• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Guerilla Dev : Cell CPU is more powerful then modern desktop chips, even the fastest Intel ones

bilderberg

Member
Killzone 2's hit reactions and animation blending is still second to none. Even Shadow Fall was a step back in this regard. I wonder how much of that is because of different priorities, or just unique advantages cell afforded.
 

xool

Member
wtf is this nonsense?

8 core Zen 2 does 16FLOPs per core (SIMD32) .. that's 448 GFLOPS at only 3.5GHz. Intel chips have similar performance.

That's (nearly) double what Cell does.

Fair enough it took 10+ years, but modern common desktop chips completely outclass Cell..

Here's some real (not theoretical) benches that shows 8 core i9s and 8 core Zen+ and Zen 2 chips getting SIMD32 performances that are literal multiples of Cell's mid 200GFLOPs score
 
Last edited:
wtf is this nonsense?

8 core Zen 2 does 16FLOPs per core (SIMD32) .. that's 448 GFLOPS at only 3.5GHz. Intel chips have similar performance.

That's (nearly) double what Cell does.

Fair enough it took 10+ years, but modern common desktop chips completely outclass Cell..
IIRC, it's 32 flops for Zen 2 vs 8 flops for Jaguar.

Someone had done the number crunching in the next-gen thread.
 

GamingKaiju

Member
It certainly would have been interesting to see what could be done with the PS3 if Sony managed to put 2 Cell CPU’s like they originally planned too.
 
Remember, the Cell could do 4D, 120fps, you didn't need a computer, it could do everything, uncompressed lighting, real-time leaf wind blow, giant enemy crab, can have [perpendicular color shifts, and would not need a GPU.

Or that's what they said.
 
I thought it made sense for SONY to go with the cell during the PS3 era, they come into generations with new tech all the time (CD Disk, DVD etc.) it was only considered a failure until developers figured it out in the later part of the PS3's years.

NO it was still considered a failure, those finances are gone and won't be coming back.

Also what is a "CD Disk" and why do you think 80's technology was new in the mid-90's? ;)
 

blu

Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
1. Cell was superseded by GPGPUs. I.e. its EIB/SPEs were, the orchestrator PPE was essentially a POWER5, which has long been superseded by more modern POWER designs in servers, etc. Programming-wise, job-dispatch systems for the SPEs resemble today's GPU command queues in OCL, CUDA, Vulkan, DX12, etc.
2. Cell (just like GPUs) was a streaming processor -- its greatest strength was not in GFLOPS per se, but in its capability to sustain throughput -- it had the datapaths, the fast local storage and the ALUs to take care of that.
3. For a very long time green500's top was ruled by the DP-enhanced version of cell BE -- as late as june 2010, up until the advent of GPGPUs. *hint: This is what happens when you have a throughput-optimised design -- something no x86 has ever been*.
4. Ever since then GPGPUs have reigned supreme in green500.
5. Until last month, that is, when an arm64 design overtook the top, beating even Voltas in GFLOPS/watt. *hint: The next purely-CPU based entry in the green500 is at #35.

* Xeon Phi tried and failed. And failed. And failed.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom