I'm hearing a bit too much "raw specs" buillshit, like "cell is 20x more powerful than C2D". Where are you pulling this crap from? Folding@home results? Sorry to burst your bubble, but GFLOPS don't make a good processor. The ATi client outperforms the PS3 client pound for pound. So why don't we run Windows on our GPU? The Cell processor contains a lot of vector processing units whih are not only a pain to use, but they're VERY specialised. There's a reason why CPUs exist despite the fact that a GPU will have "20x" the power running at 1/4 of the clock speed. The CPU is a general processor and can do a lot more than the Vector Processors of the Cell. If your code is not optimsed for the Cell (and despite what many fanboys think, there are MANY applications which CANNOT be run on the Cell's vector units) then it's just a regular old POWER6 CPU, which is way outperformed by the C2D. The Cell is a completely different architecture and you cannot say it is "20x" more powerful than a C2D, because it depends on what you're using it for. Pure physics calculations with no branching, it will wipe the floor with a C2D. Gaming? Who knows? But I think by the time we find out, PC chips will be well ahead of the PS3.
Help! I'm stuck in a forum signature!
