Scaled-Down Version of Cell Beats Intel Core 2 Quad!

[Ascended_Saiyan]

We know that Toshiba was working on a lesser version of the Cell (like in the PS3) to put in their TVs and computers. It consists of only 4 SPEs (no PPE). It's called the SpursEngine (SE1000).

Well, in an encoding test (1080p H.264 video to 480p), the 4 SPEs encoded the video in HALF the time it took Intel's Core 2 Quad @ 3GHz processor!

The PCI Express x1 card houses a 65 nm Cell BE processor running at 1.5 GHz (compared to the 3.2 GHz in the Playstation 3) as well as four active SPE units (PS3: 7) and 128 MB XDR DRAM memory (PS3: 256 MB). Essentially, the SE1000 has about half the resources of the Cell engine in the PS3.

However, the demonstration results were quite spectacular. The video transcoding process takes about half as long on a SE1000 than on a 3 GHz Intel Core 2 Quad CPU. Keep in mind that this is a very specialized application, while the Core 2 Quad is a much more universal chip, but the simple performance potential is impressive nevertheless. Especially if you consider the fact that the accelerator consumes only 10 to 20 watts.

Source


Here is another example of what can be achieved with properly optimized code for the Cell. This was posted on Beyond3D.com with a rough math breakdown of what that means.

The team spent about eight months on the project first implementing the algorithm on a 2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor. Using the PC, the team showed machine vision that could recognize in three minutes a bar stool in an image of an office setting.

Using a network of three Playstation3 consoles linked to a PC, the tem was able to speed the recognition rate up to just one second.

...
Overall the three consoles handled the work at rates up to 140 times the speed of the single PC processor, Felch said.

Let us make some rough deductions.

3 Cell at 3.2 GHz = 140 Core Duo at 2 GHz
+ Assuming 1 Cell at 3.2 GHz = 4 SpursEngines at 1.5 GHz =>

1 SpursEngine at 1.5 GHz = 11.7 Core Duo at 2.0 GHz for this particular image processing application.

Assume 1 Quad core at 3.0 GHz = 3 Core Duo at 2.0 GHz

And then we have 1 SpursEngine at 1.5 GHz = 3.9 Quad Core at 3.0 GHz for a comparable image processing application.

Source

I can't wait to see what 1st and 2nd party developers will be able to do on the PS3 with highly efficient code tailored for it's architecture.

[hardcore_canadian]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

We know that Toshiba was working on a lesser version of the Cell (like in the PS3) to put in their TVs and computers. It consists of only 4 SPEs (no PPE). It's called the SpursEngine (SE1000).

Well, in an encoding test (1080p H.264 video to 480p), the 4 SPEs encoded the video in HALF the time it took Intel's Core 2 Quad @ 3GHz processor!



Source


Here is another example of what can be achieved with properly optimized code for the Cell. This was posted on Beyond3D.com with a rough math breakdown of what that means.



Let us make some rough deductions.

3 Cell at 3.2 GHz = 140 Core Duo at 2 GHz
+ Assuming 1 Cell at 3.2 GHz = 4 SpursEngines at 1.5 GHz =>

1 SpursEngine at 1.5 GHz = 11.7 Core Duo at 2.0 GHz for this particular image processing application.

Assume 1 Quad core at 3.0 GHz = 3 Core Duo at 2.0 GHz

And then we have 1 SpursEngine at 1.5 GHz = 3.9 Quad Core at 3.0 GHz for a comparable image processing application.

Source

I can't wait to see what 1st and 2nd party developers will be able to do on the PS3 with highly efficient code tailored for it's architecture.

I know how much you love the Cell, and who wouldn't. I don't understand this much, so i'm just gonna go off of the title of the thread, which is pretty exciting.

[Marquoz]

I've been awestruck about the Cell ever since I read some of the applications it is being used for currently in real life. I was perusing the yellow dog linux website and checking out the purchase the network part, and they link to a few people using it. Worth checking out!

http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/sh.../cellebration/

My favorite one is the black hole researcher hands down! Plus the list of people using it is impressive! US Airforce research lab, US FDA, Los alamos!

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by hardcore_canadian

I know how much you love the Cell, and who wouldn't. I don't understand this much, so i'm just gonna go off of the title of the thread, which is pretty exciting.

I like the Cell because it is ushering in a new age in computing. It is the result of solving a lot of the major problems with the x86 architecture. Even Intel is taking a page from the Cell's book with it's "Larrabee" future processor. What's not to love?!

The overall post is pretty simple. Some tasks on, basically, a Cell processor (at less than half the clock speed and only 4 SPEs) have been proven to run much faster than on Intel's 3GHz Core 2 Quad (in some instances, almost 4x faster).

So, imagine how much faster it could run on the Cell processor in the PS3. When properly utilized, imagine what you could see in games (or application wise via Linux on the PS3). The potential is enormous.

[Nismobeach]

The potential of Cell is enormous, but as of right now the Cell processor has pretty much gotten a cold shoulder from the open source community. I find this extremely disheartening considering the fact that the PS3 is a semi-open platform to begin with.

That being said, if the SpursEngine card is successful, maybe it will encourage people to start tinkering around with the PS3's Other OS more.

[Beta-guy]

I know the cell is far more powerfuly then my Q6600, it actually baffles me, my computer that probably has like $3000 spent on it, it out done by my PS3 that cost me $600. it seems the PS3 is also more reliable...

[david2189]

Originally Posted by Beta-guy

I know the cell is far more powerfuly then my Q6600, it actually baffles me, my computer that probably has like $3000 spent on it, it out done by my PS3 that cost me $600. it seems the PS3 is also more reliable...

what about graphics wise? i doubt it can beat your pc in that department..well atleast i know it cant beat mine

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by david2189

what about graphics wise? i doubt it can beat your pc in that department..well atleast i know it cant beat mine

I think graphics wise it depends on how much the Cell can help the RSX and what tasks are being performed. There is no way to really know.

However, I did post a test between the Cell and the Nvidia G80 family of GPU. The results were stunning.

Do you have a G80 GPU?

[NutsAboutPS3]

A supercomputer built with components designed for the Sony PlayStation 3 has set a new computing milestone

[Ascended_Saiyan]

^^
That was posted yesterday in a thread a few places below this thread.

Going back to how a GPU processes data Vs. how the Cell processes data (high level view). I think that somewhat lays it out in a easy to read manner.

[Mobe1969]

Yeah, and still after all this the 360 version of GTA4 was technically better than the PS3 version. Games still aren't full HD, and still don't have decent anti-aliasing.

I'm looking forward to when the development of games on it can get sorted.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Mobe1969

Yeah, and still after all this the 360 version of GTA4 was technically better than the PS3 version. Games still aren't full HD, and still don't have decent anti-aliasing.

I'm looking forward to when the development of games on it can get sorted.

Actually, not true.

The X360 version of GTA IV has a higher resolution and AA, but the PS3 version has better post-processing effects and no dithering problems. Plus, it's not rational to look to multi-platform games for consistently better performance. Some multi-platform games look better on the PS3 and some look better on the X360.

Games are "full HD" (like RR7, Tekken 5: DR, NBA Street, Marvel:UA, Pixel Junk Monsters, Blast Factor, etc.).

Decent anti-aliasing (AA)? That's subjective, but here are some titles...

Warhawk (4xAA)
Heavenly Sword (4xAA)
GT5P (4xAA)
Calling All Cars (4xAA)
Full Auto 2 (4xAA)
Etc... (then there are a ton of titles with 2xAA)

I'm just waiting for more of these examples to continue to come out and get even better. Of course, I will only expect that from 1st and 2nd party developers for some time.

[NARMAK]

Impressive test results

But we will have to see how this affects game's in the coming years

Personally think i will be properly impressed next console gen, when launch titles should be in native 1080p, 4x AA (minimum) & locked at 60fps

This is the start of the HD console gaming era so not a bad start but i will only be truly impressed when games are totally void of jaggies & tearing and have graphics equal to crysis at least on full settings

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Personally, the most AA I could tolerate is 4xAA. Anything after that just looks like petroleum jelly smeared on the screen. I like crisp visuals.

As far as being locked at 60fps, I think it's overrated. 30fps (locked) is smooth and the images look better at that framerate (see KZ2). 60fps is even smoother, but that's it.

[Proteus]

I'm convinced that if developers took the time to learn the Cell that they would freak out about what they can do.

Seriously, so many people have no idea how juice the PS3 really is.

Graphics wise, the PS3 can already do full 1080p at 60fps no problem using the Cell properly. We're talking top end theatrical animation and everything. Problem is, no one knows how to tap all that in it yet and the tools available are just barely starting to scratch the surface.

It will be a few years before we truly see the results of Cell.

Personally, I can't wait.

[phlydude]

Originally Posted by NutsAboutPS3

A supercomputer built with components designed for the Sony PlayStation 3 has set a new computing milestone

I wonder who quickly this thing would fold?

[Mobe1969]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

Actually, not true.

The X360 version of GTA IV has a higher resolution and AA, but the PS3 version has better post-processing effects and no dithering problems. Plus, it's not rational to look to multi-platform games for consistently better performance. Some multi-platform games look better on the PS3 and some look better on the X360.

Games are "full HD" (like RR7, Tekken 5: DR, NBA Street, Marvel:UA, Pixel Junk Monsters, Blast Factor, etc.).

Decent anti-aliasing (AA)? That's subjective, but here are some titles...

Warhawk (4xAA)
Heavenly Sword (4xAA)
GT5P (4xAA)
Calling All Cars (4xAA)
Full Auto 2 (4xAA)
Etc... (then there are a ton of titles with 2xAA)

I'm just waiting for more of these examples to continue to come out and get even better. Of course, I will only expect that from 1st and 2nd party developers for some time.

Yeah, there are some good game examples there - not that I have any of those. ALL of the PS3 games I have have poor antialiasing. And you might be right about GTA4. From all the reviews I've read they have been 50:50 on one system or the other, but from my own interpretation/weight association of the various factors (which ones I find most important) of the results I'd bias it the other way. Sorry if my opinion come across as "fact". It's just my opinion, so next time I'll prefix it with "in my opinion..."

I guess the PS3 is making it difficult for developers being custom. XBox is basically a PC and would have directx and opengl or whatever. I know on my PC that antialiasing was part of the video card setup - eg, the game developers didn't even have to worry about it. I might be oversimplifying it a bit, but I think that is why devs are having a harder time with getting results out of the PS3 that are worthy of it. They have to currently do a lot of basic stuff like AA that they wouldn't have to deal with in intel based development.

I mean even Apple finally gave up being the lone RISC and went intel. There is benefits for sticking with something a defacto standard.

Just my 2 cents. People say I'm full of BS though so take it with a grain of salt...

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Proteus

I'm convinced that if developers took the time to learn the Cell that they would freak out about what they can do.

Seriously, so many people have no idea how juice the PS3 really is.

Graphics wise, the PS3 can already do full 1080p at 60fps no problem using the Cell properly. We're talking top end theatrical animation and everything. Problem is, no one knows how to tap all that in it yet and the tools available are just barely starting to scratch the surface.

It will be a few years before we truly see the results of Cell.

Personally, I can't wait.

The Cell requires a new way of thinking and proper planning. Developers are use to diving in and planning mid-coding. That type of bad code doesn't work on the PS3 (it barely works on the X360). That is why Sony is trying to convince developers to start on the PS3 first. It makes for a better X360 game as well.

The best thing about the Cell is that we will reap the benefits of it's advanced architecture through, at least, another console. By that time, MS will will be the console that is harder to develop for and with less performance. In other words, even next-gen the PS4 will most likely START OUT and maintain better graphics and physics over the next Xbox console.

Originally Posted by Mobe1969

Yeah, there are some good game examples there - not that I have any of those. ALL of the PS3 games I have have poor antialiasing. And you might be right about GTA4. From all the reviews I've read they have been 50:50 on one system or the other, but from my own interpretation/weight association of the various factors (which ones I find most important) of the results I'd bias it the other way. Sorry if my opinion come across as "fact". It's just my opinion, so next time I'll prefix it with "in my opinion..."

What games do you have?

I don't know which reviews you read, but most of the major reviewers said the PS3 version looks better (not that anyone should even pay attention to reviewers in the first place).

I guess the PS3 is making it difficult for developers being custom. XBox is basically a PC and would have directx and opengl or whatever. I know on my PC that antialiasing was part of the video card setup - eg, the game developers didn't even have to worry about it. I might be oversimplifying it a bit, but I think that is why devs are having a harder time with getting results out of the PS3 that are worthy of it. They have to currently do a lot of basic stuff like AA that they wouldn't have to deal with in intel based development.

The Cell is a depart from all the flaws in the current x86 architecture. That is why some applications run at MUCH GREATER than x10 the fastest quad-core CPUs Intel has out. Even apps that are suppose to be terrible for the Cell usually run faster than traditional quad-core PCs.

The quick people can change their thinking process, when it comes to programming for the Cell, the faster you will see the benefits. Killzone 2 should just be a taste of what's to come (which only uses 4 SPEs to run).

Most of the titles with no AA are from 3rd party developers. BTW, "no AA" does not mean 0xAA. It means less than 2xAA.

Did you know a lot of X360 games have no AA as well? Halo 3, Bioshock, Guitar Hero 3, Turok, Dark Sector, Conan, FIFA 2007, etc. This is a developer issue...not a console one.

[TruBlu2]

They should compare the Cell Processor to an AMD Processor. I really don't think Intel makes a good Processor anymore. I prefer AMD.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by TruBlu2

They should compare the Cell Processor to an AMD Processor. I really don't think Intel makes a good Processor anymore. I prefer AMD.

I like AMD as well, but there is no denying the new Intel processors run circles around them.