 发表
不信的可以问问某些专业人士。

请把专业人士请出来，还是要我把NV的大佬们请出来自己说话？

RSX其实做PS的时候频率是550MHZ，还没有算到数据里。

引用:

原帖由 zhangjingy 于 2007-8-10 16:55 发表
RSX其实做PS的时候频率是550MHZ，还没有算到数据里。

转移话题了

引用:

原帖由 zhangjingy 于 2007-8-10 16:26 发表
SPE是3.2ghz，C1是多少？SPE没有C1快？

天师果然开始比主频了，意料之中啊……

引用:

原帖由 zhangjingy 于 2007-8-10 16:51 发表
那张图数据本来就有错误，早就被纠正了。

c1：500MHz x 48 x (4x2+1) = 216GFLOPS  （以前的240GFLOPS是错误的，xps_3_0的scalar根本没有mad这个指令，只有add/mul。具体参看MSDN：http://msdn2.microsoft.c ...

来自PS3DevForum

-problems with Cell
"There are some challenges involving the architecture of the Cell, the cell consists of PPE and SPE cores. A developer states, "It is impossible to extract the full performance of the Cell on launch titles, it will take time get familiar with it". Another developer states that they are having difficulties with the 256KB memory of each SPE core. The actual useable area of the 256KB is closer to 128KB when buffering is considered with accessing external DRAM. "It would have been much different situation if there was 1MB of local memory”. There is however a benefit for these restrictions on local memory, since latency can be reduced, and latency cycles are more easily read. This is an advantage for real-time gaming applications.

Till now, developers were stingy with programming and memory usage, and this will not change with the PS3, in fact, the Cell will reward developers that put more effort into programming. While that may not be a negative, it is a hurdle that will take larger developer resources and time. For the Cell it has changed from extracting performance from the hardware, but more towards multi-threaded performance and takes a different skill set then the previously."

-problems with RSX [7600GT bandwidth]
"Developers were using 7800GTX for development, The RSX uses Nvidia’s G70 and performance programmable shader performance is very high. But the memory interface is 128-bit, in addition 8 ROP (Rasterizing Operation). It can be said that the RSX has a shader equivalent of a high-end PC with mid-range memory bandwidth. For that reason, due to the GPU high shader performance there is a bottleneck to the ROP memory and is causing a bottleneck. “For lower resolutions it is a fantastic GPU, but it gets difficult for high end HDTV resolutions”, says a developer."

-not finished SDK
The article goes into some hurdles PS3 developers had to go through. SDK 1.00 was supposed to be released by TGS, but the latest release before TGS is 0.93. What is shown at TGS is still developed with SDKs that are not final."

- RSX still downgraded
"All this takes into account of the rumored RSX clock speed downgrades to 500/650. This is not going to effect the quality of games we have witnessed as the dev kits were working to lower clock speeds of 450. It can be looked as an upgrade in from another point of view. Also there is still nothing to say come final retail PS3 the clocks are actually 550/700."
See also earlier confirmation from the same page RSX downgraded to 500/650:

引用:

原帖由 上海恐龙 于 2007-8-10 16:54 发表


问题是，单纯的20GB带宽，你的处理速度跟得上么……？也不看看RSX内部带宽瓶颈是多少

内部带宽有什么瓶颈？有C1-CPU的瓶颈大吗？

引用:

原帖由 上海恐龙 于 2007-8-10 16:54 发表


请把专业人士请出来，还是要我把NV的大佬们请出来自己说话？

找吧，他说得你应该信。