Why are niether Intel or AMD planning on using SONY / IBM's cell microprocessor technology?

[Frugal1ty]

reading some of these posts with everyone talking about the new platforms on the way made me wonder why no one has hooked up with the cell processor people. . . SONY IBM Toshiba etc.

 

[Furen]

First, because Cell sucks ass on general purpose code. Second, why pay someone royalties to use its chip technology when you can make your own, and make it better suited for the tasks you need.

 

[dexvx]

How many Cell based servers has IBM sold? Oh thats right...

 

[Vegitto]

Because it's a bitch to program for?

 

[dguy6789]

As stated above, Cell does not make any sense in the pc market. It is terribly slow at general purpose code and is hard to program for. Why would AMD/Intel pay to use something that is slower than what they have now?

 

[Aluvus]

Complexity, licensing fees, etc.

 

[morkman100]

Originally posted by: dexvx
How many Cell based servers has IBM sold? Oh thats right...

But isn't the Cell a supercomputer on a chip? That's what I've read from Sony...

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: morkman100

Originally posted by: dexvx
How many Cell based servers has IBM sold? Oh thats right...

But isn't the Cell a supercomputer on a chip? That's what I've read from Sony...

And we all know Sony doesn't ever lie. Not to mention Sony's game consoles are wickedly powerful. Why, the PS2's Emotion Engine is 8 times more powerful than any computer's graphics system at the time of it's release! That means it's still amazingly awesome by today's standards since I don't think PC graphics have jumped 8 fold yet.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: morkman100

Originally posted by: dexvx
How many Cell based servers has IBM sold? Oh thats right...

But isn't the Cell a supercomputer on a chip? That's what I've read from Sony...

And we all know Sony doesn't ever lie. Not to mention Sony's game consoles are wickedly powerful. Why, the PS2's Emotion Engine is 8 times more powerful than any computer's graphics system at the time of it's release! That means it's still amazingly awesome by today's standards since I don't think PC graphics have jumped 8 fold yet.

Of course they never lie! I'm selling of all my computers before PS3 launches and makes computer obsolete.

 

[broly8877]

3840x1080p @ 120fps guys.... can't downplay that.

 

[Lord Banshee]

The Cell isn't a good GCPU(General Purpose CPU). But it is a good supercomputing CPU as it can be programming for MASSIVE parallal tasks and thats what supercomputers are used for. A supercomputer isn't running firefox and office, it is solve math problems for thing like "What If we Did this". I read some hugh research firms are very interested in the Cell and it might be for good reasons.

 

[Frugal1ty]

well, not necessarily use sony's cell microprocessor, but develop something along the same lines. . . instead of more powerful processors AMD and Intel are developing. . . more processors. so cell's multitasking capabilities are inferior to whatever multi-core processors can deliver? . . . i can understand a cell being difficult to code for though

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: broly8877
3840x1080p @ 120fps guys.... can't downplay that.

Lol?

Sony took out the dual HMDI spec, so well for that (moreover if it is in, it'd be 3840x1080@60fps). So its 1920x1080@60fps. 60fps what? rendering a triangle? No specifications anywhere.

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee
The Cell isn't a good GCPU(General Purpose CPU). But it is a good supercomputing CPU as it can be programming for MASSIVE parallal tasks and thats what supercomputers are used for. A supercomputer isn't running firefox and office, it is solve math problems for thing like "What If we Did this". I read some hugh research firms are very interested in the Cell and it might be for good reasons.

If its as good as you say it is, then why havent the Xeon/Opteron/Itanium/SPARC farms scheduled to be upgraded not be replaced with Cell? Fact is that Cell is like the Niagara. It is barely more powerful than previous generation Pentium-4/A64's at single threaded performance and it requires a lot tweaking and doctoral research to get anywhere near its full capacity.

 

[broly8877]

Originally posted by: dexvx

Originally posted by: broly8877
3840x1080p @ 120fps guys.... can't downplay that.

Lol?

Sony took out the dual HMDI spec, so well for that. So its 1920x1080@60fps. 60fps what? rendering a triangle? No specifications anywhere.

it was typical Sony BS.

Both 3840x1080p and a 120fps framerate were touted as PS3's features.

 

[jlmadyson]

Originally posted by: TuxDave

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: morkman100

Originally posted by: dexvx
How many Cell based servers has IBM sold? Oh thats right...

But isn't the Cell a supercomputer on a chip? That's what I've read from Sony...

And we all know Sony doesn't ever lie. Not to mention Sony's game consoles are wickedly powerful. Why, the PS2's Emotion Engine is 8 times more powerful than any computer's graphics system at the time of it's release! That means it's still amazingly awesome by today's standards since I don't think PC graphics have jumped 8 fold yet.

Of course they never lie! I'm selling of all my computers before PS3 launches and makes computer obsolete.

Better believe it, it's a supa computa.