> -----Original Message----- > From: Angel Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2005 11:49 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: The CELL processor, challenger to the X86 platform? > > Well, I'm sure you have all heard about the Cell processor that is to > power the PS3 console. > > It seems though that Sony could have much larger plans for this processor, > and that it will actually make it's way into computers, > perhaps even become it's own computing platform. > > The processor is apparently leaps and bounds more powerful than any > existing X86 chip, and will apparently remain that way for quite > some time. It is so powerful that it should be possible for a Cell machine > to *emulate* a mid range X86 machine and run Windows XP > and associated applications for example.
My understanding was that a single cell isn't godly powerful in and of itself - however you might never see a single cell in anything other than consumer electronics (TVs for example). Where the real power comes in is multi-processing - a "standard platform" might actually be 4 or 8 or 16 (or more) cells emulating a single processor and intelligently splitting load (even to other cells on the network). I doubt that last part will come to light very often, but the platform is designed such that a Cell computer could "borrow" cycles from an idle PS3 or cell-equipped TV. Of course software will have to be designed to leverage that - but I fully expect that if the platform keeps it promises we'll see cell-based rendering farms and super computers become common (remember that Sony built the Cell with IBM - both companies are looking to use it). Somebody like Dreamworks or Pixar, having only only one or two highly optimized packages (like RenderMan) to deal with and the potential to save millions f rendering time could be decreased are obvious candidates. Sony, as well, will probably follow through at least somewhat. Remember that even with the PS2 Sony released, publicly, an official Linux kit (Linux on Emotion Engine). I would expect to see the same thing with PS3 at the very least. > What is this going to mean for the Xbox 2 when the PS3 hits? Sony is > apparently pushing the PS3 platform so that it will be several > years before the PC platform ever catches up to it's power, seeking to > solidify the PS3 as THE gaming platform, the only way to > play. I don't know - so far all the companies have been pretty good at crippling themselves somehow. Maybe Sony will continue this trend at only give the cell eight meg of memory? ;^) Still - this generation - like all the others - will be decided on the games. Xbox is finally getting at least a few seriously good games, if they can keep that up (and beat Sony to market) they should do fine. But since Nintendo still seems unable to just bite the bullet and take the Sega route (I've been saying for years that Nintendo should just release an "interface kit" containing a PS/Xbox compatible wavebird and an encrypted memory card and release software for other platforms) it seems like we'll have another three horse race. Like the PS2 however I think we're going to see some pretty underpowered games for PS3 until developers get up to speed on it. Of course Xbox Next (since they're changing architecture as well) will also have the same problems. I don't expect to see the really impressive games on a system until at least a year has passed. In the case of the PS2 some of the most impressive games are just coming out (this was a really good year for PS2). ;^) We'll have to see what happens... but I wouldn't count MS out yet. Lastly we may also be approaching the point of limited return. Right now the games that we've been playing for the past 10 years have really kind of hit their peak. They look and act about as good as they need to attract the average gamer. The (vocal) hardcore gamers will, of course, still notice differences, but they're not the meat of the market. Have we reached a point where improving looks of a game (the primary thrust for the past generations) just isn't that noticeable anymore? What happens when that happens? What kind of games will take us past that? The same thing happened to PCs - at this moment there's no reason for the average user to buy a recent PC - any PC from the past three or four years can perform the tasks they need easily. On the PC side new OSes tend to push hardware (but even XP and OS X don't need the last few generations of chips) and games (most people upgrade PCs to play games better). Again those games are getting to be about as good as most people care for them to be. There's room for improvement, of course, but much of that improvement is in the subtle details that are lost on the casual gamer. In the console market some people will upgrade just to play the current games (there are always those that must play the latest "Madden") but will those games actually do anything that couldn't be done on the previous generation? My bet is that the future is in procedural processing and physical implementations - Half-Life II gave us a taste of the latter and many games have played with the former but the lack of processing oomph has hindered it greatly. But in the next generation look to that for the most impressive changes. Still will those changes be enough to sway the average gamer? Jim Davis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:143941 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
