Hi,

Today's CPUs are in the 3000 to 4000 MHZ clock speed range.

Today's GPU's are in the 250 to 600 MHZ clock speed range.

I am wondering if GPU's are holding back game graphics performance because
their clock speed is so low ?

For example suppose someone programs a game with the following properties:

3 GHZ for os, game, network, etc logic
1 GHZ for graphics.

Would that game run faster than any other game ?

How about

2 GHZ for game
2 GHZ for graphics.

I know CPU's have generic instructions. so 4 GHZ means a cpu can do about
4000 miljoen generic instructions.

What does GPU 500 mhz mean ???? 500 miljoen pixels ? 500 miljoen triangles
? 100 miljoen T&L + 400 miljoen pixels ? what ?

Bye,
Skybuck.

Skybuck Flying wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Today's CPUs are in the 3000 to 4000 MHZ clock speed range.
>
> Today's GPU's are in the 250 to 600 MHZ clock speed range.
>
> I am wondering if GPU's are holding back game graphics performance
> because their clock speed is so low ?
>
> For example suppose someone programs a game with the following
> properties:
>
> 3 GHZ for os, game, network, etc logic
> 1 GHZ for graphics.
>
> Would that game run faster than any other game ?
>
> How about
>
> 2 GHZ for game
> 2 GHZ for graphics.
>
> I know CPU's have generic instructions. so 4 GHZ means a cpu can do
> about 4000 miljoen generic instructions.
>
> What does GPU 500 mhz mean ???? 500 miljoen pixels ? 500 miljoen
> triangles ? 100 miljoen T&L + 400 miljoen pixels ? what ?
>
> Bye,
> Skybuck.


Instead of looking at clock speed you should be paying more attention to
bandwidth. The latest CPU and GPU are far more powerful than they need to
be. We are just only seeing the beginning of games that take advantage of
the faster gear we have had for the last 6 months or so. You would hardly
notice on a PII 450 and FX5200 though.

Skybuck Flying schrieb:
>
[snip]

Please do not crosspost across language hierarchies (applying some
common sense in group selection might not hurt).

Thanks.

F'up2p.

Stephan
--
Meine Andere Seite: http://stephan.win31.de/
PC#6: i440BX, 1xP3-500E, 512 MiB, 18+80 GB, R9k AGP 64 MiB, 110W
This is a SCSI-inside, Legacy-plus, TCPA-free computer
Mail to From: not read, see homepg. | Real gelesene Mailadr. s. Homep.

> Today's CPUs are in the 3000 to 4000 MHZ clock speed range.
>
> Today's GPU's are in the 250 to 600 MHZ clock speed range.

And 10-30 times more powerful for doing per pixel computations at lower
frequency of the core clock without breaking a sweat. Since the 3dfx voodoo
graphics the tables were turned and the gap is just growing as time goes on.

^- gross simplifcation and inaccurate generalization!

"Stephan Grossklass" <sgrokla-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:c85282$ve6$01$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Skybuck Flying schrieb:
> >
> [snip]
>
> Please do not crosspost across language hierarchies (applying some
> common sense in group selection might not hurt).

Oops... I didn't notice it was a de language group. =)

"Stephan Grossklass" <sgrokla-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:c85282$ve6$01$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Skybuck Flying schrieb:
> >
> [snip]
>
> Please do not crosspost across language hierarchies (applying some
> common sense in group selection might not hurt).

Oops... I didn't notice it was a de language group. =)

"Stephan Grossklass" <sgrokla-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:c85282$ve6$01$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Skybuck Flying schrieb:
> >
> [snip]
>
> Please do not crosspost across language hierarchies (applying some
> common sense in group selection might not hurt).

Please do not change the original posting destinations... since you CC
yourself to it...

But in this case I forgive you since you seem interested in receiving
replies ?

( I was like huh ? why is outlook trying to send an e-mail !? didn't I click
reply group ?! )

Skybuck.

Skybuck Flying wrote:

Oh my god... Freaks like you are who make the "Netiquette" for german
speaking newsgroups useful.

Could you *please* leave the de.-hierarchy again and in future postings
*always* set a followup-to exactly *one* newsgroup where your topic is
*on* topic?

Crossposts without followup-to exactly ONE group are completely stupid.
If you set a followup-to, the people who are interested in your topic
will surely follow you to the ONE newsgroup that fits. If you do not set
any followup-to, all other readers are annoyed by the flood of useless
and off-topic messages.

So, please: GO. And do not come back unless you have at least a *tiny*
clue about how usenet works.

It's impossible for me to set a followup-to a correct group because
*none* of the groups you have chosen is correct for your topic. So,
please: DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POST IN USENET. The discussion is OVER for
me, I will NEVER EVER read any of your usenet postings again, as
probably any other reader of the de.*-groups you have randomly chosen
from your group list.

I've now set a followup-to poster. So, if you want to discuss with me, I
will *only* accept mails. No posts in usenet, as I will not read them
anymore and because this is now *completely* off topic in *all*
newsgroups this thread is posted to.

Filter score adjusted, discussion over for me.

Alan

--
Bitte nur in die Newsgroup antworten! Re:-Mails rufe ich nur selten ab.
http://www.schwinde.de/webdesign/ ~ http://www.schwinde.de/cdr-info/
Mail: at__0815<at>hotmail<punkt>com ~ news-2003-10<at>schwinde<punkt>de

In article <c84uc9$fvf$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)
says...
> Hi,
>
> Today's CPUs are in the 3000 to 4000 MHZ clock speed range.
>
> Today's GPU's are in the 250 to 600 MHZ clock speed range.
>
> I am wondering if GPU's are holding back game graphics performance because
> their clock speed is so low ?

Actually it is the other way around. The CPUs are holding up the GPUs.
Measuring by clock speed alone is completely pointless as Intel Pentium
M CPUs have shown.


--
Conor

If you're not on somebody's **** list, you're not doing anything
worthwhile.

Skybuck Flying wrote:

> Today's CPUs are in the 3000 to 4000 MHZ clock speed range.
>
> Today's GPU's are in the 250 to 600 MHZ clock speed range.

Did nobody tell you, that the clock rate alone is not the main
performance indicator?


> I am wondering if GPU's are holding back game graphics performance because
> their clock speed is so low ?

No, they don't. The do the work parallel, not serial.

Just think about doing an addition of N numbers:
Do it serially (a+b=s1; s1+c=s2 ...) or in parallel.

The algorithms computed in GPUs are much more complex than in CPUs.


> For example suppose someone programs a game with the following properties:
>
> 3 GHZ for os, game, network, etc logic
> 1 GHZ for graphics.
>
> Would that game run faster than any other game ?

The maximum clock rate is limited by the target process and the
complexity of the design. Nearly every IC is working at maximum clock rate.


Your topic is a little bit related to digital circuit design, but as
everybode can see, a newsgroup like comp.lang.vhdl is heavy for you. In
the chosen newsgroups about programming your question is completely
off-topic, because it's a hardware-related question. But in a custumer
newsgroup about hardware your topic is also a little bit too heavy.


f'up to poster set


Ralf