Support NeoGAF

[monkeyrun]

Conroe is better at 2D applications

Cell is better at 4D applications

I think this sums it up perfectly.:lol

 

[antiloop]

Cell is like a generation ahead of conroe but it isn't for general usage. It is most efficient in a closed environment.

I believe Intel have something "Cell-like" for release in 2008 or something.

 

[elostyle]

Cell is like a generation ahead of conroe but it isn't for general usage. It is most efficient in a closed environment.

I believe Intel have something "Cell-like" for release in 2008 or something.

I'm not sure why you think that cell is a generation ahead, considering that it's key is to strip out most advanced cpu techniques and then multiply the result. It is both anachronistic and new. CPUs will go into that general direction in the future but not quite as extreme as the cell I believe. Besides, Sun has the niagara cpus that are like a symmetric version of the cell.

 

[aaaaa0]

I'm not sure why you think that cell is a generation ahead, considering that it's key is to strip out most advanced cpu techniques and then multiply the result. It is both anachronistic and new.

Ding ding ding!

Cell is fundementally more primitive than the CPUs we already have today. It's not a generation ahead, but more like a generation "to-the-left".

The reason for this are the tradeoffs that the designers made.

I hate analogies, but here goes:

Cell is like making a Honda Civic go faster by ripping out the interior, the A/C, the radio, the seats, the carpeting, then cutting off the body panels and replacing them with fibre-glass. Sure it WILL go faster, since it now weighs 1000 lbs less, but driving it will be annoying, and as a daily car, it will suck ass. You take it out for special occasions like races.

Conroe is like taking a fancy BMW, keeping all the luxury stuff that slows it down but makes it nicer to drive, and instead putting a bigger, more complicated engine in it to speed it up. Sure it might sometimes lose to the Pimped-up Honda Civic cause it weighs 1000 lbs more, and yeah, it's a lot more expensive, but the BMW car will be much more comfortable to use every day, and most people will prefer it despite the extra cost and weight.

 

[gofreak]

I'm not sure why you think that cell is a generation ahead

The principles of its design share some high level similarities with long-term roadmaps Intel has discussed. They've previously presented a roadmap that will one day call for chips with larger processors surrounded by multiple, simpler auxiliary cores, some which may even be specialised for certain tasks (i.e. a very asymmetrical design), with a high level of thread parallelism. Sound familiar? Obviously the scale and execution will be very different, but on a high level the comparison can be made.

This was the slide accompanying that (note the shift from a low multiplicity of large symmetrical cores, to 1-2 large cores with a high multiplicity of simpler cores):

 

[vantastic]

but the BMW car will be much more comfortable to use every day, and most people will prefer it despite the extra cost and weight.

and when it's not in the shop :lol

 

[mckmas8808]

I choose WILDLY ****ING CRAZY ABOUT IT

Figures..... -_-

 

[Moderation Unlimited]

The CELL will meet or exceed the performance target for which it was designed. I don't think anyone here was claiming the CELL to be the next general purpose pc chip. If you want to tune a CPU for low-cost, high-power gaming/graphics/imaging/multimedia applications, CELL is good as it gets in the current day.

 

[Zombie James]

The "one big cpu w/ multiple smaller, simpler cpus" design (they should really come up with a name for that) is clearly, imho, where CPU design is going to go.