I prefer the Dragon Ball Z System.
But I thought the PS3 had the power of Cell.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
How to measure everything using GameCube Unit (GC's)
- Thread starter Unknown Soldier
- Start date
But I thought the PS3 had the power of Cell.
Agreed
Is this a secret third 176vs352 thread? http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1175838
Also, OP, we need to go deeper and go into decimals and subunits. How many GCs was NES, SNES, N64?
Hyperfludd
Member
This is a good post.
entremet
Member
Agreed.
Switch
docked: 392 GFLOPS
undocked: 153 GFLOPS (normal)
Eurogamer's reported undocked higher performance mode would give it 196 GFLOPS
(therefore slightly more powerful than Wii U in raw FLOPs).
*not taking into account AMD's RV7xx architecture (from 2008) vs Nvidia's Maxwell 2.0 architecture (from 2014-2015)
All in standard single precision fp32
not going to touch the half-precision fp16 issue
keraj37
Member
The answer would be -infinity, I guess as NES didn't have any GPU.
So it would be (0 / GC).
3Dfx Voodoos can't cook their own geometry -- they need the CPU to do it for them, lol.
Weltall Zero
Member
From it's wiki page:
You can get secondhand Gamecubes for about $50, for a total of 500 million dollars, so that would be nearly twice as expensive even discounting the duct tape.
Just for joking's sake, however, and assuming duct-taping meant "nearly free magical alien paralel tech that allows you to distribute computing tasks with no efficiency loss", I think the real kicker would be the energy costs of running 10 million gamecubes...
fantastico
Member
936,301.5 to fill an Olympic sized pool (not including the GB player) so approximately the same number as the worlds most powerful computer
nkarafo
Member
Wait, i thought the point of Voodoos was that they could render the 3D graphics themselves instead of the CPUs?
Cow Mengde
Banned
This actually makes perfect sense to me.
Outrun
Member
I think that we should not discount the importance of the duck tape.
The calculations that the OP executes only works if one is using 3M duck tape, not some cheap dollar store knock off.
3939 Duck Tape: Accept no imitations.
spookyfish
Member
Post of the Year, right here.
Slick Butter
Member
The XBOX was pretty darn powerful, yeah. The Wii is pretty much just a souped up Gamecube anyways. However, FLOPS don't necessarily equate to relative real world performance, especially if you are comparing different architectures.
bobbychalkers
Member
As much as I like the novelty of measuring computers in Gamecubes, raw numbers don't account for everything.
Yeah the original Xbox, its GPU did 20 GFLOPs.
But this is not what Microsoft had originally told us. When Xbox was officially announced at GDC 2000, Bill gates said the graphics process would do 140 GFLOPs, and be clocked at 300 MHz.
If that had been true, even with the final GPU clock speed being significantly lower, at 233 MHz, it still should be over 100 GFLOPs.
enter Nvidia's funny math aka NvFLOPs. They added up all the non-programmable operations of their GPUs in those days, somehow equating them to FLOPS. No idea how they figured it, but the reality was, the final Xbox GPU was 20 GFLOPs by normal measurements (I guess the twin Vertex Shaders @ 233 MHz).
The 20 GFLOPs figure was mentioned in Dean Takahashi's book 'Opening The Xbox'
Yeah but where does "secret sauce" factor into the gamecube unit of scale?
I mean, the Wii U had plenty of it for sure... and the switch's dock has at least 2x's as much secret sauce as the Wii U... maybe some multiplication factor?
Oh, and the Nvidia/AMD conversion, we need to remember that one, isn't 1Nvidia flop worth like 1.25 ATI/AMD flop (when it's convenient).
So with secret sauce and Nvidia, the switch is like nearing 1200GCU's or something right? lol
I mean, the Wii U had plenty of it for sure... and the switch's dock has at least 2x's as much secret sauce as the Wii U... maybe some multiplication factor?
Oh, and the Nvidia/AMD conversion, we need to remember that one, isn't 1Nvidia flop worth like 1.25 ATI/AMD flop (when it's convenient).
So with secret sauce and Nvidia, the switch is like nearing 1200GCU's or something right? lol
Gusy
Member
I think hardware T&L made its debut with the GeForce256 .. I think. Not sure if yhe TNT2 had it
You're right, the GeForce256 (NV10) was the first consumer graphics card / GPU to have transform & lighting. The TNT2 did not have it.
boxoctosis
Member
I think we also need to understand how many GameCubes you could fit in the standard European measure of area, Wales.
Reminds me of that fake Nintendo On target render that measured the power in Mario 64 castles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zX2smM87r14
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zX2smM87r14
InfiniteCombo
Banned
I'm all about alternate measurement units, so I'm with you OP.
One of the funniest "alternate units of measurement":
One of the funniest "alternate units of measurement":
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
It was a cube with the Game Boy Player.
Unknown Soldier
Member
The AMD/Nvidia conversion has to do with how many FLOPS is needed by the AMD card to have the same frame rate as the Nvidia card. This conversion isn't absolute as it's complicated to take into account drivers and design differences. I wasn't aware of this 1.25 thing.
The GameCube used a unique GPU design unrelated to any AMD or Nvidia designs used in PCs. In that regard it is the perfect unbiased measurement! That's why measuring in GameCube Units is the best unit of measurement!
nkarafo
Member
This can't be right. A Model 3 is slightly less powerful than a Dreamcast. And that's only on paper. In reality, i think the Model 3 is a better polygon pusher, i mean look at Scud Race and tell me if there's anything on the DC that comes close.i.e. GameCube is worth at least 6-12 Model3s
Now the Dreamcast is less powerful than a PS2 or a Gamecube but i don't think there is a huge gap between them. It's something like "the PS2 is about 30-40% more powerful than a DC" and "the PS2 is about 20% less powerful than a GC".
So i don't think a Gamecube is more than 2 or 3 times more powerful than a Model 3. You underestimate the power of the Model 3.
FlutterPuffs
Member
Incredible thread.
How many GCs is Scorpio?
How many GCs is Scorpio?
Slick Butter
Member
I guess like 700.
IronicSonic
Member
Glass Shark
Banned
.
SystemUser
Member
The Wii was a GC with a Genesis taped to the side. Who would think it was two Gamecubes? That is just silly.
cultureculture
Member
Assuming the same point in Dragon Ball time as the 1 GC ≈ 1 Vegeta and Nappa duct-taped together calculation, the closest I could identify is the Nintendo DS.
http://kyokojap.myweb.hinet.net/gpu_gflops/ has the DS at 0.6 GFLOPS, while Krillin's power level at the same point in time as the above comes to about 0.77 GFLOPs. I think the DS is actually slightly closer to Yamcha at that point in time, oddly.
Krillin's power level when training for the arrival of the Saiyans is listed as 206, which comes to about 0.09 GFLOPS. This is pretty close to the low end for the N64 listed on the same website in the paragraph above, which lists it at 0.1~0.2 GFLOPS.
Hope this helps. I failed maths in school a couple of times so I might be off.
I tried to calculate it from the GC specs and Google's result on the area of Wales in square km, and got:
1 GC = 0.000000794797688 Wales
To explain this to the man on the Clapham omnibus, to cover an area the size of Wales in duct-taped GameCubes, you'd need to duct-tape enough GameCubes to make at least 2,815 PS4 Pros, leaving a bit of room for the space occupied by the duct-tape. This doesn't take into account leaving space for proper ventilation of the GameCube as specified in the manual, so you shouldn't attempt to play PS4 Pro-enhanced titles under these conditions.
Again, hope this helps.