PS3 distributed computing without internet limitations ques.

[Fafalada]

I don't think tesselation will be left exclusively to the Visualizer/Realizer. It would be a mistake...

What tesselation? Didn't you hear me, I said I want a configurable primitive processor, tesselation is for wussies

But what happens when you use a texture that spans several pages, and bilinear (or worse still trilinear) is turned on? Won't the texture cache have to thrash between the two (or four!) pages for every single texel at the seam, to get correct interpolation?

Actually bilinear isn't normally a problem outside pathological cases - say, something like a 4pixel wide triangle, and a texture spanning width of 4pages squezzed into it.
Of course drawing the above case would look hideously ugly before you start worrying about performance, that's what mipmapping is for

This implies that you have to always take your target platform into consideration when coding and daisy chaining several cell devices isn't going to 'compute' any faster even though there is a larger pool of resources, unless devs explicitly aim for this

The implication is towards executing the program on a "platform" where some APUs run at different speeds then other. It doesn't refer to running a program across "more" APUs, or the entire platform being clocked higher.

 

[nAo]

What tesselation? Didn't you hear me, I said I want a configurable primitive processor, tesselation is for wussies

Faf..wait a moment! You'll have a configurable primitive processor..it's called APU

 

[Pepto-Bismol]

I was also under the impression that Apulets/ software cells get allocated a certain degree of computing power/ time budget and only if this is expired then the task at hand gets distributed to other local APU's. If this exceeds the local APU's resources then I presume it distributes it to the LAN/WAN as a last resort?

I'm not so sure about that. And I'm only saying this because neurological function is what technologists are attempting to model.

"Just as the cells in a body unite to form complete physical systems, a "Cell" architecture will allow all kinds of electronic devices (from consumer products to supercomputers) to work together, signaling a new era in Internet entertainment, communications and collaboration … Code-named Cell, chips based on the architecture will be able to use ultra high-speed broadband connectivity to interoperate with one another as one complete system, similar to the way neural cells interoperate over the brain's network." - IBM

Apparently, Cell's sundry components carry on like neurons. And that being the case, proximity should have very little to do with the way they are communicating with each other.

"While we are born with a complete set of neurons, the connections between them are determined in large part by a learning process -- external stimuli coming in the form of electrical currents from the sensory cells cause patterns of nerve impulses to be set up. These impulses can alter the strength of the coupling between different neurons. While the overall program for determining which neurons should be connected together is under genetic control, it is external stimuli which are crucially important in determining what network connections are made. Indeed, to some extent our brains are continually rewiring themselves to cope with passing experience. This is particularly true for small children who are born with a full complement of neurons but a relatively primitive set of connections -- a useful set of network connections must be learnt during the early years." - Brain Operation and Processes

Unlike the brain, however, these connections are momentary, existing only long enough to accomplish a task. Consequently, the "organism" will be incapable of learning ...

Putting biology into computer jargon, it sounds like grid computing is something Cell does internally; and Cellular networks are, well, conceptually anyway, an outward manifestation of this very introspective operation.

So to a "neuron" that needs help getting its work done, ALL of the available neurons -- whether on the die or off it -- comprise one contiguous system. This kind of topography could make our simplest electronic devices contributors to (and the beneficiaries of) massive supercomputing power.

 

[MfA]

This also states that future , faster APU's will not run your game's any faster. . I presume this is to keep everying in sync and backwards compatible for the cell architecture. This implies that you have to always take your target platform into consideration when coding and daisy chaining several cell devices isn't going to 'compute' any faster even though there is a larger pool of resources, unless devs explicitly aim for this

To top it off you are also unable to easily distribute tasks which can be completed in a short time, if truely distributed computing is a goal (if communication latency becomes significant and unpredictable with this timer scheme you are doomed).

As Ive said in the past, I hope this is one of the parts Sony came up with and which IBM dealt with (by trashing it).

 

[Megadrive1988]

Faf..wait a moment! You'll have a configurable primitive processor..it's called APU

and lots of them, too.

 

[j^aws]

This implies that you have to always take your target platform into consideration when coding and daisy chaining several cell devices isn't going to 'compute' any faster even though there is a larger pool of resources, unless devs explicitly aim for this

The implication is towards executing the program on a "platform" where some APUs run at different speeds then other. It doesn't refer to running a program across "more" APUs, or the entire platform being clocked higher.

Yeah, I assumed the implication of platforms with various speed APUs...the point I was trying to make was that higher 'clocked' APUs would be equivalent to lower 'clocked', but more numerous APUs, as the 'available pool of resources' that a given APUlet will be allocated to. Thereby linking it to this threads topic of 'daisy chaining' multiple PS3s.

What tesselation? Didn't you hear me, I said I want a configurable primitive processor, tesselation is for wussies

Faf..wait a moment! You'll have a configurable primitive processor..it's called APU

I think Faf was referring to programmable SALPS?

So to a "neuron" that needs help getting its work done, ALL of the available neurons -- whether on the die or off it -- comprise one contiguous system. This kind of topography could make our simplest electronic devices contributors to (and the beneficiaries of) massive supercomputing power.

Do you think the simplest elctronic devices will all be connected to the 'broadband' network? i.e. WiFI/ network enabled TV's, DVD players, Hi-fi systems etc?

If this were to work, I'm having a hard time thinking potentially what other devices they would be...PS3's, workstations and perhaps TV's.? Also any portable device would be out of the question. Would you want your precious batteries being drained by Cell distributed processing?

This also states that future , faster APU's will not run your game's any faster. . I presume this is to keep everying in sync and backwards compatible for the cell architecture. This implies that you have to always take your target platform into consideration when coding and daisy chaining several cell devices isn't going to 'compute' any faster even though there is a larger pool of resources, unless devs explicitly aim for this

To top it off you are also unable to easily distribute tasks which can be completed in a short time, if truely distributed computing is a goal (if communication latency becomes significant and unpredictable with this timer scheme you are doomed).

As Ive said in the past, I hope this is one of the parts Sony came up with and which IBM dealt with (by trashing it).

It would be handy for non-realtime Apps/simulations I suppose...a super renderfarm ! 8)...On the non-graphics side I could see lots of engineers/scientists gaging for it if it had a 64bit flops rating but as far as I know Cell will only do 32 bit natively?

 

[Pepto-Bismol]

Do you think the simplest elctronic devices will all be connected to the 'broadband' network? i.e. WiFI/ network enabled TV's, DVD players, Hi-fi systems etc?

Ideally, getting everybody on the Wi-Fi bandwagon should be doable. Practically, however, the notion that Cells from different products (and manufacturers) could be sharing does not seem to fit the competitive business model ...

If this were to work, I'm having a hard time thinking potentially what other devices they would be...PS3's, workstations and perhaps TV's.?

Apparently, ANY device that has processing chores should be able to get Cell to do them. And its malleability makes it a dead ringer for consumer goods -- fitness & recreation equipment, large and small kitchen appliances, lawn & garden equipment ... the list is endless.

"IBM expects Cell to define an entirely new way of operating. Cell's underlying architecture will enable it to manifest itself into many forms for many purposes, helping to open up a whole new set of applications. Incorporating this architecture, chips will be developed for everything from handheld devices to mainframe computers." - IBM