Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 17:34 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems The first laptops to make use of the SpursEngine, a multimedia co-processor derived from the Cell chip that powers the PlayStation 3, will go on sale in Japan in July. Toshiba will launch its Qosmio G50 and F40 machines with the chip, which contains four of the "Synergistic Processing Elements" from the Cell Broadband Engine processor. The Cell chip used in the PlayStation 3 has eight of the SPE cores plus a Power PC main processor. The SPE cores perform the heavy number-crunching that makes the console's graphics so stunning. The SpursEngine SE1000 will work in much the same way in the laptops. The operating system will run on an Intel Core 2 Duo chip and the SpursEngine will be called on to handle processor-intensive tasks, such as processing of high-definition video. This arrangement means the laptop should be capable of some tricks that haven't been seen on machines until now.
Thread beginning with comment 319600
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Poor article
by evangs on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 19:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Poor article"
evangs
Member since:
2005-07-07


To answer your question #2: The Cell processing units are not comparable to a rendering pipeline found on a GPU. They are not capable of an API like OpenGL. Also the Playstation 3 has a dedicated GPU from nvidia.


But there are already efforts being made to use the the GPU as a vector unit (see Apple's OpenCL for example). Add to the fact that the GPU's shader language is so complex (and Turing complete?), this suggests to me that it should be possible to use the current crop of GPUs in a Cell-like fashion.

I don't know how exactly the current crop of GPUs differ from the Cell, but from glancing at the tech specs of the latest nVidia and ATI chips (wth, 128 cores? I remember having 4 pixel pipelines and being impressed) I can't see how they would be different from a programming point of view.

Granted, I haven't done any graphics programming since DirectX 7 in '00 and so I could be just talking out of my @rse. But I think I remember your nick from the old Gamedev and Flipcode forums so you'd probably be able to enlighten me ;)

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[3]: Poor article
by StephenBeDoper on Tue 24th Jun 2008 02:12 in reply to "RE[2]: Poor article"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

(wth, 128 cores? I remember having 4 pixel pipelines and being impressed)


Hah, and it seems like yesterday that the big debate regarding 3d accelerators was "is there any real benefit in getting a card with 8MB of RAM, or should you stick with 4MB?"

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[3]: Poor article
by Ford Prefect on Tue 24th Jun 2008 16:42 in reply to "RE[2]: Poor article"
Ford Prefect Member since:
2006-01-16

Ok, now I was talking about the other way round (specific question from the OP).

Sure you can do many processsing tasks with today's high end and perhaps even mid-range GPUs. They have several APIs for that already.

But the question is how efficient that is. If you have a powerful GPU lying around in your PC doing nothing special anyway, it is a great idea to utilize it. If you don't have that per-se, which is especially the case for laptop computers, it's a different case. Then it could be worth it for several reasons to only use an integrated GPU and instead try these nifty Cell SPUs.

Edited 2008-06-24 16:43 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2