How many FLOPS are in game consoles?

Printable View

May 27th, 2008, 22:43
wraggster

How many FLOPS are in game consoles?

Analyst Opinion - Floating Point Operations Per Second - FLOPS - one of the more obscure processor performance indicators, and one of the oldest ones. Over time, it has been modified with prefixes such as M (mega), G (giga), T (tera) and will soon get a P (peta). “Tera” describes a million millions - one trillion (1012) - which is a whole lot of anything whether it is cycles (Hertz), bytes, dollars, or FLOPS.

Recently I was asked how many TFLOPS are in all the game consoles shipped to date. There are two answers to that question. You can look at it from the perspective of all the game consoles built and you can look at this question with specific consoles in mind.

Let’s look at the combined TFLOPS rating of all game consoles, which actually provides two answers as well.

If you count central processor FLOPS then you have one answer and if you count the FLOPS potential of the GPU and add it to the CPU’s FLOPS, then you have the second answer. This second version is controversial since the FLOPS of the GPU aren’t used in computations and some therefore claim that the GPU should not be counted as it simply represents a theoretical number. Others argue that GPUs are used in computation - the computation of shader operations. Both sides, however, agree that there isn’t yet a benchmark that can measure this discipline. And therefore I conclude that we shouldn’t use them in evaluating the CPU FLOPS of game consoles.

The following table lists the FLOPS in consoles:

Xbox | CPU: 1.5 GFLOPS | GPU: 5.8 GFLOPS | Combined: 7.3 GFLOPS
Xbox360 | CPU: 115 GFLOPS | GPU: 240 GFLOPS | Combined: 355 GFLOPS
Dreamcast | CPU: 1.4 GFLOPS | GPU: 0.1 GFLOPS | Combined: 1.5 GFLOPS
Wii | CPU: 60 GFLOPS | GPU: 1 GFLOPS | Combined: 61 GFLOPS
PS2 | CPU: 6 GFLOPS | GPU: 0 GFLOPS | Combined: 6 GFLOPS
PS3 | CPU: 218 GFLOPS | (GPU: 1800 GFLOPS) | (Combined: 2018 GFLOPS)

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/37621/128/
May 27th, 2008, 23:18
alanparker05

Huh??? Ahh my brain hurts
May 27th, 2008, 23:45
Axelius

Wow, I never thought that the PS3 is so far ahead from the Xbox360.

But the wii reaches 61GFLOPS (lol at the 1GFLOP for the GPU:rofl:)? Well, I thought it would be only a little higher than the PS2's score:rolleyes:

I wonder how much the PSP can reach?
May 28th, 2008, 00:11
deceiver117

Take these numbers with a bucket of salt...115GLOPS for the x360 or 218 for the PS3? I smell marketing bull.
May 28th, 2008, 00:20
ian h

wtf wtf wtf my head also hurts!
May 28th, 2008, 00:34
goshogun1

Everyone knows higher GFLOPS = better games!
PS3 has 2018 vs 360's 355. What more proof do you need?! It's in the numbers man! :rolleyes:
May 28th, 2008, 00:41
Triv1um

No, more FLOPS doesn't mean better games. That comment is weak. Gameplay makes a good game, and the PS3 have few. (C'mon, i'm a 'PS3 fanboy' but i have to look at the facts, right?)

Yes, the PS3 is more powerful etc. but the 360 has better games at the moment. [/fanboy crap]

The PS3 will rise in time, and I bloody well hope it does so my investment can mean something.
May 28th, 2008, 00:54
onetwentyeight

he was being sarcastic!
now i'm going back to play some folding@home!
p4432_Seq41_Amber03 FTW!
May 28th, 2008, 01:00
quzar

Um... am I the only one who has been keeping track of sales? Of course the PS3 has more flops.

...
May 28th, 2008, 01:23
pibs

Quote:

Originally Posted by quzar

Um... am I the only one who has been keeping track of sales? Of course the PS3 has more flops.

...

Sick BURN!:eek:
May 28th, 2008, 01:41
goshogun1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triv1um

No, more FLOPS doesn't mean better games. That comment is weak. Gameplay makes a good game, and the PS3 have few. (C'mon, i'm a 'PS3 fanboy' but i have to look at the facts, right?)

Yes, the PS3 is more powerful etc. but the 360 has better games at the moment. [/fanboy crap]

The PS3 will rise in time, and I bloody well hope it does so my investment can mean something.

LOL, I was being sarcastic. My fave system right now is Wii, and I have ps3 and 360. Why? Because Nintendo makes games I enjoy. I could care less about system wars, or the top GFLOP. And I agree, Sony...wheres the games? I know MGS IV is gonna be great, but after that? FF 13 in 2010? (probably sooner, but who knows)
May 28th, 2008, 01:51
Triv1um

Quote:

Originally Posted by goshogun1

LOL, I was being sarcastic.

I noticed after i posted :P and couldnt be arsed to delete. I will just stay looking stupid, fine with me. :cool:
May 28th, 2008, 02:31
watupgroupie

Well to be kinda technical the 360 has a better gpu because it can process faster resulting in possible better graphics without dropping framerate unlike the ps3.
May 28th, 2008, 03:01
kcajblue

i dont get this thread.
numbers suck.
May 28th, 2008, 05:36
MZeroEW2

Better GPU? kinda crazy we all know that Nvidia is better then ATI anyday, not to mention ATI stole the tech for ther xbox GPU from Nvidia. and that would be the programmable shader pipelines. that ms got from Nvidia during there run in with the xbox 1.

and Tflops or Gflops are just a measurement of the raw power of the system. it's not hard to realize that 9 cores beat 3 cores.
May 28th, 2008, 05:58
quzar

Quote:

Originally Posted by MZeroEW2

Better GPU? kinda crazy we all know that Nvidia is better then ATI anyday

Except for about 50% of the time. Even then, absolutely never in picture quality.
May 28th, 2008, 06:15
alanparker05

I think you're all forgetting about the wii it is much less floppy than the rest but it regularly beats the others on gameplay and sales figures so all these flop numbers mean nothing if they just make pretty games that people will forget about in 6 months
May 28th, 2008, 10:30
goliath182

PS3 is much more FLOPy than I first though.
May 28th, 2008, 11:42
woop

Quote:

Originally Posted by MZeroEW2

Better GPU? kinda crazy we all know that Nvidia is better then ATI anyday, not to mention ATI stole the tech for ther xbox GPU from Nvidia. and that would be the programmable shader pipelines. that ms got from Nvidia during there run in with the xbox 1.

and Tflops or Gflops are just a measurement of the raw power of the system. it's not hard to realize that 9 cores beat 3 cores.

Thats retarded, ATI never stole jack from Nvidia. Didnt the HD 2900XT also have a unified shader architecture to? Also who has the most powerful GPU on the market today? Its pretty much a tie, The 3870X2 and The 9800GX2. Stupid fanboyism. Fanboyism = Bad...... Go fight some one for the worlds biggest E-Penis ok.
May 28th, 2008, 14:27
mcdougall57

Pure numbers never mean anything.

But yeah the PS3 has much more potential than currently shown, but no developers are willing to take the plunge in cost to properly exploit the PS3's magnificent architecture.

Why do sony always have to be different? cell processors when we were fine with the normal 32/64 bit architecture? And those damn memory sticks will always annoy me, every other manufacturer was fine with SD cards but sony insisted on creating their own brand to put on a premium. I suppose blue-ray won fair and square. But I wouldn't call it a win yet...
May 28th, 2008, 14:48
trugamer

Surely this tells us what we already knew, PS3 is the most powerful, followed by the Xbox 360 and then the Wii.
May 28th, 2008, 15:53
Raither

1800 GF for the GPU of the ps3 is bullshit.
A 8800ultra has 500. 1800 would mean a performance liek the polaris.
May 28th, 2008, 16:34
watupgroupie

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanparker05

I think you're all forgetting about the wii it is much less floppy than the rest but it regularly beats the others on gameplay and sales figures so all these flop numbers mean nothing if they just make pretty games that people will forget about in 6 months

To be honest, I hate most of the games on wii. They are all very linear and very, very frustrating to me. I think it all comes down to personal choice. Some people really like Wii games(I have friends who do) and some people love ps3 games. I personally love 360 games, stop making this a war and just enjoy whats there.
May 28th, 2008, 16:39
Shadowblind

Quote:

Originally Posted by watupgroupie

To be honest, I hate most of the games on wii. They are all very linear and very, very frustrating to me. I think it all comes down to personal choice. Some people really like Wii games(I have friends who do) and some people love ps3 games. I personally love 360 games, stop making this a war and just enjoy whats there.

Your not alone, but lets try to avoid this conversation.

FLOPS (still don't get it) is relative. It hasn't proven one system to be able to play better then another, so whats the point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by quzar

Except for about 50% of the time. Even then, absolutely never in picture quality.

My Nvidia has the compatibility of a dead squirrel. its more graphically advanced per cost, but its performance is far worse.
May 28th, 2008, 17:14
Uberman

Read the responses to the original article. The PS3 numbers are Sony's bullsh*t marketing spin. It is the machine's "potential", but as one respondent pointed out, the PS3 is not capable of reaching even 10% of that number.

So, you cannot compare the XBox 360 numbers to the PS3 numbers. It's meaningless territory where only fanbois tread. If the PS3 has an advantage on the XBox 360, it's only slight.
May 28th, 2008, 17:56
robman84

I remember when all this were just megaflops.
May 28th, 2008, 17:59
robman84

Oh, and I personally can't wait for us to reach YottaFLOPS. It just sounds so amusing. I want to go into PC World in 2036 and ask, "How many YottaFLOPS can this laptop do then?"
May 28th, 2008, 18:36
dgila

one question

..........:mad: What about PSP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:mad::mad::mad:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA........
May 28th, 2008, 18:37
waternova

Flops are just how many instructions the system can handle per second. PS3, if the numbers are correct, is waaay over-kill for games. That is how PS3 does all the water effects. cool? yes. necessary for fun game? no. In the end, what developers do with a system decides which one is more enjoyable.
May 28th, 2008, 18:44
Shadowblind

Quote:

Originally Posted by waternova

Flops are just how many instructions the system can handle per second. PS3, if the numbers are correct, is waaay over-kill for games. That is how PS3 does all the water effects. cool? yes. necessary for fun game? no. In the end, what developers do with a system decides which one is more enjoyable.

I think the water has more to with the engine then anything else...
May 28th, 2008, 19:38
jaffaman99

This is obviously a typo. The PS3 has actually a worse GPU Id believe the numbers if you took one of the 0's off the PS3's GPU flops number.

Its obviously not right, I think the ps3 prob does have a few more theoretical flops in its CPU but I dont play superPi very often.
May 29th, 2008, 08:23
Joe88

and this is why folding @ home is only available only on the ps3
May 29th, 2008, 16:42
ZeroQuest

Programming for the PS3 is like trying to get 8 people to screw in a light bulb. Each one has to be dedicated to a single task. You cannot simply multiply the processing power of one of the PS3's processors by 8 and get an accurate value. Not every thread uses the same amount of processing time, and the other 7 cores WILL be idle a lot of the time. Unless they're doing something non-game dependent. (Rendering water)

In most cases a 200gflop processor will render a game smoother than 3 100gflop processors.

The reason folding@home is so fast, each of the 8 processors can run separately from the other 7.

The 360 suffers from the same problems, but to a lesser degree. It's much easier to split your code over a smaller number of cores.
May 29th, 2008, 17:25
watupgroupie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe88

and this is why folding @ home is only available only on the ps3

folding @ home is a complete joke in my oppinion. It seems like a novelty item more than something I'd use regularly. I think the 360 could maybe pull something like it off to but in my oppionion would be pointless.