mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Interesting thoughts.
Let's put that into perspective, shall we?Look,
Microsoft announced the power of the cloud... Nothing happens.
Sony announced the Cell... Also nothing happens.
Microsoft gets lot of hate for that.
Sony gets much love for doing such a fine piece of tech that brought you nothing!
There is a thread about fan boys in which this behavior is all about.
We are getting thisSo, on the other hand, we have a technology that never delivered. And then a technology that did (with some incredible results, given the RAM constraints), although that took its sweet time. But surely you realize there's a difference there?
We are getting this
No, Macs were born 68k CPUs which are imo still the best architecture out there.PPC had its day but WHY doesn't cut anymore IF their performance are why better than X86? Power consumption is a reason... but why nobody have searched a solution?
Macs switched to X86 recently (10 years or less) but they have born with PPC architecture and always been superior to the X86 counterparts of their time (plus optimized software in general)
I also saw great Crackdown 3 footage before release. Until I'm seeing it running on real hardware, verified by a neutral party - fool me once and all that.
Calculating the physics themselves in the cloud - doable for sure. Delivering the results to people with varying network conditions, especially so that people can interact with each other in a meaningful fashion - not so much.that footage was real and would have worked. it would just make for a really bad game.
calculating physics on a high end server is not a difficult task, it's rather trivial actually. it's just that a VS multiplayer game where after 2min the whole map is just flat, because everyone breaks all the buildings, isn't a good game
Pretty sure everyone called it meh ever since reveal. Compare that with FS's reception.I also saw great Crackdown 3 footage before release. Until I'm seeing it running on real hardware, verified by a neutral party - fool me once and all that.
I hate edge lords more than you do (especially PCMR ones), but I have strong doubts about his claims.We have a Guerilla developer who worked on Cell, PS4 and PC give his opinion and yet OP disregarded all this and asked a bunch of forum poster their take on this
If Guerilla dev say Cell is more powerful than any modern intel CPU today, I would believe him more that some of the edge lords here.
Cell was a proto-APU, a heterogeneous processor.Problem is, a CPU shouldn't try to be a GPU.
It's 25.6GF in FP32 per core (1 PPE + 8 SPUs).I'm looking I these numbers are a lie, it seems.
The 400 GFLOPs is possible, but in 8bit precision. At 32bit is 25 GFLOPS, at 64bits is 20 GFLOPs. So in practice is the CELL was just better than PC CPUs at that time, but nothing so revolutionary.
Actually they wanted to use a custom Toshiba GPU (an evolution of Graphics Synthesizer).Cell is very good at the kinds of computations which GPU's are good at. This is because the original design of PS3 didn't have a dedicated GPU - Cell was supposed to do both CPU and GPU functions.
That didn't work out at all which is why the final shipping PS3 had an Nvidia GPU bolted on. But Cell is still pretty amazing for what it was designed to do, and while modern GPU's have since surpassed Cell, it's still a very unique design in it's own right.
Actually it was 1/10 of that:Sony could not continue with Cell development because that 4 billion in R&D almost sunk them
For better or worse, GPGPUs and mobile SoCs (cheap video decode/encode) rendered it obsolete and redundant. Very interesting piece of tech and way ahead of its time, but ultimately an evolutionary dead end.Yet, if cell took off in a few desktops, laptops and more devices and STI (Sony, Toshiba, IBM) recouped some of that money to profit, they would have continued to develop cell and remove any niggles people had with the first iteration...….At it's inception, Cell was a powerful beast..... 13-14 years later, with continued development of cell......I think STI could have had by far, the most powerful CPU technology out there...
In essence......If cell 1.0 was so powerful, then think of Cell Technology Evolved...
AFAIK, even G80 with CUDA wasn't as flexible as custom Cell SPU coding.There's a catch with this comparison.
Contrary to the CELL, x86 desktop CPUs aren't trying to be GPUs.
The CELL was a good GPU without a doubt, but a not so good CPU.
Why have something like the CELL ever again instead of something else with a good GPU (contrary to RSX)?
Correct. There's a reason modern GPGPUs still have TMUs instead of relegating it to FP32 ALUs.It wasn't really good GPU either.
It was nice for some of the tasks ilke geometry pre-processing, yet was horrendous for texturing and such.
Look,
Microsoft announced the power of the cloud... Nothing happens.
Sony announced the Cell... Also nothing happens.
Microsoft gets lot of hate for that.
Sony gets much love for doing such a fine piece of tech that brought you nothing!
There is a thread about fan boys in which this behavior is all about.
We are getting this
I know about the 400 million for Cell development amongst Sony and it's partners, I was talking R&D Sony spent on overall PS3 development where it brought more than cell to the table....Actually it was 1/10 of that:
Not only is 2 PB of map stored on Azure, much of the calculations like the weather simulation are done in Azure servers.what is in that game that requires the cloud? to stream the map because it doesnt fit on the disk?
I don't think the CPU is what gets you 4k bud.So it could run games at 4K and at 60fps? This guy just wants to make headlines since the big boss left to Sony.
Microsoft announced the power of the cloud... Nothing happens.
Sony announced the Cell... Also nothing happens.
Microsoft gets lot of hate for that.
Sony gets much love for doing such a fine piece of tech that brought you nothing!
Not only is 2 PB of map stored on Azure, much of the calculations like the weather simulation are done in Azure servers.
Here is some explanation
Actually in WoW, GTA SA or even Destiny for that regard, data is stored on your PC/Console not streamed from a server. Your device communicates your gameplay actions like when you press jump with the server. Flight Sim stores the whole data on cloud.yes but its only streaming parts of the world, sure it changes some stuff in the server but the system you use do the heavy work rendering the world and making physcis form the terrain and atmospheric data and there will be offline modes with cached data that is different from crackdown 3 where the server was suposed to take care of the physics and give the client the data of objects and position of the particles so the client doesnt have to calculate it, the demos were impresive but the final game is severely downgraded and there are games that do similar if not better physics offline
the problem with the cloud is that it was supposed to help the system with calculation of the graphics as if the console was many times more powerful or "unlimited power", then later it was changed for physics and updating baked light of the world and now is only streaming the world and "drivatars" naturally people are disapointed because "the cloud" is just a server and doesnt make the games look better
this flight simulator sure is impressive the details for the simulation, the size and how it works and maintains the world but the concept is not much different from an openworld game like WOW where a huge world is streaming from the server so your character can travel to the next town or like GTA SA where a ps2 with 32 MB of RAM stream parts of a 4+ GB stored on disk or an algorith to make a procedural world you can in thery create a world for a flight simulation game with similar data as microsoft flight simulator and run it offline
Actually in WoW, GTA SA or even Destiny for that regard, data is stored on your PC/Console not streamed from a server. Your device communicates your gameplay actions like when you press jump with the server. Flight Sim stores the whole data on cloud.
The offline mode involves you downloading a part of the map. But you need one hell of a server to download the whole 2 PB of data, otherwise almost everyone is going to play them off Azure server.I mentioned GTA SA was stored on disk and the examples are about the concept, flight simulator also will include offline modes with part of the world stored on your PC but if you prefer an example of the whole world in the server then second life is a good example of it, the point is flight simulator and the cloud are not doing anything new and that is why people are disappointed with the cloud in general, at least cell was used as a relatively cheap CPU very powerful for games at the time
So now you are telling me not only Cell is better than current gen console CPUs, it's also better then current gen Desktop PC CPUs?
The offline mode involves you downloading a part of the map. But you need one hell of a server to download the whole 2 PB of data, otherwise almost everyone is going to play them off Azure server.
I think that's quite given - the separation of CPU and GPU is so strong nowadays that there's no point having the CPU do the functions of the GPU anymore. I'm not sure if it made sense when PS3 launched either. And as stated, it was a bitch to program for.For GPU-related tasks, it surely is, WAY better than any CPU currently available on the he market, and I would even go as far as saying that we will never see such a powerful CPU when it comes to graphics processing ever again.
A couple of years ago i suggested in an emulation forum that the last gen console CPUs could be just as good or better than the current ones, especially Cell, given how crappy current ones are. And i got so much shit for said post, i still remember it today.
Read this carefully:But for a typica CPU workload? Nah, PPC architecture is surely more capable than Jaguar found in current consoles, but I'm not sure if that single PPC core from the PS3 was more powerful than all 8 Jaguar cores combined in PS4/XB1, or even an ordinary quad-core ARM found in a typical smartphone nowadays, let alone a modern multi-threadded Intel/AMD CPU.
Gameplay code will get slower and harder to write on the next generation of consoles. Modern CPUs use out-of-order execution, which is there to make crappy code run fast. This was really good for the industry when it happened, although it annoyed many assembly language wizards in Sweden. Xenon and Cell are both in-order chips. What does this mean? It’s cheaper for them to do this. They can drop a lot of cores. One out-of-order core is about four times [did I catch that right? Alice] the size of an in-order core. What does this do to our code? It’s great for grinding on floating point, but for anything else it totally sucks. Rumours from people actually working on these chips – straight-line runs 1/3 to 1/10th the performance at the same clock speed. This sucks.
But Cell was a proto-APU, it heralded the heterogeneous processor paradigm shift/era:Considering how the CELL was good at GPU tasks, I wonder how it could have evolved to replace both CPU and GPU. Not like an APU, but like in the old days before GPUs existed. A new CELL based design 7nm processor dealing with both graphics and cpu tasks. Probably not good for gaming, but as an ARM competitor for portable solutions.
It's more like Canadian cars.AFAIK Cell was ~250GFs... which is really good for a CPU. The problem is that it is very wonky and you have to code stuff specifically to run well on it. And not everything you try to run on it will run well. So there's that. It's like a Ferrari with a really shitty gearbox and steering wheel.
I have never hard of a 2 PB HDD. And I dont know what drug you are on but MMOs including WoW dont stream the map, they stream your player data. The map is locally stored on your device and is not that big.a hell of hdd yes but like other games/servers, wow uses 1.3+ PB of data for example and second life is immense(200+ PB some people say) and that is because it let you create content and that is the problem with the cloud after all the hype its use is like other game servers mostly to store data from the world with some physics implementation
I have never hard of a 2 PB HDD. And I dont know what drug you are on but MMOs including WoW dont stream the map, they stream your player data. The map is locally stored on your device and is not that big.
How World of Warcraft Works
World servers are essentially complete, self-contained copies of the game world. Learn more about world servers and how the world servers work.electronics.howstuffworks.com
but the sunshine did play big role of revitalize life XDDoesn't matter how strong something is if you can barely get anything out of it.
It's like bragging about the power of the sun to some nuclear reactor site but the best you can do is sunshine. lol
Benchmark wise how long did it take? lolbut the sunshine did play big role of revitalize life XD
certain species of bambo can grow 91 cm per day though lolBenchmark wise how long did it take? lol
IIRC, Cell had scaling issues below 45nm (something to do with EIB).Hey, imagine if Sony was secretly in development with AMD to develop a 7nm Cell Co-Processor to help with PS3 emulation...…….It could also be used for physics, sound processing for PS5 games and media functions, when not used in BC processing....
Very good, AMD cpu's are very capable no doubt, but in my scenario, if they use cell to make PS3 BC easier as a very small co-processor, in it's downtime, nothing stops the devs or Sony from using it for extra physics simul, media, sound or even OS functions...…...IIRC, Cell had scaling issues below 45nm (something to do with EIB).
Zen 2 has 8 powerful 256-bit SIMD co-processors for audio/physics processing (media will be handled by AMD VCN):
It should be enough to emulate Cell's SPUs (128-bit SIMD).
So it could run games at 4K and at 60fps? This guy just wants to make headlines since the big boss left to Sony.
That's the drawback of giving gamers big HDD.I would say so did size limits on XBLA games. Lots of devs said they hard a hard time fitting the file size restrictions. They had to learn to code and recompile games that on last gen they made to fit in a gig. This gen they just toss in bloat code and we get download it all. When indie games are over 10 gigs you know that code isn’t optimal.
To be fair, it's also broadband/always-on internet that made devs kinda lazy.That's the drawback of giving gamers big HDD.
You'd think it would be to install games, saved game files and gamers filling it with media clips.
Instead, devs use it as a dumping ground for huge files and patches, with the assumption every gamer has a big HDD and bandwidth........... "let all those asshole gamers figure it out".
My 486 in the early 90s had I think about 200mb space. So a system with tons of games installed, Win 3.1, shitty versions of Wordperfect and Lotus 123, and whatever other junk was on it used no more than 200mb.
And a patch is 13gb alone?
13 GB Dead Rising 3 Patch Raises Questions About Gaming's Future
There's a 13-gigabyte update live for Dead Rising 3 today, and if you think that seems kind of big, well, that's because it's kind of big.kotaku.com
Didn't have home internet until I think 1998.To be fair, it's also broadband/always-on internet that made devs kinda lazy.
Back in the early 90s, chances are you didn't have internet access, or at best you had dial-up internet (probably no more than 14.4k).