The Cell Processor....

[Final-Fan]

crumas2 said:

Final-Fan said:

That was apparently more offensive than I meant it to be.  Sorry. 

But you ARE implying, by claiming that people will be mislead, that those people are not readily able to comprehend that "more cores ≠ better performance".  If not, then why shouldn't we mention the fact that it has 8 cores? 

The MERITS of this argument are your reasons for wanting people to not talk about the Cell having 8 cores where non-expert people can hear them (or that's what it sounded like to me). 

So I asked, 'Why refrain from mentioning (if you object to "hide") pertinent facts, when a simple disclaimer will do?' 

Or, alternatively, if you're only talking to people about performance, why mention the stats of the processor at all, instead of picking out things in particular that we shouldn't mention?  (At least, that's what it seemed to me that you were doing.  Was that impression mistaken?)

I'm not sure we're really getting anywhere with this discussion.

All I was trying to say was that the Cell's cores aren't designed to operate the same way as the cores of an Intel or AMD consumer-level CPU.  The latter are designed to run general-purpose code while the former is 1 core designed to run general-purpose code (the PPE is actually a modified Power Architecture CPU core) and 7 cores designed to handle SIMD type work.  AMD and Intel multi-core chips are designed with one approach in mind, while the Cell is designed with a very different approach in mind.  Comparing AMD and Intel "cores" is in many ways comparing apples to apples.  Comparing AMD/Intel cores to the Cell's cores is apples to oranges.  Very different architecture.  Very different design philosophies.  So I believe telling non-architecture-aware people that the Cell is an 8-core chip might lead them to believe it would work in a similar fashion and with similar performance to an Intel 8-core chip.

I'm sorry if my belief that non-engineering types might not intuitively draw this distinction.  But there you have it.  I don't think they will.

1.  "if [your] belief ..." what?  What is the result/quality/whatever of that belief that you are sorry for if it exists?  I can guess, but guessing is all I can do right now. 

2.  Such people might be inclined to believe that ... unless you tell them it's not true.  I don't see why a simple disclaimer wouldn't prevent all this misunderstanding you fear.  As for the objection "but why mention it at all?" -- well, I had had the impression that you were saying that this aspect of the Cell in particular shouldn't be mentioned (and not necessarily other things), which makes little sense unless you are indeed telling those people some things about the Cell's architecture, in which case it would make more sense to simply mention the cores, where appropriate -- with the disclaimer -- instead of skirting around the issue.  (And, for that matter, similar fears of misunderstanding (and thus disclaimers) ought, I would think, to attach to ANY architecture you mention in the Cell that could be falsely believed equivalent to Intel/AMD architecture by the uninitiated.) 

If the impression I mentioned was mistaken, then this whole side discussion was likely a misunderstanding-based waste of time.  WAS IT?