A couple of patents ;)

Off chip cache reminds me of good the good old days when I was younger, straight and had long hair.
So, yeah, definately EWWW.
 
Why does everyone focus on the IBM patent when the Oka patent is so intrguing:

Masaaki Oka said:
[0103] Next, an embodiment of the distributed information processing is described below where an application with an unpredictable magnitude of load is image processing.

[0104] Image processing includes the afore-described geometry processing and rendering processing. Geometry processing defines a shape of a model (object) in an absolute coordinate space by parameters of an equation that represents vertex coordinates, and boundary lines and/or planes, and converts the defined model to a viewpoint-referenced screen space; it performs, among others, 3-D space coordinate transformation, lighting, and clipping. Rendering processing renders lines or planes on the image memory based on the data generated by the geometry processing, to produce image expression of the model of interest.

[0105] Because geometry processing is enormously compute-intensive, it is suitable as an application that is load balanced by a plurality of computers.

[0106] It is presumed here that image processing is intended to create data for displaying a model as shown in FIG. 8 onto a display screen 50. The model is created based on mesh data; for geometry processing, coordinate transformation is performed to vertex data on grid points as shown in FIG. 9.

[0107] Assuming that the main computer 1m has four sub processors 14, as shown in FIG. 2, each of which acts as a cluster element, respectively; each of the sub processors 14 is capable of performing coordinate transformation of 17.times.17 vertices including four blocks A of 8.times.8 data per unit time, then the data to be processed is worthy of six blocks, as shown in FIG. 9; thus, when the data is processed by the main computer 1m in one unit time, two blocks worth of processing capacity is deficient. Accordingly, it is necessary to consign geometry processing related to blocks C and D to other available computers 1c.

[0108] Then, the main computer 1m finds available computers 1c to balance the load in accordance with the following procedure....

[procedure not quoted]
 
That sounds like a render farm using load balancing. It doesn't sound anything like PS3. A PS3 isn't going to be depending on other PS3s for rendering game graphics. Maybe in the distant future where a person might only need a thin client and a display device to play games and all the processing and game storage is done by a GRID.
 
PC-Engine said:
A PS3 isn't going to be depending on other PS3s for rendering game graphics.
remember that the PS3 isn't the only thing that is going to have CELL in it.... TVs, receivers, set-top boxes, etc. will use the CELL chip........ in fact, I wouldn't be surprized if in 2008 or so, Sony's entire consumer electronics line-up is CELL based...............



...... also;

http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=technologynews&StoryID=1417638
http://www.techzonez.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-2082.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-956855.html?tag=fd_top


"We're not thinking about hardware," said Kenichi Fukunaga, spokesman for Sony Computer Entertainment (SCE), the Sony subsidiary that develops and makes the PlayStation.

"The ideal solution would be having an operating system installed in various home appliances that could run game programs," he said.
SCE said it had not decided how to integrate the cell processor into its next game console, but the general idea was to use the chip in Internet servers and home electronics to divide computing tasks among networked machines.

This would give the devices as much processing power as a supercomputer
 
If Sony would put the "Cell" inside every consumer electronics device instead of other chips, wouldn't that put a huge demand on the supply of these cell chips? Would the factories be able to manufacture enough of them? Would the demand be too big?
Would it even be economically wise to use only their own chips, would a cell chip always be more cost effective for Sony?

Maybe that would not be an issue. I don't know, that's why I'm asking.
 
rabidrabbit said:
If Sony would put the "Cell" inside every consumer electronics device instead of other chips, wouldn't that put a huge demand on the supply of these cell chips? Would the factories be able to manufacture enough of them? Would the demand be too big?
Would it even be economically wise to use only their own chips, would a cell chip always be more cost effective for Sony?

Maybe that would not be an issue. I don't know, that's why I'm asking.

Stabdardising their devices to use CELL chips would be a big win: first you would have very high volume production of CELL chips (which would lower the cost of each chip down), second you would not leave empty capacity in your fabs, third it would reduce R&D costs for their diversified product line.

Ask yourself how many parts Toyota, Ford and General Motors share between each of their product lines ;).
 
I asked, but I didn't know.
But I guess quite a many.

What I was wondering, could there be cases that a chip from outside supplier would still be more cost effective than their own cell, while still offering similar performance.
There would still be competition, "cell" would not be 100% free for Sony's subdivisions either. I'd think the competitor's would react to cell by lowering their prices.
For example say SSI (Sony Sucks International) needs a chip for their new line of vacuum cleaners, they could purchase a "cell" for $5 a piece, or an ARM4755 (i know such doesn't exist) chip that offers adequate performance for $4.95 a piece. wouldn't they go for the ARM chip.
 
rabidrabbit said:
I asked, but I didn't know.
But I guess quite a many.

What I was wondering, could there be cases that a chip from outside supplier would still be more cost effective than their own cell, while still offering similar performance.
There would still be competition, "cell" would not be 100% free for Sony's subdivisions either. I'd think the competitor's would react to cell by lowering their prices.
For example say SSI (Sony Sucks International) needs a chip for their new line of vacuum cleaners, they could purchase a "cell" for $5 a piece, or an ARM4755 (i know such doesn't exist) chip that offers adequate performance for $4.95 a piece. wouldn't they go for the ARM chip.

What Sony did with the PS2's price point by not lowering it when competition came out was smart. Nintendo really hurt themselves trying to compete by constantly lowering their price point, instead of marketing their product in inovative ways.

The CELL platform and the products they go into will not be marketed based on their price point. Conveying to consumers the value and utility of the CELL platform will be a priority. Competitors that decide to fight the CELL based products by going cheap are going to just harm themselves. Selling your products at the highest margin possible while creating a great brand image is the correct path for long term growth and high returns on investments.
 
rabidrabbit said:
Would the factories be able to manufacture enough of them? Would the demand be too big?

Just like XDR-DRAM will be supplied by 3 vendors (Toshiba-Elpida-Samsung) for risk-hedging and positive competition, Cell will be supplied by Sony-Toshiba-IBM.
 
Grid computing for home appliances is a pipedream, Cell as a concept is meaningless for the success of the PS3 ... the consoles will be mostly judged as they have always been, Sony and Microsoft might try to bring consoles closer to homecomputers again and make them more verstatile but even for that the architecture is ulimately irrelevant.

Getting better performance per mm2 than the competition is all Cell can do for the success of the PS3, nothing more.
 
Another patent from Toshiba:
Graphics processor, graphics card and graphics processing system

A graphics processor includes a shading processing section which subjects pixel data to a shading process, a first path which permits map data and texture data output from a video memory to be input to the shading processing section, a second path which permits pixel data output from the shading processing section to be output to the video memory, and a third path which permits pixel data output from a pixel expanding section to be input to the shading processing section. Further, the third path permits pixel data output from the video memory to be input to the shading processing section instead of the pixel data output from the pixel expanding section.

ciao,
Marco
 
nAo said:
Another patent from Toshiba
I posted in another thread about Toshiba's new graphics processor for a cellphone.
You see the roadmap and the diagram of it in the middle of this page (can't link the image here because of a bad HTTP_REFERER :) ). I think Toshiba by itself has plans about graphic processors for various devices such as a cellphone or a car navigation system or a future TV product, apart from the joint project with Sony.

EDIT: various pdf presentations from Toshiba's recent exhibitions

MOBILE TURBO graphics processor for a cellular phone
http://www.semicon.toshiba.co.jp/release/exhibition/ceatec/pdf/cb-2.pdf
http://www.semicon.toshiba.co.jp/release/exhibition/ceatec/pdf/cb-1-1.pdf
http://www.semicon.toshiba.co.jp/release/exhibition/esec/pdf/panel10.pdf

An SoC solution for 3-D car navigation systems
http://www.semicon.toshiba.co.jp/release/exhibition/ceatec/pdf/caa-1.pdf
http://www.semicon.toshiba.co.jp/release/exhibition/its/pdf/panel4.pdf

An image recognition LSI for automobiles with parallel-processing architecture implemented by MeP
http://www.semicon.toshiba.co.jp/release/exhibition/esec/pdf/panel3.pdf
 
Back
Top