360/PS3 CPU Comparison (?)

[Recon]

I'm looking for an unbiased, up-to-date comparison of the latest models of these systems and their CPU output. And if you could, don't make everything extremely complicated; I'm a computer noob. Any help?

 

[Grayfox]

Xbox 360: 3.2 GHz PowerPC Tri-Core Xenon
PS3: 3.2 GHz Cell Broadband Engine with 1 PPE & 7 SPEs(8 core CPU)

In a PS3s case 6 are used for games while 1 is for system use.

Best look at wiki for all of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360

 

[Terronium-12]

It depends, really. You're not going to find an "unbiased" opinion because both CBEA and Xenon have an advantage over the other in different scenarios.

In terms of outright raw performance (something you'll never see), Cell is better than Xenon.

In practice, clock frequencies don't prove much of anything (as proven time and time again). By your mention they're exactly even.

 

[Pako]

One curious question I have is, Why do you want to know the differences between the two systems, and even more importantly, CPU output?

 

[bergauk]

One curious question I have is, Why do you want to know the differences between the two systems, and even more importantly, CPU output?

Good question.. PS3 can't run linux anymore[correct me if I'm wrong, last I heard they removed the other OS option], and xbox360.. I never heard of it doing anything like that in the first place.

 

[dice1998]

In a PS3s case 6 are used for games while 1 is for system use.

I wonder why sony decided to lock one SPU during production (it can't be just costs as they were already making a loss every ps3 made when it was first launched).

 

[Pako]

Good question.. PS3 can't run linux anymore[correct me if I'm wrong, last I heard they removed the other OS option], and xbox360.. I never heard of it doing anything like that in the first place.

Yep, they got rid of it. To be honest, the performance of YDL wasn't that great in my opinion. It was usable, but it lagged quite a bit. I'm sure there was fear of ripping the Bluray in Linux and being able to share the partition to the PS3 system allowing Bluray games to get hacked running on a virtual drive on the Linux system.

Anyways, will wait to hear from the OP as to why he's so concerned with CPU output. Wondering if Recon was wondering which system is better. To that I would answer with what ever system has the game you are wanting to play, and which one is easier for developers to optimize their games for.

 

[Recon]

Anyways, will wait to hear from the OP as to why he's so concerned with CPU output. Wondering if Recon was wondering which system is better. To that I would answer with what ever system has the game you are wanting to play, and which one is easier for developers to optimize their games for.

These debates explode into a war at my school, and I wanted to hear the answer that they were equal, which I gladly received.

 

[Seismica]

They are therabouts equal. I used to go really in-depth into this argument i.e. How the PS3 is cheaper in the long run due to free online play, how the cell processor means the PS3 has so much more potential and how the graphics chip in the 360 is better but it outweighed by the better processor and faster memory in the PS3 etc.

But it has become evident over time that both consoles are very evenly matched. Both consoles have been refined and don't have a high failure rate (for newer models) and both have games that are taking the hardware near to their limits. But, the 360 is easier to develop for, so you see a lot of cross-platform designers using this as their starting point.

But as Pako has said it really depends what games you want, as some games have been designed for one and poorly ported to the other (Skyrim comes to mind - nearly unplayable on PS3 once your save file gets big enough).

 

[Robin]

I wonder why sony decided to lock one SPU during production (it can't be just costs as they were already making a loss every ps3 made when it was first launched).

I believe it was done to increase the yield or rather speed of production because they were a year behind as it was. Instead of being locked I heard that it isn't even there in the chip (just a blank space) otherwise they would have likely unlocked it by now for a boost.

 

[Scaff]

I believe it was done to increase the yield or rather speed of production because they were a year behind as it was. Instead of being locked I heard that it isn't even there in the chip (just a blank space) otherwise they would have likely unlocked it by now for a boost.

Close.

It was for yield purposes, effectively the chip produced with either 7 or 8 SPE's could be used for production rather than only those with 8, which apparently made for quite a significant increase in the number of usable chips (and first production run yields of any chip can be low).

Scaff

 

[Robin]

Close.

It was for yield purposes, effectively the chip produced with either 7 or 8 SPE's could be used for production rather than only those with 8, which apparently made for quite a significant increase in the number of usable chips (and first production run yields of any chip can be low).

Scaff

Ahh I see, so some don't have the extra SPE and some do. I wonder how somone would be able to tell which one is in a specific PS3. If they have an 8 SPE cell technically they have a more powerful PS3

I also wonder whether the chips produced now for the slims are all 7 or 8 SPE's cell's.

 

[bluemoon_19]

I was under the impression that the 8th SPE was reserved in case one of the others broke. I think that's what Scaff said tho.