On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 07:45:37PM +0000, Douglas James Dunn wrote

> I believe that 64 bit computing will just begin to gain momentum
> when quantum computing makes it obsolete.

  "The Cell" has been vapourware for a while.  However, the STI group
(Sony/Toshiba/IBM) have recently been granted a patent for it, so there
is actual info available now.  Nicholas Blachford has a very good
writeup at http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cells/Cell0.html where he
discusses it in detail.  The only part I don't like is "Unfortunately
the patent reads like it was written by a robotic lawyer running Gentoo
in text mode, you don't so much read it as decipher it".<G>  I resemble
that remark, composing this email in mutt in a real text console.

  The suggested specs for The Cell are
  * 4.6 GHz
  * 1.3v
  * 85 Celcius operation with heat sink
  * 6.4 Gigabit / second off-chip communication

=======================================================================
If over clocked sufficiently (over 3.0GHz) and using some very optimised
code (SSE assembly), 5 dual core Opterons directly connected via
HyperTransport should be able to achieve a similar level of performance
in stream processing as a *SINGLE* Cell - Admittedly, this is purely
theoretical and it depends on the Cell achieving it's performance goals
and a "perfect" application being used, it does however demonstrate the
sort of processing capability the Cell has.

The PlayStation 3 is expected to have 4 Cells.
=======================================================================

  I repeat, 1 Cell = 5 dual core Opterons.  4 Cells on a PS3 will walk
all over X86-based CPUs, or anything this side of an IBM z-series
mainframe.  Unlike "Quantum Computing", The Cell should be affordable
very soon.  4 Cells per PlayStation is going to mean really *BIG* volume
production, and the resultant economies of scale.

  Superiority won't guarantee adoption.  The Amiga walked all over the
IBM PC in every aspect except sales.  However, the 8088/8086 CPU's
address space was segmented to look like a bunch of Intel 8085's and
it's Zilog-8000 (aka Z80) equivalant.  This allowed very quick porting
of a whole slew of CP/M business apps (Wordstar, Lotus 1-2-3, dBASE II,
etc) and remember what the "B" in IBM stands for.  There are two things
that can kill Cell on the desktop...

  1) Built-in DRM.  The "S" in "STI Group" is Sony, who have a lot of
media properties and "intellectual property".  If they try to turn it
into a "Fritz-chip" by having the DRM code unblockable, it's going to
hurt sales.  Remember the Pentium III serial number fiasco?

  2) Microsoft, for only the second time in its history, puts out a new
version of its OS that takes *LESS* CPU and RAM resources than its
predecessor, making the extra power of Cell superflouous, except for
gamers.  OK, I'll admit to being in my fifties and experiencing...

     - the moaning and groaning about the switch from DOS 3 to DOS 4 and
       its heavier memory usage.

     - when DR-DOS came up with loading stuff into vacant memory between
       640K and 1088K, leaving more low memory for DOS apps, its sales
       started taking off.  The Windows-3-may-not-run-on-DRDOS FUD by MS
       was minor in comparison to the improved memory-management ability
       of MS-DOS 5, when it came to taking away DR-DOS marketshare.

  On the other hand, MS would just love DRM hardware to run Windows on,
so that they can implement customer lock-in galore.  If anything, I can
see them rapidly abandoning Intel for Cell.  We'd see an overnight shift
from "Wintel" to "WinCell".

  Maybe the modifiable, free-wheeling linux that we know and love may
run on the first-generation Cell, but I would urge people to be very,
very afraid of Cell in the long run.  Linux must be kept...
  a) portable, and
  b) lean and mean enough to run speedily on CPUs other than Cell.  I
     hope that the Microsoft fanbois developing the GNOME and KDE
     "desktops" take this to heart.

-- 
Walter Dnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
An infinite number of monkeys pounding away on keyboards will
eventually produce a report showing that Windows is more secure,
and has a lower TCO, than linux.

--
[email protected] mailing list

Reply via email to