[Nuendo]

Originally Posted by Costique The thing that really bugs me is that nobody ever said Apple is involved. Some say they wish Apple were involved or just find it logical.

Did IBM ever say they were building a stripped down Power4 for Apple? I think if Apple is somehow involved in Cell development, they certainly want nobody to know about that untill they've got a product ready.

[Henriok]

Originally Posted by Costique I wonder if the following is possible. Cell is indeed highly customizable, which makes it usable anywhere. Apple is not involved in the development because they have no resources, i.e. they have nothing to contribute to the project. Meanwhile, they develop software support for Cell, extend the OS, reimplement frameworks. When IBM is ready for mass production, here comes Apple with a huge order for customized Cell hardware.

I find that scenario highly likely. Sony, Toshiba and IBM should all be very eager to license this technology to whomever wants to use it. It just fits into the core application model of the Cell technology that they would want as many as possible to adopt Cell. IBMs strides to make an open community arround their Power effrorts hints to this also. IBM have seen the benefits of making a large and open base of Power, and that should be true in regards of Cell too. Even more so.

But.. Sony, Toshiba and IBM might want to get a head start and be the early adopters that show the world how insanely great this technology is and reap the initial benefits of this and get a strong foothold into a potential new market. They might not want to bring Apple along in the beginning as Apple carries a certain stigma. Apple might steal the limelight, and some might not even want to use Cell if there is some connection to Apple (since the only makes mice with one button).

But.. if I was Apple I would just sit back, let Sony, Toshiba and IBM do all the hard work and then just tag along for the fun of it.. 'caus I think Cell will be really really great, and certain applications of it fits just right into Apple's products.

[Costique]

Which leads to the main question: can Cell be used instead of a traditional CPU and what sort of changes to kernel/memory management/etc. would that require?

Originally Posted by Nuendo Did IBM ever say they were building a stripped down Power4 for Apple? I think if Apple is somehow involved in Cell development, they certainly want nobody to know about that untill they've got a product ready.

You're right, of course. I was thinking that Apple is almost the only customer for PPC970, which is easier to conceal. Cell is, like, Trinity = IBM + Sony + Toshiba, a project involving engineers from at least 3 huge companies, a lot of patented stuff, which is broader.

[DrGruv]

This is beginning to feel like a twilight zone episode...

Is any thing going to ever be released?

Product:
PowerMac

Last Release:
June 09, 2004

Days Since Update:
243 (Average = 176)

[CoreMac]

Deeper into the Twilight Zone...http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.ph...2619/#comments

[Banana]

The idea of cell actually scares me....

[checksum]

This CELL or another: opinions will invariably oscillate, right?

A: http://www.qualia.sony.us/movies/qualia_phase2_high.mov - "that's that’s both eclectic and artistic in nature"

B: "The idea of cell actually scares me ..."

C: "What's happening right now may be beyond anyone's understanding, that goes for all of these properties at first." [don't think "spotlight" or "qualia" are some sort of accidental motivational codenames.]

And so on.

The formation of these various alliances (OSGi, GLOBUS, Power.org, etc.) is encouraging, as they will tend to regulate each other in interesting ways. As long as they won't coalesce into one big crowd.

Side note to self:

1. Remember Le Bon - crowds are reactionary (translation: "stupid")

2. Never do anything without a clear purpose.

3. Get in touch with reality: go for a good walk.


--

[Programmer]

Originally Posted by Costique Which leads to the main question: can Cell be used instead of a traditional CPU and what sort of changes to kernel/memory management/etc. would that require?

Well considering Sony is talking TVs & game consoles, and IBM is talking about workstations and supercomputers, I'm sure the Mac could fit in there somewhere. They say it has a Power core and it can run Linux (and is OS neutral). That bodes pretty well for being able to run MacOS X. There would probably be some OS kernel and driver changes necessary, but that isn't unprecidented for a new PPC processor. The new SPU cores would need software support, but they are the kind of thing that Apple is creating the CoreAudio/CoreImage/etc APIs to support.

Frankly I think Apple would be silly not to take this seriously. Lets see, 2 cores at maybe 3 GHz, or 9 cores at 4 GHz. I don't know, what do you think?

[HHogan]

Originally Posted by Banana The idea of cell actually scares me....

Wasn't there a whole saga about the horrors of Cell on Dragonball Z ?

[wizard69]

Originally Posted by Programmer Well considering Sony is talking TVs & game consoles, and IBM is talking about workstations and supercomputers, I'm sure the Mac could fit in there somewhere.

I hope it fits in somewhere. Maybe not the Cell we are hearing about tonight but a variant at the very least.

In any event that PPC core just about has my pants wet.

They say it has a Power core and it can run Linux (and is OS neutral). That bodes pretty well for being able to run MacOS X.

This is what we are hearing, a full PPC core in there someplace. I do hope that accessibility to the rest of Cell will be good. I'd like to see the market move back to opening up hardware so that things like Linux can fully exploit what is there.

There would probably be some OS kernel and driver changes necessary, but that isn't unprecidented for a new PPC processor. The new SPU cores would need software support, but they are the kind of thing that Apple is creating the CoreAudio/CoreImage/etc APIs to support.

Apple could have OS/X up on the PPC core in a very short time considering how the chip looks at the moment. It probally wouldn't take them long to get Core Audio working on one of the SPE/U's either. The SIMD units may not be AltVec but it appears that AltVec instruction streams could map into them pretty quick.

Frankly I think Apple would be silly not to take this seriously.

Maybe CoreAudio/CoreImaging is Apples way of telling us that they are taking Cell seriously.

Lets see, 2 cores at maybe 3 GHz, or 9 cores at 4 GHz. I don't know, what do you think?

[Henriok]

Allright.. Cell has a Power core with VMX (AltiVec?), mutithreading and running faster than 4 GHz. Seems pretty much like Nr.9 was very wrong in what he said was a fact in the industry. The question I'm asking is if the +4 GHz is erfering to the processor as a whole or some part of it. Is it really the Power core that's suddenly decided to increase its speed two fold, or is is just the SPUs that's runing that fast? When I first saw the figure "4.6 GHz" i immediately thought that this was the speed of the streaming processors and that the core was half of that. a Power core running in 2.3 GHz isn't that much of a deal.

[FallenFromTheTree]

Skimming through this info left me with the impression that the G5 processor
would still be the controller or you might say the primary CPU.

With that in mind, I then considered the possibility that each of the dual G5 processors could then be used to control each of the 8 Cell cores.

So right or wrong, my impression is that the cell cores might then be used as a secondary GPU rather than the primary CPU.

If cell was used to process graphics, video and sound, then
what happens to PCI, PCI-X and PCI-Express ?

I'm very confused



Either way, my Mac fund is going back in the bank.

[Costique]

Originally Posted by Programmer They say it has a Power core and it can run Linux (and is OS neutral). That bodes pretty well for being able to run MacOS X. There would probably be some OS kernel and driver changes necessary, but that isn't unprecidented for a new PPC processor. The new SPU cores would need software support, but they are the kind of thing that Apple is creating the CoreAudio/CoreImage/etc APIs to support. Frankly I think Apple would be silly not to take this seriously. Lets see, 2 cores at maybe 3 GHz, or 9 cores at 4 GHz. I don't know, what do you think?

If Cell does provide the claimed performance increase over, say, PPC970, then Apple simply does not have a viable alternative. If the damn thing can indeed run Linux, then it can run Mac OS X too.

Originally Posted by Henriok Cell has a Power core with VMX (AltiVec?), mutithreading and running faster than 4 GHz.

I don't think so. If I understood Hannibal correctly:

Originally Posted by Hannibal Finally, the instruction set for the SPEs is not VMX compatible or derivative, because its execution hardware doesn't support the range of instructions and instruction types that VMX/Altivec does.

Anyway, this can be solved with a well-designed framework abstracting the hardware.

[Henriok]

The SPEs might not be VMX-compatible (i won't question Hannibal on this topic) but the Power core does have VMX as stated by Sony's spec-sheet. I wan't to have it confirmed that this VMX is indeed AltiVEc comptatible. It seems to me that this Power core (sans SPEs) is a Power5 derivative, quite suitable for Mac use in its own right, and such it would be interessting to know if it is the Power core that is running in +4 GHz or if it's some other component in the Cell processor.

[Baron Munchausen]

FallenFromTree,

I read the article in the same way as you did - a dual core hub processor controlling 8 cell elements being handed tasks.

It would not surprise me if we see an initial 'cut' with just a couple of
cell cores to get the platform out there, but a multi-core device would be sensible as a home theatre platform that can handle multiple HDTV streams at once.

I wonder if Cell support spawns OS/XI...

[Costique]

Originally Posted by Henriok The SPEs might not be VMX-compatible (i won't question Hannibal on this topic) but the Power core does have VMX as stated by Sony's spec-sheet.

Yes, you're right. I've missed it somehow. So Cell appears to be a PowerPC-like core + x vector-processing units, rather than x PowerPC-like cores. This is good, IMHO, because: a) they mainly leave the core alone and b) SPEs don't have to be fully VMX/Altivec-compatible since they are just additional computational units.

BTW, Ars forums do seem enlightening, though it's hard for me to understand everything.

[wizard69]

That is what Cell appears to be at this time. I'm expecting another report today (hopefully) or Ars that will go into more details. If the core is indeed running faster than 4 GHz this could be a very good thing indeed.

As to Nr.9, I will repeat in thought what I've said before. 1. The 970 in all its appearances seems to have been a rushed job to get a product to market for Apple. Little tought was put into power usage. 2. Many manufactures have indeed gotten excellent power scaling by going ot 90nm. You do have a serious problem with static power being a large proportion of the total power due to leakage. That however does not mean that different organizations have not attempted to address the issue or not meant with success. It is certainly a case that many currrent processes have bumped up against a wall of sorts, that just gives a vendor the incentive to enhance the process.

As to the PPC, it does appear from the Sony announcement that it does indeed run that fast. It will be interesting to see how they accomplished that and how much it impacts performance. Personally I'm very interested in the power performance of this chip, it could be that the chip is impractical to run at high speed even if it is reliable. Or this core could be very energy stingy and ideal for a fast laptop. I can't help but to think that this core will show up elsewhere, possibly without the Cell baggage.

Dave

Originally Posted by Henriok Allright.. Cell has a Power core with VMX (AltiVec?), mutithreading and running faster than 4 GHz. Seems pretty much like Nr.9 was very wrong in what he said was a fact in the industry. The question I'm asking is if the +4 GHz is erfering to the processor as a whole or some part of it. Is it really the Power core that's suddenly decided to increase its speed two fold, or is is just the SPUs that's runing that fast? When I first saw the figure "4.6 GHz" i immediately thought that this was the speed of the streaming processors and that the core was half of that. a Power core running in 2.3 GHz isn't that much of a deal.

[Snoopy]

I have been reading that it is the SPEs, or SPUs, that run at 4 GHz or over. The PPC core, which appears to be a Power5 derivative, runs at just 1 GHz. These are second hand quotes, however. Anyone see this in a reliable report?

[Enki]

The PPE core is reportedly not a Power5 derivative, but an extension of the "1GHz PPC" project from 5-6 years ago and presented at this same conference in 2000. A project from days when 1GHz was still a long way off in PPC land. I have also read reports the PE only runs at 1GHz and the SPEs run at 4GHz.

[Programmer]

This is not correct -- the whole chip runs at 4 GHz (well, if you can believe their claims it well). The in-order dual issue, long pipeline design of the Power core is clearly designed to get maximum clock rate. The Power core may have been an offshoot of the "1 GHz PPC" project, but it has far exceeded the initial demonstration.

[Enki]

I don't doubt the PPE is vastly superior to the old demo core. There seems to be more than a few conflicting reports on its speed though and I don't know what to take to the bank yet, hence the "read reports" method of passing along tidbit info. Are you saying you have a definitive source on the whole chip being 4Ghz? Anything definitive at this point is better than the scatterblasts all over the web right now, although the variance is reducing slowly.

[dglow]

Hannibal's Part II is up, fyi.

[DrGruv]

Don't know if you saw this....


STI =

STI cell processor
Next generation processors



Just as the cells in a body unite to form complete physical systems, a "Cell" architecture will allow all kinds of electronic devices (from consumer products to supercomputers) to work together, signaling a new era in Internet entertainment, communications and collaboration.




The Vision:
Breakthrough microprocessor architecture that puts broadband communications right on the chip.

Markets:

·**
Next-generation communications

·**
Consumer multimedia applications

STI cell processor defined
Two years ago, Sony and Toshiba and IBM (STI) announced that they had teamed up to design an architecture for what is termed a system-on-a-chip (SoC) design. Code-named Cell, chips based on the architecture will be able to use ultra high-speed broadband connectivity to interoperate with one another as one complete system, similar to the way neural cells interoperate over the brain's network.

Market demand for STI cell processor
IBM expects Cell to define an entirely new way of operating. Cell's underlying architecture will enable it to manifest itself into many forms for many purposes, helping to open up a whole new set of applications. Incorporating this architecture, chips will be developed for everything from handheld devices to mainframe computers.

IBM strategy with STI cell processor
IBM has an unmatched history and capability of building custom chips and believes the one-size-fits-all model of the PC does not apply in the embedded space; embedded applications will require a flexible architecture, like Cell. Cell also brings together, for the first time, many leading-edge IBM chip technologies and circuit designs developed for its servers.

STI cell processor benefits
Cell will take advantage of IBM's most advanced semiconductor development and process technologies.

http://www-1.ibm.com/businesscenter/...av_id/emerging

[Morpheus]

Originally Posted by DrGruv Don't know if you saw this.... Just as the cells in a body unite to form complete physical systems, a "Cell" architecture will allow all kinds of electronic devices (from consumer products to supercomputers) to work together, signaling a new era in Internet entertainment, communications and collaboration.

Yes, Virginia. Re-read the above paragraph as many times as needed until it sinks in.

(Very few in the press have)

Morpheus

[DrGruv]

- so my ps3 and mac will interface to give me 'cell' power

- and if they can give me more computer 'cell' power, then apple could use the cell!

[DrGruv]

and "work together"

"signaling a new era in Internet entertainment"

"communications and collaboration."

and it's all run on apple software? as the president of sony told steve 'just make software not hardware'

[Morpheus]

Originally Posted by DrGruv ... and it's all run on apple software? ...

Apple software? Who mentioned Apple software?

Morpheus

[CoreMac]

Originally Posted by Morpheus Apple software? Who mentioned Apple software? Morpheus

So basically its all over for Apple, right? All we get is the pukey Antares. Cell destroys it and everything else in it's path. Sometime in 2007, when Cell running Longhorn has dominated, Apple will get another shot. 666 , indeed.

[rickag]

Originally Posted by Morpheus Apple software? Who mentioned Apple software? Morpheus

Power PC ISA, plus additional sets of instructions should run Cell? For IBM, Sony, Toshiba would that be Linux? Wouldn't it be possible for BSD to be run on Cell??

I swear, I am pertetually in a constant state of confusion.

[checksum]

Just as the cells in a body unite to form complete physical systems, a "Cell" architecture will allow all kinds of electronic devices (from consumer products to supercomputers) to work together, signaling a new era in Internet entertainment, communications and collaboration.
--
"Yes, Virginia. Re-read the above paragraph as many times as needed until it sinks in. (Very few in the press have)

Morpheus"
--


... And when you're done, cycle through A-C on the [2005-02-07, 17:24] post, until C really kicks in. In 2020 perhaps.

checksum
--