Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 17:34 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 319600
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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






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