Well, I suppose the geometry engine is about as programmable as you can make it, but apart from that it honestly seems pathetic performance wise... Also has anyone looked at their solution for scaling performance? (see http://www.sun.co.jp/dot-com/tools/dotcomforum/c4.pdf slide 12 - 14). It looks like they are duplicating a block containing program memory, texture memory, a MAJC5200 and a rasterizer.
Now the performance of a single one of these units is 19MT/s peak
and 119MPixels/s... So about 8 of these would give you fill comparable to a GF4 or 8500.
I don't understand how this kind of design makes sense... I guess this is an example of general purpose programmability losing to dedicated HW in a big way...