Final-Fan said:
jetrii said:
Final-Fan said:
jetrii said:
Final-Fan said:
jetrii said:
mjk45 said:
@jetrii,how much of the r&d is funded by IBM and how much by Toshiba and Sony and didn't i just read somewhere about Toshiba recently start putting them into there products and a cell super comp coming on line and 20m ps3 is a lot of chips so it seems to be picking up even if its slower than they like but i get your point about the market having to widen ,especially with programmable GPU's ready to take off even if it means a complete mobo overall |
IBM did most of the development but Sony and Toshiba contributed a lot in funds. Also, keep in mind that the Cell processors being used in supercomputers are not the ones inside of the Playstation 3. The Playstation 3 Cell processor is fairly weak and outdated compared to the one IBM uses. IBM uses the PowerXCell 8i which had its SPEs remade with improved memory addressing and dual-precesion improvements. |
Even so people have been doing some amazing shit with PS3 clusters! I've seen any number of news items on so-and-so doing this or that with 'em. |
That's because the Cell processor in the PS3 is still pretty powerful and much cheaper than an IBM Cell server. Sony should actually be worried about that, although it gives them good press, it makes them lose money and lowers their tiein ratio. |
See, that sounds opposite from what you said before, even though both statements are consistent. Although how outdated can it be, if the clusters are so effective?
Agreed on the tie-in ratio though, which makes what the PS3 actually has more impressive.
Also agreed on the clusters being a loss for Sony. But someday -- some glorious day! -- it'll sell for a profit; and in the meantime it is awesome PR. |
Cell CPU in PS3 - Powerful compared to x86/PPC and cheaper than an IBM Cell server
Cell CPU in PS3 - Fairly weak and outdated compared to the PowerXCell 8i
I don't see how those 2 things are opposites. The clusters may be effective compared to x86 but they are outdated compared to the PowerXCell 8i clusters. Also, effective compared to what? To x86? To a supercomputer?
The only reason people use the PS3 in projects like those is because they are cheap. If IBM Cell servers cost the same, trust me, no one would touch the PS3 with a 100 foot poll for those projects. |
Don't get bent out of shape. I know the statements aren't actually contradictory -- I said so. I was just noting that calling it 'weak and outdated' in the one post gives a much different impression than calling it 'decently powerful yet cheap' in the other. Do you deny that that's the case?
But I still have to disagree with the assessment that it's outdated. It depends on your definition, I guess -- but the fact that the PS3 solution is effective enough for big, serious projects to choose to use it says to me that it's not "outdated" if it's able to compete in the marketplace with the latest supercomputers. (From black hole research to Air Force projects IIRC.)
If Ferraris cost the same as Toyota Camrys, there might be a different car in my dad's garage right now. What's your point?
|
The Cell processor in the PS3 is outdated compared to the superior version used by IBM. My dad's 2004 Lotus is outdated compared compared to my 2008 Lotus. His 2004 Lotus may be able to smoke your 2009 Mustang, but compared to other versions of itself, it's outdated.
The Cell in the PS3 is not outdated compared to today's x86 processor, far from it, however, it is outdated compared to newer Cell processors. That is why it can complete in the marketplace, because it's not outdated compared to other chips, however, it is outdated in its class. That is the point I was making all along, I'm sorry if you thought I meant it was outdated compared to today's x86 CPUs.
