> >All three consoles could run NR2002 (remember 640x480 is pretty maxed
> >out on a TV) perfectly fine,
> I was under the impression that the PS2 and Gamecube at least had
> really bad FPU's. The framerate hog in NR2002 is more floating point
> performance than graphics, no?
> Jason
It is the integer performance of the PS2 which is lacking, the FPU is
better than a P3. I couldn't find any GFLOPS figures for the Pentium
4, but Intel chips have always been poor on floating point operations.
The FPU in the PS2 is somewhere between P3/P4 in performance, but the
PS2 is superscalar, while the P4 uses SSE (SIMD) to accomplish the
same kind of thing. The P3 has no such inherent or additional
hardware.
Here is something I found at:
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,15038,pg,1,00.asp
-quote-
How adept is it? According to MicroDesign Resources, the processor can
handle 6.2 gigaflops at 300MHz. A single gigaflop equals one billion
floating-point operations per second. MDR says that makes the chip two
times faster than a 733-MHz Pentium III and 15 times faster than a
400-MHz Celeron...
-endquote-
(I snipped the polygon counts because they are always vastly
exaggerated - 75 million polys per second? I think not, lol!)
Interestingly, a 733MHz Celeron is in the xbox, so floating point
performance in the PS2 is somewhere between 2 and 7 times faster. I
don't want to start a PS2/xbox/PC argument, because I don't care.
Of course, this all comes from the internet and could all be lies... I
don't personally know or care which processor has bigger numbers, all
I care is that the PS2 can handle games like NR2002. My 500Mhz Celeron
could handle it, so a chip with a FPU more than ten times faster would
have no trouble at all. Incidentally, I *think* the GameCube is faster
still than the PS2.
The graphics are calculated completely separately. The PS2 EE doesn't
do any graphics calculations, because the PS2 has two Vector units
VU0/VU1 which are designed with that function in mind. I think SSX
only uses one of these Vector units for graphics, and uses the other
to do realtime Dolby Digital positioning and stuff, so you can see how
powerful these guys are. Plus, output at 640x480 doesn't push them
very much on each frame, so they can focus on FPS and fluidity, rather
than individual frame quality needed for 1280x1024 or some other high
resolution needed on a 17" monitor.
Whoa, that turned into a real long post...