Talk:Xenon (processor): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:14, 9 October 2007

+stub, look at Cell (microprocessor) for comparison - laughable how poor this article is. --Col. Hauler 19:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's to be expected since Cell is a design which will be (or is already) avaliable for whomever want's to buy it, whereas Xenon is a custom built CPU specifically for Microsoft. There's really NO documation available if you're not under NDAs. -- Henriok 22:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also the Cell has a lot of industry hype behind it while the Xenon is just a gimped PPC chip. PPC isn't as "interesting" since it's a commodity chipset. It's even less interesting since the Xenons are missing a large portion of what other PPC chips have while the Cell is a whole new architecture. No slagging the Xenon as I'm sure people would rather program with a tri-core symmetric PPC rather then a asymmetric 1 PPC + 6 SPU vector engine. It's easier if not more powerful.

Mips Numbers?

Are there any mips numbers for this CPU yet? If there are they should be included. If Microsoft isn't releasing them, I suppose we'd have to take bogomips numbers from a linux distro running on it.

It'll be a while until anyone gets Linux running on an Xbox 360 (if ever), but we might extrapolate performace from published numbers of the PPE in Cell (Xenon is practically a tri-core PPE), or marketing babble of the expected performace of Xbox 360. Regarding "MIPS", we probably will have to do with "FLOPS" -- Henriok 00:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VMX128 register file

The meaning of the sentence "2× (128×128 bit) register file for each VMX128 unit, 6 in total." is not clear, because it is not clear from the article context what a VMX128 unit is. I think that it's better to talk about the implemented register file in the context of "core" or "microarchitecture". -- 217.224.70.87 19:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better this way? -- Henriok 20:56, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not "SIMD: VMX128 with 2× (128×128 bit) register files for each core." ? -- 217.224.103.3 12:36, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taken -- Henriok

Xenon and Xbox 360

May someone find relevant references about this issue? There are just two contradict claims. --millosh (talk (meta:)) 18:06, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Err, umm, to which issue are you referring? The claim that Xenon "is using cores similar to the Power Processing Element (PPE) in the Cell microprocessor."? Guy Harris 18:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Xenon could not perform at 116 GFLOPS and although I understand that its theoretical, its not an accurate measure of it's performance. ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Werner ghost (talk • contribs) 04:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 +stub, look at [[Cell (microprocessor)]] for comparison - laughable how poor this article is. --[[User:Col. Hauler|Col. Hauler]] 19:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 :That's to be expected since Cell is a design which will be (or is already) avaliable for whomever want's to buy it, whereas Xenon is a custom built CPU specifically for Microsoft. There's really NO documation available if you're not under NDAs. -- [[User:Henriok|Henriok]] 22:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
+::Also the Cell has a lot of industry hype behind it while the Xenon is just a gimped PPC chip. PPC isn't as "interesting" since it's a commodity chipset. It's even less interesting since the Xenons are missing a large portion of what other PPC chips have while the Cell is a whole new architecture. No slagging the Xenon as I'm sure people would rather program with a tri-core symmetric PPC rather then a asymmetric 1 PPC + 6 SPU vector engine. It's easier if not more powerful.
 == Mips Numbers? ==