-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
RSX pics/Next gen Nvidia card benchmarks/info..
- Thread starter Doom_Bringer
- Start date
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
G70 and RSX numbers in that table don't include any texture ops either, so that evens the comparision, I guess.
Marconelly said:
Well, it might.
Someone on B3D has said that G70 decouples texture addressing from the shader, but the general thought up to now is that it didn't. Without decoupling, texture addresses would still take an ALU op from the shader.
The good news is that texture addresses aren't particularly frequent in long shaders which should be the norm next gen. So a lot of the time, the pixel shaders will have all that logic to itself. The downside of texture decoupling is, AFAIK, that even if the texture address units aren't needed, they can't double up as shader ALUs in a similar fashion. That said, I'd definitely take texture decoupling in RSX's design, since there seems to be no shortage of ALUs in its shaders.
Ok, pop quiz - G70 has a bunch of video decoding crap on board that is completely useless for PS3. What happens to those transistors:
a) Nvidia has monkeys working on this so they keep it on the chip doing nothing whatsoever.
b) the space is used to stick a GS inside or GS compatibility extensions
c) That Japanese blog is right and RSX has hw-tesselation (useless I know, but PSP has a bunch of useless features in GPU too).
d) Some kind of sound assist (hw decoder for many ATRAC channels or something along those lines) - (I'd kinda like this if we don't have it anywhere else in the system).
e) Something completely different (lemon curry*?)
*I'm high on caffeine and sleep withdrawal, so forgive me.
Edited to add option for sound assist
I hope we'll get an answer tomorrow, or shortly, Faf. The chart suggests they'll be able to talk about RSX from tomorrow onwards, so hopefully any interviews with NVidia beyond this will sort it out, if they don't volunteer that info themselves.
I've a feeling the video logic might still be there, somehow. Don't know why, just a hunch.
I've a feeling the video logic might still be there, somehow. Don't know why, just a hunch.
Tenacious-V
Thinks his PR is better than yours.
Mooreberg said:
wow!!!!!
Duckhuntdog
Member
CrimsonSkies said:
Well duh, the ATI team with talent is working on the Rev GPU.
I'm confused. The video decoding won't be used for outputting RSX video whereas that function is handled separately on the 360?Fafalada said:Ok, pop quiz - G70 has a bunch of video decoding crap on board that is completely useless for PS3. What happens to those transistors:
a) Nvidia has monkeys working on this so they keep it on the chip doing nothing whatsoever.
b) the space is used to stick a GS inside or GS compatibility extensions
c) That Japanese blog is right and RSX has hw-tesselation (useless I know, but PSP has a bunch of useless features in GPU too).
d) Some kind of sound assist (hw decoder for many ATRAC channels or something along those lines) - (I'd kinda like this if we don't have it anywhere else in the system).
e) Something completely different (lemon curry*?)
*I'm high on caffeine and sleep withdrawal, so forgive me.
Edited to add option for sound assist
midnightguy
Member
so if RSX' real floating point performance figures are 44 Gflops + 356 Gflops and we add in Cell's 218 Gflops, that gives PS3 about 618 Gflops total, in non-bullshit, peak theoretical performance?
Chiggs said:
LOL. What a joke. So let me get this straight. This article is BS (paraphrasing your own words) but they got the RSX specs down right?? All they did was upgrade the clock rate of the G70 and mark it as the RSX which is the same crap b3d idiots have been doing forever now (that's called SPECULATION FRIEND < NOT FACT). But, on the other hand, if we are to take what this article is saying for granted, then the RSX is bitch slapping the xenos regardless... so which is it? ;p
Tenacious-V
Thinks his PR is better than yours.
Doube D said:
Here we go......
We've switched from discussion on aspects mode to full fledged troll mode.......
Tenacious-V
Thinks his PR is better than yours.
Doube D said:
Is anyone else in this thread as hostile as you??? Hellz no, why not calm down. Keep this as a discussion instead of a troll war. You so eagerly want to veer this thread off course, if you want to fight over crap keep it in PM's. Don't mess up this thread. The rest of us want to keep discussing and solving issues with this.
dorio said:
Programmable power + non-programmable power.
We can work out the former, the latter is much harder to derive (if not impossible without a guided walkthrough from nVidia
).midnightguy said:
Peak programmable performance, yes.
Non-programmable doesn't mean non-existant, of course.
monkeymagic
Banned
Tenacious-V said:
That's a little hypocritical don't you think considering you wrote this over at OA 'JesusgotmeKFC'
http://*************/forums/index.php?showtopic=34758
Tenacious-V
Thinks his PR is better than yours.
Doube D said:
Explain to me how that was trolling?? I stated what was true. RSX is G70 but higher clocked. And the chart compared it with X800XL which is true as well. nVidia purposely avoided using ATi's top of the line card for a comparison. And my statement beneath it is the same. I never stated anything negative against PS3 in that post, just that XBox 360 will hold it's own. The only thing I did was posted that reply in a "I was right" attitude cause I was happy cause I knew it.
You're the one bringing in all the bitch slap talk.
Tenacious-V said:
How was it trolling? For one, you state conjecture and claim it to be fact. You say the RSX is a higher clocked G70 (which is pure unsubstantiated wishful thinking). If you got white papers then post them, otherwise curb the BS. If you are using the posted chart as the basis for your claims, then don't come back claiming they posted X800 specs for comparison (cause what it says is R500/xenos). You don't like it? Too bad. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the chart is correct or false. To take the info you want out of it, claim it to be fact, and mince the rest to garner credit for your brand of tech is a well established trolling tactic.
Tenacious-V
Thinks his PR is better than yours.
Looks like the 7800 is a pixel Shading monster, but the Vertex shading is weak in comparison. The X850XT PE is actually better at vertex shading.
Looks like if any work will be offloaded to CELL it will most likely be vertex shading. Think they had that planned? Techies here predicted CELL would do vertex load, and now 7800 is a PS monster with relatively weak VS.
Looks like if any work will be offloaded to CELL it will most likely be vertex shading. Think they had that planned? Techies here predicted CELL would do vertex load, and now 7800 is a PS monster with relatively weak VS.
Thanks, so 1.4 of the flops power is non-programmable. What type of things would that encompass? Things like z-ops, AA etc.?gofreak said:Programmable power + non-programmable power.
We can work out the former, the latter is much harder to derive (if not impossible without a guided walkthrough from nVidia
Peak programmable performance, yes.
Non-programmable doesn't mean non-existant, of course.
Tenacious-V said:Looks like the 7800 is a pixel Shading monster, but the Vertex shading is weak in comparison. The X850XT PE is actually better at vertex shading.
Two things..
a) 3DMark apparently has limitations re. vertex work. I'd have to look into it for specifics but that's the "word" being bandied about.
b) The G70 is probably CPU bound, whereas the X850 is not. It'd be interesting to stick them on faster CPUs and see where they end up. (This is probably the issue in many of the other benches where the G70 doesn't significantly outperform that X800 btw).
So I'm not sure how accurate a reflection that is of its actual vertex performance.
dorio said:
Everything that isn't running on the CPU or shaders. So texture addressing (in X360's case, anyway, in PS3's if texture addressing is decoupled), texture ops, AA, z-ops..yeah. Basically everything else that is computational. But it isn't counted in the same way as programmable power, I'm sure.
I guess that's in line with the increase in pixel shaders 8 vs. vertex shaders 2?Tenacious-V said:Looks like the 7800 is a pixel Shading monster, but the Vertex shading is weak in comparison. The X850XT PE is actually better at vertex shading.
Looks like if any work will be offloaded to CELL it will most likely be vertex shading. Think they had that planned? Techies here predicted CELL would do vertex load, and now 7800 is a PS monster with relatively weak VS.
Tenacious-V
Thinks his PR is better than yours.
Doube D said:
If you wanna keep biting me, PM me, I'm not veering this thread off course.
1) Months ago nVidia stated RSX was a modification of their upcoming next gen graphics card.
2) G70 unveiled and instantly RSX is right beside it. The answer being specs are the same (save for clockspeed) and nVidia did not want ATi to have their next gen cards specs months in advance.
3) The posted chart is accurate, it was released by nVidia. My concern with the Xenos info I brought up earlier. If you look up a bit instead of lashing out at me, you'd see it was adressed by some of the members on the board.
4) If you think I have a well established troll tactic think again.
5) If you want to keep lashing out at me, PM me, I don't want this thread fudged over.
Tenacious-V
Thinks his PR is better than yours.
gofreak said:
a) wouldn't 7800 VS still max out whats available even with 3DM05 being limited?
b) related to (a) I guess, but shouldn't it still be higher? Even if it was limited by program or CPU, the VS should be more advanced than X850, wouldn't it be a little higher though? To reflect what advantages it does have?
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
Tenacious-V said:Looks like the 7800 is a pixel Shading monster, but the Vertex shading is weak in comparison. The X850XT PE is actually better at vertex shading.
Looks like if any work will be offloaded to CELL it will most likely be vertex shading. Think they had that planned? Techies here predicted CELL would do vertex load, and now 7800 is a PS monster with relatively weak VS.
Could be...
BTW, even though USAs can run at near 100% efficiency, they are not as fast as dedicated pixel shaders....
http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/article.asp?SCID=14&CIID=22720&p=2
That being the case, we will probably need to benchmark X360 vs. PS3 to come to any real conclusions...
I must say I also fall into the group that doesn't necessarily sees RSXs G70 relation as inherently bad???
Seems like a pretty kickass part to me :/
Fafalada said:
Yeah, the way CELL<->RSX intergration was discribed seems really impressive to me
Tenacious-V said:
No, not necessarily at all. It can only deal with what 3DM05 sends it.
Tenacious-V said:
Again, I don't know the ins and outs of how 3DM05 works, but if there is an issue with vertex work, it may just be that the X850 is a better fit for how it handles things vs G70. I don't think it's a reflection on its actual performance.
More generally, the CPU has a big impact with certain games. It can hold a card back in a major way, and I think that's probably the case with the G70. Not so with the X800 or X850, really. Beyond a certain point, it doesn't really matter how fast the GPU can do its work if the CPU is becoming the bottleneck..that's why if you plugged in faster CPUs I think you'd start seeing the difference (if not in 3Dmark, in some of the other benches certainly). It's the same reason why it's not worth buying cutting edge graphics cards if your CPU is somewhat old..the CPU will only hold it back, and you may be as well off with an older (cheaper) card.
Tenacious-V
Thinks his PR is better than yours.
gofreak said:
Gotcha, thanks for clearing that up.
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
gofreak said:
Yeah, I wonder if PS3/X360 will be GPU bound or CPU bound?
If they turn out to be GPU bound (and I would think that at least PS3 will be) then YEEEEE-HAW! lets get ready for some .5B and up poly counts!
Chiggs
Gold Member
Doube D said:
Your "paraphrasing" has greatly misconstrued what I wrote (surprise!). Sorry, but that's not even close to what I said about the article (which was basically a critique of the Xenos specs provided by Nvidia and the apples to oranges comparison- not the RSX specs, or even the article itself, really).
But lets get back to the topic on hand: You argued with me last night about how nobody outside of Nvidia and Sony knew what the RSX was, and I argued that pretty much anyone following it should know that it would be very similar to the G70 part from Nvidia. Of course, you shit all over this, and said "GIVE ME NAMES, QUOTES, ETC!!!!". And that's fine if you don't want to deal with speculation, I understand completely - but I was still right and you were still, now that time has given us a better perspective on things, wrong.
And yes, the RSX certainly appears to be "bitch-slapping" the Xenos on paper (which I've never argued against - it's coming out after the 360, so it should be more powerful, right?); but the big question is: Will the much-vaunted ALU's in the Xenos achieve their theoretical maximum efficiency (which is what we were talking about last night)? The architecture of these two systems are very different, so the apples to oranges comparisons are a little stupid - it's not going to be that black and white. But as far as overall raw system power? PS3 > Xbox 360 - is this really even surprising? And stop trying to use it as an insult at me; it's not like you're hurting my Xbox 360 feelings. Like you said yourself last night, just because ATI made a different design decision this time around, doesn't mean it's the "right" decision.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=32827&stc=1
This real?
oh btw chiggs, Im tired of this debate regarding the RSX = G70. If we have an official release or statement from nvidia stating what you claim, fine, i was wrong. Until then, we will have to wait and see. The chart up there is CLAIMED by some chinese site to be from nvidia. I'll wait for nvidia to come out and say it.
This real?
oh btw chiggs, Im tired of this debate regarding the RSX = G70. If we have an official release or statement from nvidia stating what you claim, fine, i was wrong. Until then, we will have to wait and see. The chart up there is CLAIMED by some chinese site to be from nvidia. I'll wait for nvidia to come out and say it.
Fafalada said:Ok, pop quiz - G70 has a bunch of video decoding crap on board that is completely useless for PS3. What happens to those transistors:
a) Nvidia has monkeys working on this so they keep it on the chip doing nothing whatsoever.
b) the space is used to stick a GS inside or GS compatibility extensions
c) That Japanese blog is right and RSX has hw-tesselation (useless I know, but PSP has a bunch of useless features in GPU too).
d) Some kind of sound assist (hw decoder for many ATRAC channels or something along those lines) - (I'd kinda like this if we don't have it anywhere else in the system).
e) Something completely different (lemon curry*?)
*I'm high on caffeine and sleep withdrawal, so forgive me.
Edited to add option for sound assist
f) A huge array of 6502 cores.
Why are people saying that chart was made by nVidia?
Why would they release a chart in chinese first? Makes no sense to me.
http://www.hardspell.com/hard/showcont.asp?news_id=14372&pageid=3105
Sounds like they based RSX specs on the G70.
Anyway its good that the G70 isn't the slouch *many* were predicting, and wouldn't be bad news to PS3 fans regardless.
Why would they release a chart in chinese first? Makes no sense to me.
A rough translation from where the image was made:
http://www.hardspell.com/hard/showcont.asp?news_id=14372&pageid=3105
Sounds like they based RSX specs on the G70.
Anyway its good that the G70 isn't the slouch *many* were predicting, and wouldn't be bad news to PS3 fans regardless.
On the one hand, I'm pretty annoyed that RSX really may not be more than a pumped-up G70. I was really expecting better use of those trannies, and a concerted effort to try for something different, even slightly.
OTOH, G70/RSX is a powerful GPU regardless. And as I've said in the past, there's no reason RSX should be the weaker part, eventhough it doesn't try for unified shaders. 50-70% of 10-14GP is still greater than 90% of 4GP.
I still would have liked to have seen more PS pipes or something. I really, REALLY hope the rumors of 128bit blends is true. Even if it's not used that often, it would (a) be a change from the G70 and (b) offer some real possibilities to show off some of those advanced effects. So far so good. RSX > G70, and G70 is already laying the smackdown. NVidia hasn't disappointed...yet. PEACE.
OTOH, G70/RSX is a powerful GPU regardless. And as I've said in the past, there's no reason RSX should be the weaker part, eventhough it doesn't try for unified shaders. 50-70% of 10-14GP is still greater than 90% of 4GP.
I still would have liked to have seen more PS pipes or something. I really, REALLY hope the rumors of 128bit blends is true. Even if it's not used that often, it would (a) be a change from the G70 and (b) offer some real possibilities to show off some of those advanced effects. So far so good. RSX > G70, and G70 is already laying the smackdown. NVidia hasn't disappointed...yet. PEACE.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
R500 fillrate is 16gigasamples = 4gigapixels (GP in his post, I presume)
Shogmaster
Member
Where's Duane getting 10~14GP for RSX vs 4GP of Xenos? If it's that chart, isn't it a poor source since it says 10GP for G70, 14GP for RSX, and 8GP for Xenos?
If the chart is right, then it's more of a 5:4 ~ 7:4 ratio then 10:4 ~ 14:4 ratio that Duane is insinuating.
Regardless, that chart and article is a speculation by a Chinese site, so we are getting worked up for something not so official, nor correct.
If the chart is right, then it's more of a 5:4 ~ 7:4 ratio then 10:4 ~ 14:4 ratio that Duane is insinuating.
Regardless, that chart and article is a speculation by a Chinese site, so we are getting worked up for something not so official, nor correct.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Yeah, but that's texel fillrate.
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
Isn't Xenos 4 GigaPixels and 16 Anti Aliased GigaSamples??
At any rate....here is another 7800GTX 3DMark score for ya:
At any rate....here is another 7800GTX 3DMark score for ya:
Shogmaster
Member
Marconelly said:
I realize, but I'm asking where his 10~14G pixel fillrate figure for RSX is coming from.