QUOTE(steveju @ Mar 30 2007, 10:23 AM)
Care to elaborate a bit on that?
I don't see how 10M Xb360's couldn't beat 2-4M PS3's
EDIT: There's no way the XB360 can beat my crappy Athlon XP CPU, it has a temp of +60C on idle.
Well, about 25k PS3's already outperform 200k PC's + 12k Macs *combined* (see http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=osstats)
. Maybe that already clears things up for you.
Point is, the PS3 architecture is extremely well-suited for these kinds of applications, because they use highly parallelizable algorithms. The architecture of the Xbox 360 could do pretty well compared to the PS3, if used to its full potention, but even then it would be nowhere near the PS3's. Remember the PS3 has 7 DSP cores @3.2 GHz available that can operate completely independent of each other, with a PPC core to coordinate everyhting and handle the general-purpose stuff. A 360 has 3 PPC cores at 3Ghz. XNA uses only 1 (one) of them, and it doesn't even use it to its full potential as XNA code is interpreted bytecode, which can be assumed to have at least 10 to 20% performance overhead.
I would guess a native folding@home client using all three cores would probably perform at about 50% of a PS3, but that's just a guesstimate.This post has been edited by d-range: Mar 30 2007, 07:00 PM