Take your i7 and get it to run 8 BD level HD streams at the same time. Then thank your i7 based computer for its hard work.
We know that Cell can do this in realtime without breaking a sweat.
FAO Biscuit and other daft bastards. Cell vs i7
- Thread starter WeasteDevil
- Start date
Take your i7 and get it to run 8 BD level HD streams at the same time. Then thank your i7 based computer for its hard work.
We know that Cell can do this in realtime without breaking a sweat.
....
Go get laid Weaste.
Go get laid Weaste.
Well. My Acer laptop is 3 years old and it can run Football Manager and Firefox and iTunes all at the same time.
Suck my cock.
Suck my cock.
not a fair comparison
I'm sure i7 is much better at other tasks
why don't you compare your precious cell with a GPU? Radeon HD5970 for example
I'm sure i7 is much better at other tasks
why don't you compare your precious cell with a GPU? Radeon HD5970 for example
deep down Weaste knows the i7 is better.Why in the hell would you compare a CPU with a GPU?
And why would anyone compare a PS3 processor with a PC/Mac processor? What is to be gained? And who on Earth is ever going to run 8 BD level HD streams at the same time, and why would they even want to do such a thing?
The cell is a brilliant step forward for processors, there can be no argument about that. It destroys everything else at certain tasks, that's for sure.
However, with regards to it in the PS3, it's a bit like the 'Emotion Engine' of the PS2. Technically brilliant, but nowhere near to the level of all the fanboy hype. It's all well and good people talking about it in theoretical terms, but as I've said many times before, the machine as a whole isn't going to prove to be any better than the 360 and frankly both are at a level where they didn't even blow away current time mid-level pc's.
The cell used in future machines though? Well, if Sony can get it in hardware more accessible to developers, then it's going to show just how good it is.
However, with regards to it in the PS3, it's a bit like the 'Emotion Engine' of the PS2. Technically brilliant, but nowhere near to the level of all the fanboy hype. It's all well and good people talking about it in theoretical terms, but as I've said many times before, the machine as a whole isn't going to prove to be any better than the 360 and frankly both are at a level where they didn't even blow away current time mid-level pc's.
The cell used in future machines though? Well, if Sony can get it in hardware more accessible to developers, then it's going to show just how good it is.
So if the consoles were, even when released, not level with mid-level PC's, why have we seen no development of console hardware and why is Weaste so adamant we won't see another generation for several years?
Because Weaste is partly right, the games sales are too strong for all three companies and will be for the next couple of years. It only takes one to start dropping off (and I don't think the latest Wii sales will be that catalyst just yet) and start hinting at a new machine and the others follow. No one wants to be left behind, especially in this climate.
However, don't think that the next generation of consoles aren't always in the works, because R&D never stops. I still maintain we will start to hear about them within the next two years.