The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
For the full article:
http://cube.ign.com/news/40543.html
Thought this may be interesting to some of you...
IGNcube: We have to ask: How do you think Gekko stacks up against the Intel CPU inside of the Xbox and the much-touted Emotion Engine inside PlayStation 2?
IBM, Mike West: Well, I'm going to do it from a non-Processor Architect point of view. It's difficult to make those comparisons. The particularly difficult comparison is the comparison against the Emotion Engine. The architecture of the Playstation 2 is very, very different from the architecture of the GameCube and the Xbox. The architecture of the Emotion Engine cites a lot of the graphics-type functionality within it. In the case of the Xbox and GameCube it's actually executed in processor companionship. Okay, the graphics processor on the system. I've heard criticism that the Emotion Engine is difficult to program -- I believe there are companies making a living on making tools for that. I don't know, I think... I don't really want to make direct comparisons. The one thing I think that's really unfortunate is that the one comparison that should never be made is between the Intel chip and the PowerPC chip on the megahertz (MHz). My kids are into this type of marketplace and they've had questions like, "Well, how come the IBM processor is only 485 MHz when the Intel one is 733 MHz."
I think it's a pretty well known fact that megahertz don't equal megahertz across different architectures like that. I think if you stack it up in terms of FLOPS -- you know floating-point performance, throughput, bandwidth, and sustainable performance and things like that, whether in benchmarks or game reality, I actually believe our 485 MHz RISC processor is a hell of a lot better gaming processor than Xbox's CISC processor. And, it's really hard to make a comparison between Gekko and the Emotion Engine because of the difference in architecture and approach. Obviously Sony came out a little bit earlier than Nintendo with that product and it suffers a little bit from megahertz but it does have some massive SIMD engines. So if you want to calculate all the FLOPS available inside the Emotion Engine it dwarfs either of the two other processors. But in the total system if you look at what is being done by the FLOPS that Sony has in the Emotion Engine you'll see that a lot of those FLOPS are being covered by hardware engines that exist in the nVIDIA chip or in the Flipper chip. So it's a different system balance. It's a difficult question because you're comparing apples to oranges to bananas.
http://cube.ign.com/news/40543.html
Thought this may be interesting to some of you...
IGNcube: We have to ask: How do you think Gekko stacks up against the Intel CPU inside of the Xbox and the much-touted Emotion Engine inside PlayStation 2?
IBM, Mike West: Well, I'm going to do it from a non-Processor Architect point of view. It's difficult to make those comparisons. The particularly difficult comparison is the comparison against the Emotion Engine. The architecture of the Playstation 2 is very, very different from the architecture of the GameCube and the Xbox. The architecture of the Emotion Engine cites a lot of the graphics-type functionality within it. In the case of the Xbox and GameCube it's actually executed in processor companionship. Okay, the graphics processor on the system. I've heard criticism that the Emotion Engine is difficult to program -- I believe there are companies making a living on making tools for that. I don't know, I think... I don't really want to make direct comparisons. The one thing I think that's really unfortunate is that the one comparison that should never be made is between the Intel chip and the PowerPC chip on the megahertz (MHz). My kids are into this type of marketplace and they've had questions like, "Well, how come the IBM processor is only 485 MHz when the Intel one is 733 MHz."
I think it's a pretty well known fact that megahertz don't equal megahertz across different architectures like that. I think if you stack it up in terms of FLOPS -- you know floating-point performance, throughput, bandwidth, and sustainable performance and things like that, whether in benchmarks or game reality, I actually believe our 485 MHz RISC processor is a hell of a lot better gaming processor than Xbox's CISC processor. And, it's really hard to make a comparison between Gekko and the Emotion Engine because of the difference in architecture and approach. Obviously Sony came out a little bit earlier than Nintendo with that product and it suffers a little bit from megahertz but it does have some massive SIMD engines. So if you want to calculate all the FLOPS available inside the Emotion Engine it dwarfs either of the two other processors. But in the total system if you look at what is being done by the FLOPS that Sony has in the Emotion Engine you'll see that a lot of those FLOPS are being covered by hardware engines that exist in the nVIDIA chip or in the Flipper chip. So it's a different system balance. It's a difficult question because you're comparing apples to oranges to bananas.
I do believe that's pretty much what I have been saying aaalllllll along, though.
Whoops - a little over the head there!
ssxpro wrote:
> So... this is bad news for PS2! It seems to be the biggest FLOP. Ah well. :-)
i would'nt say that considering the ps2 is currently the best games console.
> So... this is bad news for PS2! It seems to be the biggest FLOP. Ah well. :-)
i would'nt say that considering the ps2 is currently the best games console.
So... this is bad news for PS2! It seems to be the biggest FLOP. Ah well. :-)
He has a good point all hardware is different. my machine is similar to the spec that was tested on a web page called toms hardware and he put it against a P4 1.7Ghz mine is a K7 1.4Ghz both with geforce 2 GTS and the K7 beat it at almost everything due to having the better maths processing.
But then again if a game looks good and more importantly plays good then hardware doesn't matter.
But then again if a game looks good and more importantly plays good then hardware doesn't matter.
For the full article:
http://cube.ign.com/news/40543.html
Thought this may be interesting to some of you...
IGNcube: We have to ask: How do you think Gekko stacks up against the Intel CPU inside of the Xbox and the much-touted Emotion Engine inside PlayStation 2?
IBM, Mike West: Well, I'm going to do it from a non-Processor Architect point of view. It's difficult to make those comparisons. The particularly difficult comparison is the comparison against the Emotion Engine. The architecture of the Playstation 2 is very, very different from the architecture of the GameCube and the Xbox. The architecture of the Emotion Engine cites a lot of the graphics-type functionality within it. In the case of the Xbox and GameCube it's actually executed in processor companionship. Okay, the graphics processor on the system. I've heard criticism that the Emotion Engine is difficult to program -- I believe there are companies making a living on making tools for that. I don't know, I think... I don't really want to make direct comparisons. The one thing I think that's really unfortunate is that the one comparison that should never be made is between the Intel chip and the PowerPC chip on the megahertz (MHz). My kids are into this type of marketplace and they've had questions like, "Well, how come the IBM processor is only 485 MHz when the Intel one is 733 MHz."
I think it's a pretty well known fact that megahertz don't equal megahertz across different architectures like that. I think if you stack it up in terms of FLOPS -- you know floating-point performance, throughput, bandwidth, and sustainable performance and things like that, whether in benchmarks or game reality, I actually believe our 485 MHz RISC processor is a hell of a lot better gaming processor than Xbox's CISC processor. And, it's really hard to make a comparison between Gekko and the Emotion Engine because of the difference in architecture and approach. Obviously Sony came out a little bit earlier than Nintendo with that product and it suffers a little bit from megahertz but it does have some massive SIMD engines. So if you want to calculate all the FLOPS available inside the Emotion Engine it dwarfs either of the two other processors. But in the total system if you look at what is being done by the FLOPS that Sony has in the Emotion Engine you'll see that a lot of those FLOPS are being covered by hardware engines that exist in the nVIDIA chip or in the Flipper chip. So it's a different system balance. It's a difficult question because you're comparing apples to oranges to bananas.
http://cube.ign.com/news/40543.html
Thought this may be interesting to some of you...
IGNcube: We have to ask: How do you think Gekko stacks up against the Intel CPU inside of the Xbox and the much-touted Emotion Engine inside PlayStation 2?
IBM, Mike West: Well, I'm going to do it from a non-Processor Architect point of view. It's difficult to make those comparisons. The particularly difficult comparison is the comparison against the Emotion Engine. The architecture of the Playstation 2 is very, very different from the architecture of the GameCube and the Xbox. The architecture of the Emotion Engine cites a lot of the graphics-type functionality within it. In the case of the Xbox and GameCube it's actually executed in processor companionship. Okay, the graphics processor on the system. I've heard criticism that the Emotion Engine is difficult to program -- I believe there are companies making a living on making tools for that. I don't know, I think... I don't really want to make direct comparisons. The one thing I think that's really unfortunate is that the one comparison that should never be made is between the Intel chip and the PowerPC chip on the megahertz (MHz). My kids are into this type of marketplace and they've had questions like, "Well, how come the IBM processor is only 485 MHz when the Intel one is 733 MHz."
I think it's a pretty well known fact that megahertz don't equal megahertz across different architectures like that. I think if you stack it up in terms of FLOPS -- you know floating-point performance, throughput, bandwidth, and sustainable performance and things like that, whether in benchmarks or game reality, I actually believe our 485 MHz RISC processor is a hell of a lot better gaming processor than Xbox's CISC processor. And, it's really hard to make a comparison between Gekko and the Emotion Engine because of the difference in architecture and approach. Obviously Sony came out a little bit earlier than Nintendo with that product and it suffers a little bit from megahertz but it does have some massive SIMD engines. So if you want to calculate all the FLOPS available inside the Emotion Engine it dwarfs either of the two other processors. But in the total system if you look at what is being done by the FLOPS that Sony has in the Emotion Engine you'll see that a lot of those FLOPS are being covered by hardware engines that exist in the nVIDIA chip or in the Flipper chip. So it's a different system balance. It's a difficult question because you're comparing apples to oranges to bananas.