Nvidia says Playstation3 GPU is slightly less powerful than GeForce 7800

[nam75]

Nvidia is now saying that Playstation3's GPU (call RSX) is slightly LESS
powerful than the GeForce 7800 GPU for PCs.

sources:
http://theinq.com/?article=25838
http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/9126/PlayStation-3-GPU-Less-Powerful-than-GeForce-7800/
http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4958

Direct quote from the latest PSM, an Nvidia spokesman is quoted with: "The
GeForce 7800 is almost identical to the RSX, the rsx is only slightly less
powerful."

this is just the opposite of what Nvidia was saying a few months ago.
Nvidia had previously stated that the RSX for PS3 was going to be more
powerful than GeForce 7800.

RSX is supposed to be clocked at 550 MHz whereas the GeForce 7800 GTX is
(without overclocking) around 430 MHz.

so the question is: what is it about GeForce 7800 *architecture* (not
clock frequency) that makes it slightly more powerful than RSX, if what
Nvidia now says is the truth ?

does it stem from the memory bus width and bandwidth?

GeForce 7800: 256-bit - 38.4 GB/sec
RSX: 128-bit - 22.4 GB/sec

thats all I can think of. unless RSX has some of its pipelines disabled
and therefore less active pipes than GF7800.

[KillzoneBigNuts2]

It's labeled RSX for a reason. Sony has already stated that the Cell
chip will help the RSX in graphics rendering performance. I assume, bet
money even, that the RSX is much like the GS of the PS2 so it does more
rasterizing work while Cell is capable of sending it display lists.

Just look at God of War on PS2.
There is no way in hell the GS of the PS2 could do that alone.

Hell, the GS of the PS2 has no pixel shaders yet games like Shadow of
the Collosus use HDR lighting.

[KillzoneBigNuts2]

nam75 wrote:
> Nvidia is now saying that Playstation3's GPU (call RSX) is slightly LESS
> powerful than the GeForce 7800 GPU for PCs.
>
> sources:
> http://theinq.com/?article=25838
> http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/9126/PlayStation-3-GPU-Less-Powerful-than-GeForce-7800/
> http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4958
>
> Direct quote from the latest PSM, an Nvidia spokesman is quoted with: "The
> GeForce 7800 is almost identical to the RSX, the rsx is only slightly less
> powerful."
>
>
> this is just the opposite of what Nvidia was saying a few months ago.
> Nvidia had previously stated that the RSX for PS3 was going to be more
> powerful than GeForce 7800.
>
>
> RSX is supposed to be clocked at 550 MHz whereas the GeForce 7800 GTX is
> (without overclocking) around 430 MHz.
>
> so the question is: what is it about GeForce 7800 *architecture* (not
> clock frequency) that makes it slightly more powerful than RSX, if what
> Nvidia now says is the truth ?
>
> does it stem from the memory bus width and bandwidth?
>
> GeForce 7800: 256-bit - 38.4 GB/sec
> RSX: 128-bit - 22.4 GB/sec

PS2 2,560 bit.. yeah, 2,560

[carl0s]

<nam75> wrote in message news:t8CdnS8gq6B...@comcast.com...

>
> Nvidia is now saying that Playstation3's GPU (call RSX) is slightly LESS
> powerful than the GeForce 7800 GPU for PCs.

Actually if you read the original discussion where this 'news' was posted,
it seems the original poster was making the statement up.

[First of One]

Does it really matter? Look at current PC benchmarks comparing the Geforce
7800 against the 6800GT/Ultra. Meaningful differences only appear above
1600x1200. Many sites have started testing at 2048x1536 just to prove a
point. A PS3 will never have to do such resolutions.

Keep in mind all this is just speculating on *theoretical* hardware
horsepower. Most developers have no idea how to take advantage of
multi-core/multi-chip setups.

--
"War is the continuation of politics by other means.
It can therefore be said that politics is war without
bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."

<nam75> wrote in message news:t8CdnS8gq6B...@comcast.com...

[Bill Cable]

This story has already been debunked.

--
Bill Cable - Steelers Fan & Star Wars Collector
http://CreatureCantina.com <----- funny!
ca...@creaturecantina.com