View Full Version : The CELL project at IBM Research
It's online now..;)
The CELL project at IBM Research (http://www.research.ibm.com/cell/)
An interesting quote for developers..:
the IBM Research division grew its partnership in the development of the Broadband Processor Architecture beyond the initial definition of the architecture. During the course of this partnership with the STI Design Center, members of the original CELL team developed the first SPU compiler which was a guiding force for the definition of the SPU architecture and the SPU programming environment, and sample code to exploit the strengths of the Broadband Processor Architecture. The extended partnership led to further contributions by IBM Research, including the development of an advanced parallelizing compiler with auto-SIMDization features based on IBM XL compiler technology, the design of the high-frequency Power core at the center of the CELL architecture, and a full-system simulation infrastructure.
Titanio
04-Apr-2005, 15:39
is an innovative solution whose design was based on the analysis of a broad range of workloads in areas such as cryptography, graphics transform and lighting, physics, fast-Fourier transforms (FFT), matrix operations, and scientific workloads.
The SPU was designed with a compiled code focus from the beginning, and early availability of SIMD-optimized compilers allowed development of high-performance graphics and media libraries for the Broadband Architecture entirely in the C programming language.
Keeps popping up over and over...
pixel-shading-only gpu PLEASE! ;)
It's also interesting how they describe Cell specifically as a 8-SPU chip, rather than more broadly as an architecuture, as we were careful to do previously. Perhaps they just do so for convenience's sake.
Shifty Geezer
04-Apr-2005, 16:17
From the very beginning I felt Cell was to offer a hardware for all things - Prgram execution, graphics rendering, physics, maths processing, DSP work, etc. This is so it can be a one-chip solution to certain applications. eg. In a TV you don't a graphics processor as well as a CPU etc.
That Cell is good at T&L, doesn't necessarily means that's its function. The switch to nVidia might represent a rethink from Sony where they decided not to have the one chip structure. Maybe they anticipated a dual Cell system and realizing they couldn't pull that offer, conscripted an nVidia GPU to provided graphics support for a single Cell system?
It's still all random guesswork and vague speculation :P
I'm going to write this for the last time (I swear :) ):
CELL is not good at pixel shading. CELL designers are not so dumb to don't know this :roll:
Sony was aware they needed a GPU from the very start.
Toshiba was developing a GPU for the PS3, that GPU was canned and Sony switched to a more advanced and powerful GPU designed by NVIDIA.
AMEN.
Titanio
04-Apr-2005, 16:25
From the very beginning I felt Cell was to offer a hardware for all things - Prgram execution, graphics rendering, physics, maths processing, DSP work, etc. This is so it can be a one-chip solution to certain applications. eg. In a TV you don't a graphics processor as well as a CPU etc.
That Cell is good at T&L, doesn't necessarily means that's its function. The switch to nVidia might represent a rethink from Sony where they decided not to have the one chip structure. Maybe they anticipated a dual Cell system and realizing they couldn't pull that offer, conscripted an nVidia GPU to provided graphics support for a single Cell system?
It's still all random guesswork and vague speculation :P
Yes, except TnL is not "graphics". It's one part of the equation. Usually associated with the vertex half ;) So calling in a second chip for pixel shading would not necessarily go against the initial idea of Cell.
london-boy
04-Apr-2005, 16:34
I'm going to write this for the last time (I swear :) ):
CELL is not good at pixel shading. CELL designers are not so dumb to don't know this :roll:
Sony was aware they needed a GPU from the very start.
Toshiba was developing a GPU for the PS3, that GPU was canned and Sony switched to a more advanced and powerful GPU designed by NVIDIA.
AMEN.
You see, some people just feel better believing in the "OMG Cell is not as powahfull as Sony thought so they had to get NVIDIA at the last minute to make PS3 more powerful!!1!eleven!!" stories.
Acert93
04-Apr-2005, 20:25
You see, some people just feel better believing in the "OMG Cell is not as powahfull as Sony thought so they had to get NVIDIA at the last minute to make PS3 more powerful!!1!eleven!!" stories.
Actually, I think his comment was a response the the reverse: "OMG CELL is so powerful it was going to do the graphics rendering... but they could not fit 2 in so they went with a traditional GPU for that".
Remember 6 months ago when all the talk was, "Is the CELL better than a GPU"? Then when it came out about the nVidia deal in December the discussion switched to, "Maybe nVidia's GPU was not better than Toshibas, just cheaper" and then "The CELL suxxors! It cannot beat a 500MHz GPU at pixel shading! nVidia pwned CELL!!11" ;)
Shifty Geezer
04-Apr-2005, 20:37
For Cell doing graphics, I don't know what Sony's expectations were. Maybe they wanted Pixel shader capabilities but found it wouldn't happen? But also, Cell was targetted from the very beginning for things like digital TV and mobiles and goodness knows what else, where advanced shaders aren't really an issue. I dunno. Maybe there was a mini-Cell pixel shader unit? Maybe the Toshiba effort was more Cell orientated, as part of the overall Cell empire structure. Has anyone got notes from Sony and friends listed their initial requirements, before any design got underway?
Point is, whatever the capabilities of Cell as a processor, doesn't mean all those capabilities were targetted solely for PS3.
Point is, whatever the capabilities of Cell as a processor, doesn't mean all those capabilities were targetted solely for PS3.
You're right, IBM is using Cell for some of their server solution. When that's out, we will see some official benchmark of it, that you won't get with PS3.
For Cell doing graphics, I don't know what Sony's expectations were. Maybe they wanted Pixel shader capabilities but found it wouldn't happen?
If Sony would have wanted CELL to be good at pixel shading STI would have designed it to be good ad it!
As this is not the case it's crystal clear Sony wasn'e expecting to use CELL as GPU.
I really can't understand why people can't accept this.
What's wrong with current GPUs? they're blazing fast, damn! ;)
Maybe there was a mini-Cell pixel shader unit?
:cry: :evil:
Maybe the Toshiba effort was more Cell orientated, as part of the overall Cell empire structure.
No it wasn't.
Point is, whatever the capabilities of Cell as a processor, doesn't mean all
those capabilities were targetted solely for PS3.
Since PS3 should be able to do almost everything I'd expect CELL to be good at very wide range of applications.
Once you targeted PS3 and scalability too you're done in many cases.
Shifty Geezer
05-Apr-2005, 09:56
For Cell doing graphics, I don't know what Sony's expectations were. Maybe they wanted Pixel shader capabilities but found it wouldn't happen?
If Sony would have wanted CELL to be good at pixel shading STI would have designed it to be good ad it!
As this is not the case it's crystal clear Sony wasn'e expecting to use CELL as GPU.
I really can't understand why people can't accept this.
What's wrong with current GPUs? they're blazing fast, damn! ;)
Because you don't want a GPU in your mobile phone and TV! That's overkill. I'm wondering if Sony wanted graphics capability on Cell, Toshiba too, but when the considered how much maths grunt they wanted, how much die space they could use, etc., they found they just couldn't include it in the design.
Just saying a processor good at T&L isn't necessarily going to be doing that in a console with a GPU, that T&L functionality maybe not being there solely for PS3's sake.
Personally I'm nethier for nor against GPUs. I don't care what's in PS3 so long as the games look good! :D
Because you don't want a GPU in your mobile phone and TV! That's overkill.
Yeah..do you want a full PPE + some SPEs in your cell phone and 3 kg batteries pack? :roll:
I'm wondering if Sony wanted graphics capability on Cell, Toshiba too, but when the considered how much maths grunt they wanted, how much die space they could use, etc., they found they just couldn't include it in the design.
Please tell me why it's so hard for you to understand that they simply was not targeting a GPU!?
It's so damn simple!
have you ever heard about Occam's razor? ;)
Just saying a processor good at T&L isn't necessarily going to be doing that in a console with a GPU, that T&L functionality maybe not being there solely for PS3's sake.
Who cares? the main target is PS3 and PS3 will have to do a lot more than T&L.
Hell..we aren't even sure it will do T&L at all..
Shifty Geezer
05-Apr-2005, 11:13
Yeah..do you want a full PPE + some SPEs in your cell phone and 3 kg batteries pack? :roll:
No , but Cell is deisnged to be scalable and portable. I'd expect a 1:1 or 1:2 maybe in a Cell handheld running at much lower clock speeds
I'm wondering if Sony wanted graphics capability on Cell, Toshiba too, but when the considered how much maths grunt they wanted, how much die space they could use, etc., they found they just couldn't include it in the design.
Please tell me why it's so hard for you to understand that they simply was not targeting a GPU!?
It's so damn simple! It's not hard to understand. Dunno why you seem to be getting irate! Someone speculated that T&L on Cell = No T&L on GPU. I'm saying that's not much indication as maybe T&L functionality was there for other reasons.
Just saying a processor good at T&L isn't necessarily going to be doing that in a console with a GPU, that T&L functionality maybe not being there solely for PS3's sake.
Who cares? the main target is PS3 and PS3 will have to do a lot more than T&L.
Hell..we aren't even sure it will do T&L at all..I KNOW!!! I said that!!! I'm NOT saying Cell will be doing graphics!!! (T&L capability on Cell) != (Cell doing T&L in PS3).
And why does everyone equate Cell with PS3 almost exclusively? You say Cell is mainly targetted at PS3, I say not. There'll be more non PlayStation Cell devices in the world than PS3s if everything goes to plan. IBM's news on Cell which heads this thread is talking about Cell's capabilities. Those capabilities will find their way into number-crunching monster computers and TVs and everything else STI can squeeze them into. Therefore, I repeat myself, the functions of Cell as listed will not necesserily mean they were put there for the sole benefit of PS3, in which AFAICS you actually agree with me on :?:
It's not hard to understand. Dunno why you seem to be getting irate!
Maybe cause you're still writing stuff about Sony and Toshiba realizing that CELL couldn't be used as GPU..or about mini-Cell pixel shader units? :roll:
Shifty Geezer
05-Apr-2005, 12:01
As I wasn't in the boardroom when plans were discussed and wasn't around during the development phase to see how ideas for Cell changed during it's development, I don't know what was and was not planned for Cell. All I offered were theorectical reasons why a feature might exist in Cell, without ever saying they were the case. What's wrong with that?
Because you don't want a GPU in your mobile phone and TV! That's overkill.
These days an HDTV set has a GPU-like processor such as ATI's STB/DTV chip XILLEON.
Shifty Geezer
05-Apr-2005, 15:47
When you say GPU, what do you mean? I'm not up on this. Presumably it doesn't have 3D capabilities but is mostly a DSP for digital pics, plus some rendering for text etc.
Because you don't want a GPU in your mobile phone and TV! That's overkill.
And putting a eighty watt chip, that is crap at rasterization, isn't ?
yeah, I know it can scale down, but not nearly enough
Cheers
Gubbi
Point is, whatever the capabilities of Cell as a processor, doesn't mean all those capabilities were targetted solely for PS3.
You're right, IBM is using Cell for some of their server solution. When that's out, we will see some official benchmark of it, that you won't get with PS3.
I'm curious, can you name three server workloads that will run reasonably well on CELL (not fast, just not grind to a halt).
Cheers
Gubbi
AtariAlum
06-Apr-2005, 00:41
T&L?
pixels shaders?
:roll:
Shifty seems to be the only one with a clue in this thread.
Home computer/workstation GPUs are hideous hacks. Nothing more than archaic artifacts of the bus architecture of the original IBM PC. Their time is coming to an end, thankfully. Cell is the first glimpse of the future. It's no wonder NVidia's CEO has been lavishing praise on Sony over the past couple of years and not the other way around. He knows which way the industry is heading.
pahcman
06-Apr-2005, 00:47
hi atari alum,
any new secret next gen info from your friends at EA?
hi atari alum,
any new secret next gen info from your friends at EA?
When AA posts, I don't know if I should laugh or cry.
hi atari alum,
any new secret next gen info from your friends at EA?
When AA posts, I don't know if I should laugh or cry.
Then laugh so hard you cry.
Cheers
Gubbi
passerby
06-Apr-2005, 08:59
Hey! DM finally gets an opposing counterpart!
How about this request - a special thread on the forum is created and only AA and DM can post there. That will be some awesome entertainment!
David_South#1
13-Apr-2005, 04:45
Point is, whatever the capabilities of Cell as a processor, doesn't mean all those capabilities were targetted solely for PS3.
You're right, IBM is using Cell for some of their server solution. When that's out, we will see some official benchmark of it, that you won't get with PS3.
Those benchmarks will be different in use to what the PS3 intends.
Panajev shared an IBM interview with me a while back.
In it the Cell processor would be used for media servers with the Power5 as the primary processor. Also Cell will be limited to two of IBM's middle market servers. I think it was the E and P series.
Anyhow I still haven't been able to understand the real usefulness of a Cell processor. Just of list of things it might be able to be used in. In many ways to me it is a vast improment on the EE of the PS2 but limited usefullness in the same respect. NVIDIA is needed to create a new GS, but are they needed for a whole (PC like) GPU? If they are then the number of SPE IMO doesn't need be very many.
Those benchmarks will be different in use to what the PS3 intends.
True, but it will probably the only thing we get publicly, that aren't quite PR number. And you can compare it to other processor. Not PS3 per say, just the cell processor. After all that's what I was talking about.
Anyhow I still haven't been able to understand the real usefulness of a Cell processor. Just of list of things it might be able to be used in. In many ways to me it is a vast improment on the EE of the PS2 but limited usefullness in the same respect. NVIDIA is needed to create a new GS, but are they needed for a whole (PC like) GPU? If they are then the number of SPE IMO doesn't need be very many.
Cell would be over engineered if you just chained a couple SPE in there. Heck I feel it was over engineered, if Sony is only going to put in one cell in PS3.
Devourer
13-Apr-2005, 23:35
You see, some people just feel better believing in the "OMG Cell is not as powahfull as Sony thought so they had to get NVIDIA at the last minute to make PS3 more powerful!!1!eleven!!" stories.
Well, that's Dave Baumann story, if I remember correctly.
Michael Walter
14-Apr-2005, 00:02
Because you don't want a GPU in your mobile phone and TV! That's overkill.
Yeah..do you want a full PPE + some SPEs in your cell phone and 3 kg batteries pack? :roll:
CELL phone ^D
CELL phone ^D
It's nice to know thare is someone who likes my jokes at least :lol:
version
14-Apr-2005, 00:21
http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/D9439D04EA9B080B87256FC00075CC2D/$file/MPR-Cell-details-article-021405.pdf
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.