I like the last line: "With the PS3’s high price pushing away developers, PS3 owners will have something to put all those unused processor cycles to use."
The real intresting thing is that F@H has PS3's to test it on.... I though these were not being made, once again proving the point that ASUStek most likely is pumping them out...
I would like to know if somebody could put this statement into perspective for me..."Folding@Home performance from the Cell processor is expected around 100 gigaflops per PS3 console"
Is that over the consoles lifespan? How long would it actually take to attain that with the Cell processor that's in there????
Hmm, well SiSoft Sandra scores the 3.4 GHz Xeon I'm using at 10,165 megaflops (on Whetstone SSE3, HT off). Does that mean the PS3 is roughly 10x as powerful, or have I misunderstood something?
Today seems a good day for me to throw my name away
I did a bit of research and came up with this...
GigaFlop (Gflop) - The ability of a system to compute one billion floating point operations in one second. AMD's K6-2 processor and Motorola's G4 processor can achieve speeds of over 1 Gflop, for example, and newer chips can do multiple Gflops. The problem with trying to measure Gflops is determining a standard method of measuring floating point operation or instructions. Even if you do this, it's not clear that the measurement would reflect on real world usage.
288 AMD Opterons Single core CPU's = 744 gigaflops = 2.58 gigaflops per sec per CPU.
So if the Cell CPU's can run at 100 gigaflops that is 33.333 gigaflops per sec per CPU.
According to Apple:
- Two superscalar 2.3GHz PowerPC G5 processors = 10.1 Gigaflops
According to AMD:
- 1 AMD Athlon FX-60 CPU = 2.6 Gigaflops
According to Nvidia:
- 1 6800Ultra 256MB PCI-E = 40 Gigaflops
Note: more info on GPU's folding can be found at F@H and we all know GPU's can fold much faster than any CPU...
Now this guy has come up with an intresting read but I think his gigaflops are off as Apple list the G5 2.3Ghx CPUs as posting 10.1 Gigaflops per sec. he list them as 30? so I take his post with a grain of salt.
Just goes to show that gigaflops ≠ real world performance. Yes, it's true that 2xG5 powerpc chips could far outperform 2xathlons (for a cheesy example), but in real world performance, it's almost meaningless. Gflops is a measure of very abstract use.
It's another perk to not add to the reason why I am already buying one There is already enough features on this bad boy to make it sell like hot cakes.
I dont really quite get the gigaflops or whatever u said before. Just want to know this is ps3 going to revolutionize the gaming industry and is it going to be more powerful then Pentium extreme edition 3.6 GHZ dual core combined with a single x1950xtx and 2000 ddr memory with lets say mediocare speed ???
No one knows if it's going to revolutionize the gaming industry (Probably not).
The "Power" of the PS3 will be incomparable to a desktop PC, as they are not remotely designed the same.
And we typically play different kinds of games on consoles than we do on PCs. RTS and FPS games are much easier to play with a PC's mouse & keyboard, IMHO anyway. RPG, sports, and fighting games seem to make more sense on a console. I want a powerful console, but I don't care if it's more powerful than my PC or not.
But what if... What if it completely decimates a desktop pc processor in folding performance?
I have better things to spend $500-600 on than just a folding machine. Not saying that foldings worthless, but why spend that much just to fold? the games are gonna be like $60 and so far I see nothing too impressive other than MGS 4
And we typically play different kinds of games on consoles than we do on PCs. RTS and FPS games are much easier to play with a PC's mouse & keyboard, IMHO anyway. RPG, sports, and fighting games seem to make more sense on a console. I want a powerful console, but I don't care if it's more powerful than my PC or not.
That is not so true... EA games has releasxed BFME2 on Xbox 360 which I actually like better than a Mouse and Keyboard. Things are changing in the gaming industry and it is happening faster than we would like...
The main reason why I am liking the PS3 is for the main fact of the Blu-ray player and HDMI... and not to mention true 1080p goodness... and on top of that games for the PS3 look much more realistic....
I have better things to spend $500-600 on than just a folding machine. Not saying that foldings worthless, but why spend that much just to fold? the games are gonna be like $60 and so far I see nothing too impressive other than MGS 4
Have you noticed the price for PC games lately? Most are hitting the shelves at $59.99. I can see the PS3 being my next PC for the most part. I can go online, set up file sharing, and have the biggest freaking monitor of all times. And even with the cost of a 42"-50" Plasma TV, the PS3 and 5 games, I will still get out cheaper than a new High-End gaming PC. Which lacks games and a nice monitor, which will never even be close to 42" or 50" big for under $3000.
Sure people are saying "I won't be able to buy that it is to expensive etc... Etc...” well I have am a guy who saves his pennies to buy the things he wants or works those crap extra jobs to put away for the things I really want, and if cost is an issue than buy a Wii. Gaming on a $350 PC would drive me nuts... Now I do understand some people are in situations where pennies they save go to bills, my view on that is just get what you can buy and enjoy life, it can always get better.
Everyone has a hobby, mine is just High-Def gaming and super computing... I sure do hate exspensive hobbies... but they are so much fun
That is not so true... EA games has releasxed BFME2 on Xbox 360 which I actually like better than a Mouse and Keyboard. Things are changing in the gaming industry and it is happening faster than we would like...
Comes down to a matter of preference I guess. I like keyboard shortcuts in RTS games, and I can't get used to FPS games on a console controller. Goldeneye is probably the only exception for me, but the N64 controller was better designed for FPS than the Xbox or PS controllers (and even then, I found the control to be better on an emulator ).
Comes down to a matter of preference I guess. I like keyboard shortcuts in RTS games, and I can't get used to FPS games on a console controller. Goldeneye is probably the only exception for me, but the N64 controller was better designed for FPS than the Xbox or PS controllers (and even then, I found the control to be better on an emulator ).
You would be suprised on the amount of shortcuts that can be set on the Xbox 360 contoller.
And we typically play different kinds of games on consoles than we do on PCs. RTS and FPS games are much easier to play with a PC's mouse & keyboard, IMHO anyway. RPG, sports, and fighting games seem to make more sense on a console. I want a powerful console, but I don't care if it's more powerful than my PC or not.
100% true. That's why these kinds of games succeed on consoles and flop on PCs (If they even really exist), and vice versa.
Anyone remember the last time they saw fighting game for the PC that wasn't ported, or originally for a console? 1, 2, 3... Not it.
Thrax
🐌Austin, TX Icrontian
Comments
Hehehe.
http://folding.stanford.edu/FAQ-PS3.html
Hopefully it'll let us put in our team/username
now if you could just get the F@H client on Xbox Live .....
:smokin:
Is that over the consoles lifespan? How long would it actually take to attain that with the Cell processor that's in there????
I did a bit of research and came up with this...
GigaFlop (Gflop) - The ability of a system to compute one billion floating point operations in one second. AMD's K6-2 processor and Motorola's G4 processor can achieve speeds of over 1 Gflop, for example, and newer chips can do multiple Gflops. The problem with trying to measure Gflops is determining a standard method of measuring floating point operation or instructions. Even if you do this, it's not clear that the measurement would reflect on real world usage.
So if the Cell CPU's can run at 100 gigaflops that is 33.333 gigaflops per sec per CPU.
According to Apple:
- Two superscalar 2.3GHz PowerPC G5 processors = 10.1 Gigaflops
According to AMD:
- 1 AMD Athlon FX-60 CPU = 2.6 Gigaflops
According to Nvidia:
- 1 6800Ultra 256MB PCI-E = 40 Gigaflops
Note: more info on GPU's folding can be found at F@H and we all know GPU's can fold much faster than any CPU...
Now this guy has come up with an intresting read but I think his gigaflops are off as Apple list the G5 2.3Ghx CPUs as posting 10.1 Gigaflops per sec. he list them as 30? so I take his post with a grain of salt.
http://movementarian.com/2006/08/18/flops-mips-watts-and-the-human-brain/
But than I saw this blog which shows the difference in single and multi threaded apps, so I guess it all depends on what it is proccessing...
http://www.geekpatrol.ca/blog/74/
It's another perk to not add to the reason why I am already buying one
The "Power" of the PS3 will be incomparable to a desktop PC, as they are not remotely designed the same.
I have better things to spend $500-600 on than just a folding machine. Not saying that foldings worthless, but why spend that much just to fold? the games are gonna be like $60 and so far I see nothing too impressive other than MGS 4
That is not so true... EA games has releasxed BFME2 on Xbox 360 which I actually like better than a Mouse and Keyboard. Things are changing in the gaming industry and it is happening faster than we would like...
The main reason why I am liking the PS3 is for the main fact of the Blu-ray player and HDMI... and not to mention true 1080p goodness... and on top of that games for the PS3 look much more realistic....
Have you noticed the price for PC games lately? Most are hitting the shelves at $59.99. I can see the PS3 being my next PC for the most part. I can go online, set up file sharing, and have the biggest freaking monitor of all times. And even with the cost of a 42"-50" Plasma TV, the PS3 and 5 games, I will still get out cheaper than a new High-End gaming PC. Which lacks games and a nice monitor, which will never even be close to 42" or 50" big for under $3000.
Sure people are saying "I won't be able to buy that it is to expensive etc... Etc...” well I have am a guy who saves his pennies to buy the things he wants or works those crap extra jobs to put away for the things I really want, and if cost is an issue than buy a Wii. Gaming on a $350 PC would drive me nuts... Now I do understand some people are in situations where pennies they save go to bills, my view on that is just get what you can buy and enjoy life, it can always get better.
Everyone has a hobby, mine is just High-Def gaming and super computing... I sure do hate exspensive hobbies... but they are so much fun
Comes down to a matter of preference I guess. I like keyboard shortcuts in RTS games, and I can't get used to FPS games on a console controller. Goldeneye is probably the only exception for me, but the N64 controller was better designed for FPS than the Xbox or PS controllers (and even then, I found the control to be better on an emulator
You would be suprised on the amount of shortcuts that can be set on the Xbox 360 contoller.
100% true. That's why these kinds of games succeed on consoles and flop on PCs (If they even really exist), and vice versa.
Anyone remember the last time they saw fighting game for the PC that wasn't ported, or originally for a console? 1, 2, 3... Not it.
Rag Doll Kung Fu
Jurassic Park: Dinosaur Battles
Oh you meant real fighting games....