ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:Meh, who knows.  These days, GPUs are actually far ahead of CPUs in terms of speed,

GPUs are fast cause of parallel processing (correct me if I'm wrong), which is not very viable in CPUs. So that comparison is pointless, since they do different stuff. If u force a GPU to use a single pipeline (to mimic a CPU), it'll be way slower than a CPU.

Anyways, i read this interesting article that someone actually programmed a GPU to encode a bunch of audio by feeding the audio in as video data and stuff, and utilizing all the pixel pipelines, and it supposedly worked really well, faster than a CPU.

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:which is why some tests (using top-notch CPUs and GPUs) indicate that SLI actually slows down the computer.  So the extra CPU power present in the PS3 may not have a detrimental effect.

In terms of gaming, isn't the gpu usually the bottleneck, not the cpu, i mean isn't gaming more gpu intensive? ...And the PS3 has a weaker gpu, and stronger cpu...

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:And price to performance wise, the PS3 is a lot better.

For solely playing games, likely. It's designed for that purpose.

Yet neither of us will probably ever get a PS3... ... which relates back to that massive console vs PC argument i had with Ge64 a long time ago, which i don't really want to re-visit.

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:8 PS3s are enough to build a supercomputer...

My uni has this interesting super computer built of i think 64 or 128 Pentium 3's they got really cheap from some company which needed to do an upgrade.

I can get some pentium 2 computers for almost free... lets make a super computer!!! ... ofcourse, there's always the problems of space, and cooling, and skill.

(This post was last modified: 23/07/2007 05:37 PM by Assassinator.)