Say Hello to the PS3's (Sub £10) GPU // A Review of the 7800GTX 

Theres life in the old dog yet? Another great video.

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="112">1:52</a> devevevelepers?

Actually the RSX of the PS3 was helped by the SPU in the CELL CPU, the SPU can be programmed like Shader on newer graphics card to perform CPU task for helping CPU or GPU task for helping GPU(what devs called pain in the ass to code). That why the PS3 Perform better. If Sony will have used FULL version of CELL on the PS4(Cell with 12 SPU instead 8) the PS4 will do far better than she can achieve now.

And that 256mb vram can play GTA V????

Wow a 7800GTX, that's way higher than a GTX 1080!

The PS3 also had a lot of help from the Cell when it came to graphics and effects, that is why the rather anemic GPU could do impressive things.

I remember when my friend had the 512MB version this, while my pc had the mighty FX 5200. Imagine my reaction when I finally experienced Doom 3 running at 60 fps on ultra at 1280x1024, while I could barely average 15 fps @ 640x480.

"Hello Kelpy g?" "Kelpy g machine fixed" "ASENDED"

@Budget-Builds Official, this is an excellent video which offers great information for historical reference on PC vs Console hardware. I would also like to add that many PS3 games ran below 720P down to as low as 540P in order to keep frame rates stable they would then upscale to 720P or 1080P to give the impression of better graphics. Similar to how PS4 Pro is using checkerboard rendering to fake 4K imagining but not nearly as advanced.

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="36">0:36</a> doggo pushes PS3

Kelpy G sold me on this video (And of course the benchmarks haha) Subbed :)

fell in love with your channel over the last 2 hours

tough to compare a PC version vs PS3 version of a game, considering there's more than just menu graphics settings that are tweaked for performance (like tweaked shadow settings, lighting, etc. or even lower poly models)

Did you try to overclock the 7800GTX to match the PS3 speeds?

who keeps putting all these GPUs in your garden

That Sims 2 background music though :D

Remember that the current Half Life 2 version on steam runs on the Source 24 engine, which is completely unsuitable for running on hardware available at the game's launch, there are torrents that still have the game running on the original Source 7 version.

This was the first card I ever bought with my own money back in 2007, it made games of the time run amazing, at least in my mind they did... lol

PS3 used NVIDIA gpu PS4 uses AMD cpu and gpu

That Sims 2 background music, love it.

I always love the Source Engine because of how optimised it is to older and underpowered systems, I can run Portal 2 (little bit more advanced in graphics compared to Half-Life 2) at around 30 fps on low/medium settings on my Intel HD Graphics card.

That 256 mb ram and 256 mb vram runs GTA 5...!!!

Your RSX “Reality” is so adorable! <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="31">0:31</a>

Damn, thats some smooth kelpy G in the background

I distinctively remember seeing a man carrying around 2 of these cards on a bus one time about 2 years ago during college . My friend asked me what kind of gpus they were, to which I said they were definitely 7800GTXs, when we got home, he looked it up and was so surprised that I knew exactly what they were without any boxing or name titles anywhere lol

You are missing the fact that BOTH Skyrim and Crysis on PS3 - while they may be PLAYING at 720p the internal render resolution is often just 50% to 80% of that at best! This is the *Console Optimization* you are speaking of. Same deal with CURRENT gen consoles, while they may render some games at 1080p they have adaptive quality settings of a LARGE variety! They change render resolution on the fly and can EVEN do it to just SPECIFIC parts of the screen or "Assets" such that an NPC Character WAY off in the distance, instead of being rendered at the full 1080p or whatever the NATIVE OUTPUT resolution is (the res that shows up on your monitor or recording software) - assets that are already so far away that they are blurry can have their render resolution lowered IN REAL TIME! This stuff is RARE for PC games, especially modern ones, as there are COUNTLESS GPUs and CPUs such as even just an i3-2100 are enough to game at 1080p 60 fps at high/ultra setting on a GPU as low power and cheap as a GTX 1050 Ti o if you can stretch you budget a LITTLE more, an RX 470/570 at their MSRP of ~$190 cannot be beat in gaming Price/performance for 1080p! But the GTX 1060 3 GB is a good alternative, which will trade blows with the RX 470/570. Or if you go Second hand on eBay you can score even a GTX 980 for around $150!

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="61">1:01</a> Ill give you a like just because of the sims 2 backround music

Love the Sims 2 music in The beginning :)

vulcan is exactly this, trying to bring the console optimisationability (is that a word?) to the pc. consoles have much better driver optimizations plus its a unique system so they can avoid assuming stuff and just optimize for said hardware without having to target "the one that works better for the mayority"

30fps in cs:go is not "raw graphical horse power" lol. On board graphics can get more than that.

Really like your videos! But voice audio is quite low? coming from other videos I seem to need to up the volume every time.

It's worth pointing out that for a lot of later games, (roughly Uncharted 1 onwards), the CELL was used for graphics processing as that was originally how the system was intended to run and it produced much better results than the reality synthesiser. So some games may look better on the PS3 compared to using the PC's graphics card counterpart, but that is due to the fact that the CELL was designed to do both processing and graphics processing and do it to such a high level at the time.

Not sure how you calculated 400Gflops for the RSX. Gflops = ALUs * clock in GHz * operations per core per clock, in this case 24 * 500 * 2. RSX would be around 240. The 400 came from Sony marketing back then, adding the CPU and GPU flops. Bandwidth and ROPs were also cut down from the 7800 to 7600 levels, so it was a hybrid between them.

HL2 on PS3 is a gimped version, the x360 runs and looks a lot better. Crysis is different and shouldn't be compared. The reason it uses Cryengine 3 instead of 2 was because the console couldn't work with that engine, it wasn't able to scale all the way to back. Crysis on consoles is a mixed bag, since it removed graphical features while adding newer graphical features.

Need for speed ran flawlessly on my ps3 and I clean it regularly trying to keep it in good shape I have the middle of the line ps3 so not the fat but not the super slim ... Changing the thermal paste really helped quiet it down before the fans used to ramp up quickly on gta v. I just can’t believe that my ps3 has lasted as long as it has graphics can’t compare to a gtx 1070 but it sure plays old titles really well

Happy 420 subs! You should benchmark a Celeron 420 to celebrate.

If you used wikipedia for the 400Gflops, it's wrong, people are still editing it to be higher a decade later lol. 400 was what Sony advertised combining the CPU and GPU Gflops. RSX was around half of the total. Shader cores * clock speed * 2 is the equation for GPU Gflops on paper. Even adding in the vertex shaders it was not near 400. Nvidia back then, to counter ATI+Microsoft on paper, counted multiple operations issued with one instruction as Operations / sec, while everyone else did not.

I wish Sony had doubled the main ram and video ram of the PS3 to 512MB each.

great video and awesome channel, but why is the volume 15db lower than the average youtube video?

sims music in the background. nice :D

The PS3 GPU is quite similar to the 7800GTX but the RSX is optimized for gaming only (other stuff to) the 7800GTX too, but not like the RSX. The clocks are higher aswell. But I think you could call that a PS3 GPU, also I would try to go with the 8800GTX! Well done Video! Love all your videos and watched all of them! ;)

When the video started I wasn't sure if it was cgi

Love the sims music mateee

Your dog seems to be very cool while idle... Ever thought about overclocking it?

Those Crysis settings are nothing alike, why are they not the same?

it was the 7900gtx that was comparable to ps3 not 7800

Ik this is a dumb question but can you add anything from a ps3 to a pc so you can improve the pc performance, like the graphics card or sum?

Brillant work you are easily surpassing Digital Foundry.

Great video As always. They are both similar on paper but damn, console optimization. But, since console is locked at 30, i don't care. Also you can't play Quake III on your PS3 so I'd much rather have the 7800GTX

It is not just optimizations for the GPU, they offload many task to the CPU which is incredible powerful in the PS3, especially for that time.

Great video, however we should not forget a one important thing in the PS3 which is the CELL cpu. The cpu was calculating a pretty big part of the graphics, and thx to the flex system they were able to use each other's memory if i am right. So even though if the gpu is similar like 7800GTX it never will match with PC configuration.

I like your go-to drying location

Nah thanks ill just bash into my ps1 a gtx 1080 and im good to go..

is it just me, or does the Crysis' PC footage NOT run on actual Medium settings? Looks more like all-Low. Not to mention the console port of Crysis have a lot of assets and stuff literally removed to make it run better.

I used a 7900 GTX last year in the winter when preparing to make my first gaming rig. It played Crysis on medium with no trouble. It's a really good card. I loved my PS3 as well and sadly it died to cockroach infestation and a new cat marking it, but it was interesting to learn where the graphics came from.

Nice. Now if you can do a Windows OS burden video showing how much system resources each version of windows uses on the same systems. As an example Win 10 with lots of GB's HDD space, does not do a whole lot more than windows 95 with its 45MB install.

How is Half Life 2 running so bad? I remember playing on my GT7600 with more than 60 fps on max flawlessly at 900p.

Intel HD 530 is better than both of these

There is the PS1 library for the PS3 too. Which I believe is upscaled to HDMI, though no idea what the frame rate etc is there.

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="129">2:09</a> Oh man. I almost forgot my daily dose of smooth jazz.

the dog wait u finish this video to get back his ps3 that u lend from it!!

Nyoooom

Did all of the PS3 models use NVIDIA or did any of the newer ones use AMD at all?

I still have two of these 😍😍😍 they where amazing AF.

That ps3 kicked in power for a while, even compared to that time high end pcs. Too bad PS4 cant be said it does the same, they should have stayed with Cell processor to develop further.

The Xbox 360 was a real beast back in 2005, Xenos GPU had UNIFIED SHADERS which made it a superior to the PS3's RSX which had separate vertex and pixel shader pipelines. PS3 got saved by the CELL but it was so hard to program that only Sony first party studios actually fully used the system as intended. Sony should have waited 1 more year and maybe ship the PS3 with double the RAM, faster bluray(ps3 has 2x) and a better GPU that had unified shaders. Have to say the 360/PS3 generation was freaking amazing because both consoles had better specs than most high end gaming PCs. The 360 Xenos GPU was based on the Radeon X1800 XT which cost 500 bucks in 2005! In 2013 when the Xbox One/PS4 came out their specs where akin to medium range PCs, if they had GPUs that cost what the 360/PS3 had back in the day then the Ps4/Xbox One would have had 4 teraflops!!! but they didn't and both consoles had around 1 teraflops in their vanilla 2013 before they mid upgrade (easiest way to explain)

Many last gen console games run in sub hd resolutions and the image is then upscaled to 720p/1080p. Also, even though they target 30fps most of the time, they don't hit that target all of the time. I've heard pretty bad things about the ps3 versions of Half Life and Skyrim, though I haven't played them myself. As for Far Cry, the engine was heavily modified so it could actually run properly on consoles and it still doesn't run all that well. But, yeah. I'd probably pick the ps3 over a pc with a 10-year-old gpu.

the rsx and cell both share graphics work loads . the cells ALUs are also able to execute graphics code such as pixel shading and vertex

Im starting to think that consoles are just computers that have shitty stuff crammed in them.

Unfortunately, Uncharted 2 or 3 wont run on even a 1080 Ti. :(

love that kelpy g

Nice comparison and I understand that this is the main focus of the channel. However one is a gpu and one is a console with a bunch of hardware coming together under the control of the developer. Really, this is the only generation of game consoles that can be fairly compared to pc counterparts (or parts you can get over the counter *wink *wink) due to the design of the hardware but also the development of video games in general nowdays.

Did you know ps3 Have 512Mb ram dont ask how

Spongebob music

Please do another comparison video, but this time with the RPCS3 emulator, it would be great!

Did you over clock the card to be the same as the ps3 gpus clock speed?

I3 6100 is definetly not a testing cpu... Is very weak cpu

try gta5 inposible

The PS3 was originally not mean to use a GPU. The Cell architecture was so revolutionary that it was to use the 8 simplified cores for texture filtering, vertex shading, pixel shading and so on. The problem with this plan is that the cell was delayed and delayed and delayed and would have ended up with something with the power of a geforce 2 or whatever many years after it was at all relevant.

This hardware blew my mind considering what it had to offer and what it delivered. Guys for heaven sake, buy this from anywhere u get, just the feeling that I have it makes me so so happy.

maby the ps3 over clocks it self

Ran 7800 GTX's in SLI paired with a FX-60 in my rig until the 7900GT came out. Swapped over to a pair and my son scored some 7800 GTX SLI goodness along with an Athlon 64 X2 4000+

Do a video gaming on the Nvidia Quadro fx 580!

HAL: www.techopedia.com/definition/4288/hardware-abstraction-layer-hal Windows is quite layered, so there are all of these steps that the software has to go through in order to talk to the hardware. This is done for security reasons for the most part. DirectX 12, for example, decreased the amount of abstraction layers from previous implementations of DirectX. This process is known in the tech community as "getting closer to metal". Well, console titles are programmed using near ISA (homedir.jct.ac.il/~citron/ca/isa.html) so the software talks almost directly to the hardware skipping a bunch of latency and delays imposed by abstraction layers. Less latency means a lower render time on a per frame basis which results in a higher amount of frames being delivered per second. AMD explains this process here while explaining Asynchronous compute : www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php/fotostrecken/artikel-galerien/amd-asynchronous-shaders/amd-asynchronous-shader-20f7dd1f.html. Each one of those tasks listed there are to occur for a single frame. Many of them require the CPU or Memory or some other part of the system to communicate with the GPU. Sometimes to load up textures, other times for memory fetches and whatnot. Point being that each one of those tasks takes longer on a PC when compared to a console as there are more layers the GPU or CPU or Memory have to go through in order to talk to one another on PCs. So it's not really about optimizations, those do play a role in that being able to talk to the hardware in near ISA means that you can optimize for certain GPU features not being taken advantage of by the current Direct X instruction set, but mostly about lowering the render time on a per frame basis resulting in a much higher frame rate by simply cutting out middle Men imposed by the Operating System and other abstraction layers such as the API itself (DirectX in this case). This is why consoles tend to perform so well when compared to the hardware they have under the hood.

They're sub to view ratio is amazing how do they not have more subs

Andy Knowles ,You a GENIUS...👏

Is that kelpy G in the background?

What is the nvidia 7900gtx like because I found one in my shed

I mean, yeah the 7800GTX variant used on the PS3 was often helped by the CPU. The PS3 wasn't supposed to have a GPU at all, they added that 7800GTX very late in dev. Basically in some of the more pushing games for the system, the GPU was helped a lot by the CPU, that explains why the PS3 ended up pushing big titles like The Last of Us.

You said you had the EVGA version of this card... But the fan on it said MSI?

you deserve more subs

So I could do this and use the second GPU just for RU-vid?

you didnt change the paste on the mem chips. -?

How does it compare to the Nvidia GT-710?

Its like my mali-G 830 mp3 on muy Galaxy Alpha 5 (2017) its amazing

The CPU plays a part in it as well, x86 and Cell are widely different, but I can't tell if that would skew the results apart from giving the GTX a little boost from using a modern CPU. You should try comparing the Wii U to its rumoured equivalents: HD 6450 (160 shaders), HD 4670 (320 shaders) and HD 8470D iGPU (192 shaders). Great interesting video! I love seeing console hardware and what it's based on.

That Kelpy G background music.

hell yeah kelpy g in the background

is that the sims 2 buy music i hear in the background very faintly

Didn't the ps3 cpu assist with some of the graphics tasks? Uncharted being one example? Shader tasks could be offloaded to it. A similar video with the xbox360 would be cool. It had a beefier gpu than the ps3. Something like a radeon x1950 equivalent with 48 unified pixel pipelines?