brain_stew
Regular
single shared pool RAM set-up + dual or quad core Sandy Bridge based CPU + LRB based GPU....
Yes please! :smile:
End of Cell for IBM
- Thread starter Butta
- Start date
Yes please! :smile:
It depends very much what mammoth size means to you to begin with, what the yields are and then how fine grained and efficient redundancy you can implement.
It also means one less component to mount (cheaper manufacturing, simpler board layout as well) and one less component that can fail (due to flawed soldering or whatever i.e. more reliable).
Lots of parameters to take into account, given the repetetive nature of current parallel architectures it´s pretty easy to implement efficient redundancy.
brain_stew
Regular
Honestly, if any manufacturer goes with a single chip design next generation, I think Nintendo are probably the most likely. A tweaked Fusion chip w/ eDRAM (say enough for 720p w/ 2xmsaa) seems like a perfect fit for Nintendo's next console, and it'll come with a minimal R & D budget to boot. Attach it to 1GB of GDDR5 and you've got a pretty damn capable little 720p console there which should go down a treat with developers and be able to manage paired back PS4/Xbox3 ports quite easily, if they target 1080p/60fps on those systems.
That would be sweet, considering the option would be taking the flipper/Hollywood and tripling amount of the embedded memory.
Sadly I do honestly fear that Nintendo just might do that.
TheWretched
Regular
Wouldn't a "simple" core (i.e. like the PPE) plus two GPUs make sense? If we converge into a totally programmable GPU future, which is likely, two GPUs combined would be as flexible as CELL and you could make graphics count when you need to (SLI).
Putting the science project angle aside, from a game console perspective (Console Forum) I think a "decent alternative" for the console environment was released in the console space--a year earlier and at a smaller area.
I am a bit surprised there are still so many pursuing the idea that the next generation consoles will have a discrete CPU.
I think AMD has it right when they see a future of a small area of a [relatively] large OOOe on a sea of simpler cores.
Using Intel as an example, a future where you have a couple "Core2" style OOOe CPUs surrounded by Larrabee cores (x86 cores + wide vector units + fixed function graphic units like TMUs) seems more reasonable. The GPU is picking up "CPU" tasks faster than CPUs are. Making the GPUs more CPU like and taking over most of the CPU work seems more natural. Convergence is going to happen but it looks like the GPU model is winning out.
Air Force To Expand PlayStation-Based Supercomputer:
http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/linux/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=221900487
Would be interesting to see if IBM's announcement stalled them.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/linux/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=221900487
Would be interesting to see if IBM's announcement stalled them.
The only official word is that work on the 32 SPE version of the PowerXCell 8i has halted. Everything else has been supposition and inferment on the part of, at least, English speaking media. I do hope something official comes up, forced out of all this, but for now that's all we have.
But in any event, for the Air Force's purposes I'm not sure that any of it would be relevant anyway; the test cluster obviously proved suitable to their purposes, their team must feel comfortable programming for the architecture at this point, and indeed even if the entire architecture was EOL tomorrow, if the aforementioned points hold true then the expansion of the cluster would still be a great route for them from a cost-benefit analysis. I mean we're talking low hundreds per node here for some decent FLops power and scaling.
But in any event, for the Air Force's purposes I'm not sure that any of it would be relevant anyway; the test cluster obviously proved suitable to their purposes, their team must feel comfortable programming for the architecture at this point, and indeed even if the entire architecture was EOL tomorrow, if the aforementioned points hold true then the expansion of the cluster would still be a great route for them from a cost-benefit analysis. I mean we're talking low hundreds per node here for some decent FLops power and scaling.
Surely the USAF are looking for the PS3 fats? Maybe some money to be made there on eBay?!
Yes, the AirForce can take that view, and maintain the system as a "point solution/application".
I don't much about the math they're using, but what important calculations was the CELL faster in?
Could this really mean Cell is actually getting stronger?
According to the original story only the 32i is getting canned, but the tech will continue and will be used elsewhere. It looks like the SPEs will be glued onto POWER or BlueGene machines.
If that happens, wouldn't that mean POWER and BlueGene have in effect become versions of Cell?
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/11/ibm-well-keep-making-cell-processors-as-long-as-sony-needs-them/
--
Also no one has said anything about Sony or Toshiba. They have not said anything about the PS4, it's quite possible Toshiba could do their own 32 SPE Cell, might not even be that big given they are switching directly 28nm. Combine that with a more modern GPU (with EDRAM) and you'd have quite a potent system.
According to the original story only the 32i is getting canned, but the tech will continue and will be used elsewhere. It looks like the SPEs will be glued onto POWER or BlueGene machines.
If that happens, wouldn't that mean POWER and BlueGene have in effect become versions of Cell?
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/11/ibm-well-keep-making-cell-processors-as-long-as-sony-needs-them/
--
Also no one has said anything about Sony or Toshiba. They have not said anything about the PS4, it's quite possible Toshiba could do their own 32 SPE Cell, might not even be that big given they are switching directly 28nm. Combine that with a more modern GPU (with EDRAM) and you'd have quite a potent system.
Uncharted 2
It would. Lots of people confused and still confuse Cell. It wasn't a specific processor, but an architecture. The scope of Cell extends to multiple different cores - they wouldn't have to be tied to SPU ISA cores. So a POWER7 with SPUs attached on a ring bus would be still Cell. Now obviously for real-world purposes, a Cell that doesn't run existing Cell code with little more than a recompile won't convince many folk that it's stil Cell! I'd expect any proper Cell to be code compatible with current SPU code. However, replacing the PPU with a real processor is a Good Idea. If the Cell 32i was just 2 PPUs with the SPUs, it'd be worth canning IMO and replacing those with better cores.
