Support NeoGAF

[Orayn]

The core i7 is just 4 pentium 3's duct taped together? How many watts does it draw? What is the transistor count?

Duct-taping Pentium IV's together was actually something Intel did with Pentium D. The Intel Core series came from the Penium M, which was a low power mobile variant of the Pentium III that Intel made when they realized that that Pentium IV used too much power and ran too hot to be practical for laptops.

How do those compare to the core i7 line? Someone educate me. Perhaps that dev from that metro game is an idiot and cannot recognize a beastly cpu.

Can you relent a tiny bit and agree that we can't call it a completely unchanged 1999 architecture quite yet?

 

[mugurumakensei]

How do those compare to the core i7 line? Someone educate me. Perhaps that dev from that metro game is an idiot and cannot recognize a beastly cpu.

Oh, the Wii CPU's not beastly and is likely slightly slower than the Xenon. However, when factoring in the fact that audio doesn't have to be done on the CPU, it's performance is roughly equal or slightly better than Xenon. Granted, a lot of ports are still doing audio decoding on the CPU on the Wii U even though they don't have to which is a problem but oh well.

 

[Saint Gregory]

Oh, the Wii CPU's not beastly and is likely slightly slower than the Xenon. However, when factoring in the fact that audio doesn't have to be done on the CPU, it's performance is roughly equal or slightly better than Xenon. Granted, a lot of ports are still doing audio decoding on the CPU on the Wii U even though they don't have to which is a problem but oh well.

Wait what?

 

[Diablos54]

Wait what?

I dunno if that's true, but the Wii U has a DSP (I think) for sound processing. Considering it could take up to a whole core (On racing games or games with really complex sound) on the 360, it helps take some of the heat of the CPU.

 

[Trevelyan9999]

The wii u has cpu architecture from 1999.

I'm surprised you've gotten away with posting the same "1999" jargon for so long......


Yes the Wii U CPU has roots and architecture to something from the 750FX line, but the Wii U CPU can still be considered brand new based on:

• It has 3 cores
• It runs Out of Order Execution
• It's been "enhanced" with greater clock frequency, better latency, more L2 cache
• It's doesn't have to process much with sound due to the DSP
• It's been constructed totally differently from the Wii & Gamecube single core CPU's.

What some of the previous posts have said were correct also, a lot of the CPU's that run our PC games today have architecture based on things from a very long time ago. Does that make these new CPU's "old tech" because they have roots in the past?

The Wii U CPU has already been confirmed to do things that were never possible on the original Wii, so this is in no way just 3 Broadway CPU's taped together.

 

[Saint Gregory]

I dunno if that's true, but the Wii U has a DSP (I think) for sound processing. Considering it could take up to a whole core (On racing games or games with really complex sound) on the 360, it helps take some of the heat of the CPU.

Yeah, which is why this is crazy news if true. The WiiU CPU wasn't designed to handle audio functions so I'm interested in hearing where this info is coming from.

 

[KageMaru]

Oh, the Wii CPU's not beastly and is likely slightly slower than the Xenon. However, when factoring in the fact that audio doesn't have to be done on the CPU, it's performance is roughly equal or slightly better than Xenon. Granted, a lot of ports are still doing audio decoding on the CPU on the Wii U even though they don't have to which is a problem but oh well.

Do you know this for a fact or are just speculating? Makes no sense to leave hardware unused.

 

[JordanN]

The CPU has finally got its own wiki page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espresso_(microprocessor)

 

[mugurumakensei]

Do you know this for a fact or are just speculating? Makes no sense to leave hardware unused.

Eh, I'm basing it off the fact that some of the middleware didn't get optimized to use the audio dsp till the middle part of this year. I'd imagine, if middleware developers took that long, some in-house engines likely aren't optimized yet.

 

[donny2112]

I was referring rather to the notion that games slated for March for PC/PS360, or games already released, are secretly also in development for Wii U.

They may be, but if so, they'd probably come out later.

But there isn't really any logical rationale for Warner Bros Interactive to be able to announce Injustice for April for the Wii U and thinking Dead Space 3 and Bioshock are secretly to come in Feb.

EA and Rockstar have both been very skeptical of the Wii U's prospects, so, yeah, probably no real chance of those coming, even later. Further Capcom (e.g. RE6) or Ubisoft (e.g. Watch Dogs) games might be more likely, but that still remains to be seen.

 

[Saint Gregory]

The CPU has finally got its own wiki page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espresso_(microprocessor)

Typical Wiki inaccuracies, no mention of duct tape anywhere.

Eh, I'm basing it off the fact that some of the middleware didn't get optimized to use the audio dsp till the middle part of this year. I'd imagine, if middleware developers took that long, some in-house engines likely aren't optimized yet.

That would certainly be yet another twist if true, it would likely get dismissed as more damage control though. Hopefully we'll start seeing second gen WiiU software sooner than later so we can see what's really going on.

 

[donny2112]

Hopefully we'll start seeing second gen WiiU software sooner than later so we can see what's really going on.

This made me think of the Factor 5 Rogue Squadron comments that it was a 2nd-generation GameCube game available at launch. Nintendo let their two most prolific technical developers (i.e. RARE and Factor 5) go on their own and die/be in living death. Would be very interested in seeing what the old Factor 5 or the old RARE could do with the system, but alas...

 

[squidyj]

why are people replying to apophis? that's like replying to pramath.

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

Oh, the Wii CPU's not beastly and is likely slightly slower than the Xenon. However, when factoring in the fact that audio doesn't have to be done on the CPU, it's performance is roughly equal or slightly better than Xenon. Granted, a lot of ports are still doing audio decoding on the CPU on the Wii U even though they don't have to which is a problem but oh well.

Isn't that mostly due to the Broadway having very weak vector processing? The audio has to be offloaded to a DSP and the physics to the GPU because leaving them on CPU would leave games sounding either very flat or taking up way more precious processing time than it should.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I'm kidding! People see numbers, see one is lower than another number from a few years ago and don't know how to process that (no pun intended). For Nintendo it's... oh look, Nintendo is once again way behind even last gen technology... but when it comes from Xbox's side, people start to think...oh MAYBE cpu clock speed isn't the only thing to make a system a next-gen capable system

Most rational people understand that in 2012, clock speed isn't everything. But again, if the goal is to argue that the Wii U's CPU is good, has anyone meanigfully segued from that clarification into an assessment where the CPU excels? Because I remain baffled as to why some feel that this is some sort of disingenuous attack against the Wii U.

Sure, focusing on the low clock speed may not be the best method for critiquing it, but is it really that important to harp on that fact? Because it just seems to me to be more of a distraction meant to obfuscate that there certainly isn't any praise about this facet of the hardware.

 

[Saint Gregory]

This made me think of the Factor 5 Rogue Squadron comments that it was a 2nd-generation GameCube game available at launch. Nintendo let their two most prolific technical developers (i.e. RARE and Factor 5) go on their own and die/be in living death. Would be very interested in seeing what the old Factor 5 or the old RARE could do with the system, but alas...

What's going on with Factor 5 now anyway, weren't they lobbying to develop for Nintendo again at one point? It would be nice to see them working on anything again after the disasterous gen they've had.

I trust Nintendo's internal developers are working on impressive software right now but I also hope that Nintendo is working with 3rd parties to get Nintendo specific teams set up in their studios. The lack of many current gen ports probably has a lot more to do with manpower than a Nintendo bias or concerns about the userbase.

 

[lightchris]

Yes the Wii U CPU has roots and architecture to something from the 750FX line, but the Wii U CPU can still be considered brand new based on:

• It has 3 cores
• It runs Out of Order Execution
• It's been "enhanced" with greater clock frequency, better latency, more L2 cache
• It's doesn't have to process much with sound due to the DSP
• It's been constructed totally differently from the Wii & Gamecube single core CPU's.

The raised clock speed mainly comes from the smaller production process in 45nm. If they did major changes to Broadways pipeline (as in more stages), they could have clocked it higher.
OoOE has been around since 1995 and isn't new to PowerPC 750.
The DSP is also nothing new. Many consoles had dedicated hardware for sound, including Gamecube and Wii.

The only major change I see is the support for multiple cores, which isn't trivial if the original architecture was not fit for it and should've cost some development time.

Of course I agree that you can hardly call it a 1999 CPU. Performance wise it isn't more than a ~2005 CPU though.

What some of the previous posts have said were correct also, a lot of the CPU's that run our PC games today have architecture based on things from a very long time ago. Does that make these new CPU's "old tech" because they have roots in the past?

No, but the changes Intel did to date are really huge. There isn't much left from the old times anymore.

 

[AmFreak]

I'm surprised you've gotten away with posting the same "1999" jargon for so long......


Yes the Wii U CPU has roots and architecture to something from the 750FX line, but the Wii U CPU can still be considered brand new based on:

• It has 3 cores
• It runs Out of Order Execution
• It's been "enhanced" with greater clock frequency, better latency, more L2 cache
• It's doesn't have to process much with sound due to the DSP
• It's been constructed totally differently from the Wii & Gamecube single core CPU's.

Every PPC 750 has OOE.
And yes the cpu is new (obviously).
But none of your points make it a new microarchitecture.

What some of the previous posts have said were correct also, a lot of the CPU's that run our PC games today have architecture based on things from a very long time ago. Does that make these new CPU's "old tech" because they have roots in the past?

Modern x86 cpu's have completly different microarchitectures then the first x86 one's, the Wii U seems to have the same as the 750 one. That's the difference.

The Wii U CPU has already been confirmed to do things that were never possible on the original Wii, so this is in no way just 3 Broadway CPU's taped together.

What is that supposed to mean? - If it was "3 Broadway CPU's taped together" it couldn't do things that aren't possible with the Broadway?

 

[Log4Girlz]

I'm surprised you've gotten away with posting the same "1999" jargon for so long......


Yes the Wii U CPU has roots and architecture to something from the 750FX line, but the Wii U CPU can still be considered brand new based on:

• It has 3 cores
• It runs Out of Order Execution
• It's been "enhanced" with greater clock frequency, better latency, more L2 cache
• It's doesn't have to process much with sound due to the DSP
• It's been constructed totally differently from the Wii & Gamecube single core CPU's.

What some of the previous posts have said were correct also, a lot of the CPU's that run our PC games today have architecture based on things from a very long time ago. Does that make these new CPU's "old tech" because they have roots in the past?

The Wii U CPU has already been confirmed to do things that were never possible on the original Wii, so this is in no way just 3 Broadway CPU's taped together.

True, many modern chips share roots with much older technology, but with the progress in technology these architectures have seen major overhauls resulting in dramatic performance increases.

The fear with the espresso is that it is only modestly altered and is essentially 3 broadways cpus combined with little modification. It would be safe to say in this scenario that we are basically dealing with '99 tech.

What do we have to substantiate these fears? Well for one the cpu is tiny even for a 45 nm cpu. The cpu is apart of a system with an average TDP of 40 watts. Which would be modest for any modern cpu on its own. And finally we have several developers expressing the cpu is challenging or "horrible and slow".

So to a skeptic, what is the more likely scenario? Is the espresso a heavily modified modern cpu? Or is it as we fear, a slightly tweaked gamecube cpu x 3?

 

[QaaQer]

True, many modern chips share roots with much older technology, but with the progress in technology these architectures have seen major overhauls resulting in dramatic performance increases.

The fear with the espresso is that it is only modestly altered and is essentially 3 broadways cpus combined with little modification. It would be safe to say in this scenario that we are basically dealing with '99 tech.

What do we have to substantiate these fears? Well for one the cpu is tiny even for a 45 nm cpu. The cpu is apart of a system with an average TDP of 40 watts. Which would be modest for any modern cpu on its own. And finally we have several developers expressing the cpu is challenging or "horrible and slow".

So to a skeptic, what is the more likely scenario? Is the espresso a heavily modified modern cpu? Or is it as we fear, a slightly tweaked gamecube cpu x 3?

and Nintendo is cost conscious, going with an older design is way cheaper.

 

[JohnnySasaki86]

It's not quite as simple as threads multiplied by work done, but what we've heard from Marcan suggests that the "overall performance" isn't that far from Xenon's. For what it's worth, the Wii U has a DSP while many 360 games dedicate an en entire thread to audio.

So what is the word then on the specific overall performance? Isn't that far from Xenon doesn't tell us much. Is it overall slightly weaker then Xenon, or about the same? I'm assuming Wii U cpu vs Cell would be an even bigger gap?

 

[A More Normal Bird]

It doesn't matter if it's an architecture first developed in 1997 or 2010 as performance was going to be ballparked around the Xenon level either way. It's pretty pointless to keep harping on about it. At least by reusing the architecture you gain BC and Nintendo get an experience edge for inhouse devs.

 

[Orayn]

So what is the word then on the specific overall performance? Isn't that far from Xenon doesn't tell us much. Is it overall slightly weaker then Xenon, or about the same? I'm assuming Wii U cpu vs Cell would be an even bigger gap?

There was an interesting thread that we had about the possibility of Wii U using this exact CPU, several months ago. In it, someone speculated that it would be worse for some applications, but better for others compared to Xenon, and a wash overall. And yeah, Cell beats pretty much everything on paper, but it's harder to compare in use.

 

[Fredrik]

So to a skeptic, what is the more likely scenario? Is the espresso a heavily modified modern cpu? Or is it as we fear, a slightly tweaked gamecube cpu x 3?

Just like i3/i5/i7 etc it's likely a brand new multi core CPU based on an older single core CPU with modifications to make it run better.

In the end of the day you just nerd to try any WiiU game out right now and you'll stop worry about it's power. Even if you're trying the worst PS3/360 ports you can still see that "a slighty tweaked gamecube cpu x 3" is, sorry to say, a stupid way to talk about it's power. Even New Super Mario U looks great when you're seeing it live on your own TV running in constant 60fps in glorious HD. And the first time you're running any game on the GamePad screen I know you'll say wow. For me it was Nano Assault Neo that made me go wow. Superb graphics, 60fps without a single framedrop, big screen, without crappy touch controls. It's like a Vita on overdrive. And then you have the fantastic ZombiU with great GamePad usage and a very awesome Demon's Souly gameplay. Love it love it love it!

WiiU is awesome right now. The dual screen gaming, off-TV play, Miiverse, doodle art/posting, etc. It's really really great.
But... 2 years from now, if PS4/720 is out, it might not be as awesome anymore... depending on what Sony/MS brings to the table besides higher specs of course.

But why worry? Live in the present! Enjoy one of gamings coolest new gadgets right now!

 

[Log4Girlz]

Just like i3/i5/i7 etc it's likely a brand new multi core CPU based on an older single core CPU with modifications to make it run better.

In the end of the day you just nerd to try any WiiU game out right now and you'll stop worry about it's power. Even if you're trying the worst PS3/360 ports you can still see that "a slighty tweaked gamecube cpu x 3" is, sorry to say, a stupid way to talk about it's power. Even New Super Mario U looks great when you're seeing it live on your own TV running in constant 60fps in glorious HD. And the first time you're running any game on the GamePad screen I know you'll say wow. For me it was Nano Assault Neo that made me go wow. Superb graphics, 60fps without a single framedrop, big screen, without crappy touch controls. It's like a Vita on overdrive. And then you have the fantastic ZombiU with great GamePad usage and a very awesome Demon's Souly gameplay. Love it love it love it!

WiiU is awesome right now. The dual screen gaming, off-TV play, Miiverse, doodle art/posting, etc. It's really really great.
But... 2 years from now, if PS4/720 is out, it might not be as awesome anymore... depending on what Sony/MS brings to the table besides higher specs of course.

But why worry? Live in the present! Enjoy one of gamings coolest new gadgets right now!

Vita on over-drive. Good description of the wii u

 

[Fredrik]

Vita on over-drive. Good description of the wii u

I looove the Vita so if you somehow turn that comment to negativity then it's your problem, only thing I miss is better battery life, 5 hours and WiiU would take over all my lazy couch gaming habits. Btw besides Nano Assault I can also highly recommend Trine 2 for off-TV play, the new touch controls make it like 10 times better than any other version. And same here, 60fps without a single framedrop. Looks absolutely gorgeus.

 

[Durante]

So what is the word then on the specific overall performance? Isn't that far from Xenon doesn't tell us much. Is it overall slightly weaker then Xenon, or about the same? I'm assuming Wii U cpu vs Cell would be an even bigger gap?

You can't just say "CPU A > CPU B" overall, unless you are comparing two CPUs with the same microarchitecture and different clock speeds or core counts.

However, a few things are clear when looking at what we know about the Wii U CPU now:
- it's massively weaker than Xenon for streaming floating point heavy code (~15 GFlops vs. ~115 GFlops theoretical FP performance limit)
- it's also likely to be weaker for non-SIMD code that isn't branch heavy, but not to the same extent
- it may be on par for very branch-heavy code due to the shorter pipeline

 

[Panajev2001a]

You can't just say "CPU A > CPU B" overall, unless you are comparing two CPUs with the same microarchitecture and different clock speeds or core counts.

However, a few things are clear when looking at what we know about the Wii U CPU now:
- it's massively weaker than Xenon for streaming floating point heavy code (~15 GFlops vs. ~115 GFlops theoretical FP performance limit)
- it's also likely to be weaker for non-SIMD code that isn't branch heavy, but not to the same extent
- it may be on par for very branch-heavy code due to the shorter pipeline

Well, shorter pipeline might not be all that does help (assuming both have decent and similarly capable branch predictors). We have more CPU cache and MEM1 should be a lower latency pool compared to main RAM in Xbox 360 which should reduce the stalls due to data cache misses. Also, data dependencies should be a bit less of a problem given the kind of core we are talking about.

 

[shinra-bansho]

• It has 3 cores
• It runs Out of Order Execution
• It's been "enhanced" with greater clock frequency, better latency, more L2 cache
• It's doesn't have to process much with sound due to the DSP
• It's been constructed totally differently from the Wii & Gamecube single core CPU's.

The Wii U CPU has already been confirmed to do things that were never possible on the original Wii, so this is in no way just 3 Broadway CPU's taped together.

Not to beat a dead horse too much but, point one and point five seem to be the same thing. The Broadway core apparently is already OoO iirc; that there's an audio DSP doesn't seem particularly relevant to whether the core is "brand new."

It's obviously a new CPU - that's not really in question whatsoever. But there isn't anything in what you posted that prohibits it from being based on die shrunk Broadway cores with more L2 cache.

 

[madmackem]

Wait someone sum it all up for me, so not as bad as first feared and a smidge better in some aspects than current consoles?.

 

[Oblivion]

What's going on with Factor 5 now anyway, weren't they lobbying to develop for Nintendo again at one point? It would be nice to see them working on anything again after the disasterous gen they've had.

I could be wrong (and I hope I am), but I believe F5 is no more.

 

[Oblivion]

- it's massively weaker than Xenon for streaming floating point heavy code (~15 GFlops vs. ~115 GFlops theoretical FP performance limit)

Are those numbers confirmed? I know Marcan said that it's weaker on that front, but didn't specify any numbers.

 

[Thrillhouse]

Wait someone sum it all up for me, so not as bad as first feared and a smidge better in some aspects than current consoles?.

Basically nothing has changed with this info. We knew the CPU was relatively weak, but it's part of the design and how consoles will be made in the future. Sacrificing CPU power in order to feed the GPU. All things accounted for, Wii U should be able to outperform PS360, like we've always said, but not dramatically.

 

[GhostTrick]

Basically nothing has changed with this info. We knew the CPU was relatively weak, but it's part of the design and how consoles will be made in the future. Sacrificing CPU power in order to feed the GPU. All things accounted for, Wii U should be able to outperform PS360, like we've always said, but not dramatically.

I'm not sure anymore that Wii U should be able to outperform PS360.
I'll stay in the "on par/slightly better" which is different from outperform.

 

[Vagabundo]

I'm not sure anymore that Wii U should be able to outperform PS360.
I'll stay in the "on par/slightly better" which is different from outperform.

Depends what you mean by out perform. As a system as a whole it should be able to produce better looking games with solid performance.

If you stress test different individual components you will get varying results.

We wont see what this thing is capable of until the 2nd/3rd gen of games for it.

 

[Thrillhouse]

I'm not sure anymore that Wii U should be able to outperform PS360.
I'll stay in the "on par/slightly better" which is different from outperform.

The GPU is substantially better. It has four times the RAM ( I know I know half is for the OS, but it's not like PS360s OS doesn't take up RAM as well, and Nintedo will surely unlock more in the future). And it has a decent eDRAM aswell. I don't really buy into the whole RAM-bandwith debacle either, didn't GC have lower RAM bandwith than the PS2 for example? Before that thread I had never even heard of anyone speaking of it as being important. The CPU, wich arguably is the least important aspect for pretty games, is roughly on par. So I'd say it has the potential of producing significantly better looking games.

The question is, who is going to tap that potential? Nintendo makes good looking games, that's for sure, but they do not make technically advanced games. It's unlikely any third party developer will make a big budget exlusive. So what is left, Retro? Sure, Metroid Prime was impressive for it's time, but it was ten years ago and Retro is a quite a different studio today. Their current tech-wizard capabilities and incentives are really unknown. It's not certain their game is meant to be graphical showcase either, it could be a new 2d plattformer for all we know.

 

[Durante]

Are those numbers confirmed? I know Marcan said that it's weaker on that front, but didn't specify any numbers.

The Wii U number is calculated from the specs. If the information about the clock speed and architecture is correct then so are those numbers. The Xenon one is from the net.

 

[Oblivion]

Both CPU and GPU were weaker I believe. As far as I understand, the initial techdemo were running von V1 kits, which were clocked at 1GH/400MHz, and the V3 kits released a while after E3 had the clocks at 1.25/550.

From a few pages back, but this is probably the best news I've heard so far in this thread. I thought both the Zelda and Garden demo were ace, and if they were done on weaker hardware, that means the next Zelda will be tits.

The Wii U number is calculated from the specs. If the information about the clock speed and architecture is correct then so are those numbers. The Xenon one is from the net.

Well...that is quite a difference isn't it.

 

[cyberheater]

Wait someone sum it all up for me, so not as bad as first feared and a smidge better in some aspects than current consoles?.

The WiiU cpu is outperformed by both PS3 and 360. It's a weak CPU.

The hope is that the GPU will be good enough to take the additional load that will be required of it.

 

[ZiggyRoXx]

The hope is that the GPU will be good enough to take the additional load that will be required of it.

Which I'm sure the clever chaps at Nintendo HQ will do so in amazing ways, but will anyone else be capable or bothered to do so, when there will be a path of least resistance open to them with PS4 and Xbox.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Are those numbers confirmed? I know Marcan said that it's weaker on that front, but didn't specify any numbers.

Unless they added more FPU's to each core, which would require quite BIG changes in the core itself (adding execution units is not an easy task... particularly if you want to keep them fed). The FPU in each core has been stated to be able to do paired-single floating points ops, two per clock cycle...

Espresso: 4 FP ops [pair of fused MADD's]/(cycle*core) * 1.24 GHz * 3 cores = ~14.88 GFLOPS.

Xenon: VMX units + FPU's: (8 FP ops/(cycle*core) + 4 FP ops/(cycle*core)) * 3 cores * 3.2 GHz = 115.2 GFLOPS (assuming its FPU can do paired-singles FP ops too).

 

[frankie_baby]

The WiiU cpu is outperformed by both PS3 and 360. It's a weak CPU.

The hope is that the GPU will be good enough to take the additional load that will be required of it.

is it?

 

[cyberheater]

From a few pages back, but this is probably the best news I've heard so far in this thread. I thought both the Zelda and Garden demo were ace, and if they were done on weaker hardware, that means the next Zelda will be tits.
.

The thing with both the Zelda and Garden demo is that it shows the GPU is capable enough. The Garden demo certainly is pushing geometry.

But there is minimal physics going on an all of the animation could have been pre scripted.

And why didn't they ship the demos on a disk with the WiiU's. That would have been great.

 

[Ashler]

And why didn't they ship the demos on a disk with the WiiU's. That would have been great.

This would have been pretty good. I'd love to have played with these tech demos.

 

[shinra-bansho]

It was already mentioned in this thread by Drinky Cow I think, although it was somewhat glossed over... But just looking at the Mobility Radeon HD4650, doesn't the shoe fit quite well with regard to a basis for the GPU?

Is something akin to this going to be a panacea to any deficiencies with the CPU come Durangorbis?

 

[wsippel]

Unless they added more FPU's to each core, which would require quite BIG changes in the core itself (adding execution units is not an easy task... particularly if you want to keep them fed). The FPU in each core has been stated to be able to do paired-single floating points ops, two per clock cycle...

Espresso: 4 FP ops [pair of fused MADD's]/(cycle*core) * 1.24 GHz * 3 cores = ~14.88 GFLOPS.

Xenon: VMX units + FPU's: (8 FP ops/(cycle*core) + 4 FP ops/(cycle*core)) * 3 cores * 3.2 GHz = 115.2 GFLOPS (assuming its FPU can do paired-singles FP ops too).

Pretty sure paired singles are exclusive to the 750 line, maybe even just certain 750 cores.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Pretty sure paired singles are exclusive to the 750 line, maybe even just certain 750 cores.

You are quite right probably, but I do not know how MS obtained the 12 FP ops per clock cycle number then, it should be 10 IMHO...

 

[Durante]

You are quite right probably, but I do not know how MS obtained the 12 FP ops per clock cycle number then, it should be 10 IMHO...

Yeah, I just checked some architecture documents about Xenon, and I find nothing to suggest more than 2 FP ops per core out of the non-VMX part of the chip. That would put it at
(8+2) * 3 * 3.2 = 96 GFlops
using the same calculation as Wii U's
4 * 3 * 1.25 = 15 GFlops

I have no idea how they get to the 115 number for Xenon that's all over the internet.

 

[Rolf NB]

Yeah, I just checked some architecture documents about Xenon, and I find nothing to suggest more than 2 FP ops per core out of the non-VMX part of the chip. That would put it at
(8+2) * 3 * 3.2 = 96 GFlops
using the same calculation as Wii U's
4 * 3 * 1.25 = 15 GFlops

I have no idea how they get to the 115 number for Xenon that's all over the internet.

Maybe they're just counting FMAD as 2 FLOPs, like everyone likes to do these days, and end up at (8+2*2)*3*3.2=115.2.

edit: Oh, nevermind, missed the part where you weren't sure about paired single instructions even existing.

 

[viewtiful_dru]

first I couldn't use bits to show which console is superior, and now I can't use GHz? What the hell can I use to win console war arguments now?