Top
250°

Leadtek to Launch PS3 Graphics Chip for PCs

Leadtek will next week start selling its first PC graphics card based on Toshiba's SpursEngine graphics co-processor, it announced today.

The WinFast PxVC1100 will hit stories in Japan's Akihabara electronics district from November 19 and will be cost about ¥29,800 (£199).

The single-slot PCI Express card comes with 128MB of XDR DRAM memory and drivers for Windows XP and Vista. Leadtek is targeting it at applications such as video editing and authoring, video upscaling, transcoding of video formats and playback of high-definition video.

Read Full Story >>
pcadvisor.co.uk
The story is too old to be commented.
Fishy Fingers3321d ago (Edited 3321d ago )

Headline give me the impression it's the PS3s GPU they're producing. It's actually a stripped down version of the Cell. Using only 4 SPU's rather than the (PS3s) 8.

Should be a great piece of kit for certain applications such as graphics processing, but that's all listed in the article.

Foxgod3321d ago

this is not for graphic processing, its way too underpowered with only 128 mb of ram.

This is for video encoding.

AAACE53321d ago

Having this in alot of PC's could help out the Ps3 later on, because it could help smaller developers become more used to working with this type of tech. Which would lead to more games for Ps3!

They can start out with this version, and be already be somewhat familiar with the tech, so they aren't so intimidated by the CELL processor!

This is a good thing in my opinion!

Foxgod3321d ago

only it is for video encoding, so nobody is going to become familiar with the cell if its meant for video authoring.

wibble3321d ago

PS3 can only use 6 of the 8 cores for games.

Foxgod3321d ago

The Ps3 only has one core, and 6 SPE's.

My new pc has 8 cores (i7, 4 paired cores, making total of 8) , it blows both the 360 and the ps3 out of the water.

DJ3321d ago

It's true. One SPU is ignored to improve chip yields. The second SPU is dedicated to the OS and I/O devices. That leaves six SPUs for use by game developers.

Foxgod3321d ago

its 1 spu, and 6 spe's

Qdog3321d ago (Edited 3321d ago )

Answering some of those who ask, why not a traditional videocard, and why only 128mb ram... First a traditional videocard has a different aim in mind, namely videogame graphics, with video co/dec being a secondary function to support, and the CPU is left to the encoding/decoding. Where as this card will be aimed at the video compression/decompression, encoding/decoding, with a secondary function, could possibly be improved physics calculations for making games(maya, softrender, etc.)and game engines. The 128mb of ram just so happens to be XDR ram(high bandwidth/high performance) which is mainly server grade ram. The XDR has a larger bus width, higher bandwidth, and less latency problems then DDR3-DDR5, making XDR an equal/overperformer when paired against equal or greater sized DDR modules. It does the same amount of work in half the time that 256/320mb DDR, thereby accomplishing more with less....As well making it an ideal choice for the mid-range/low end developer/researcher... Hope I cleared some things up about the XDR ram...

wibble3321d ago

@Foxgod

Your I7 only has 4 cores. It uses hyper-threading to make it appear to have 8 cores. But the performance wont be equal to a genuine 8 core CPU.

ner ner

JsonHenry3321d ago

Lol, for $200 bucks you could get a much better card, faster, with more (and faster) video RAM for $150 from either Nvidia or ATi/AMD

Darkseider3321d ago

The i7 is nifty but let's clear things up. A full on Cell 1 PPE/8 SPE has the equivalent processing power of approx. 3x Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz processors. The new PowerXCell 8i increases the performance by nearly 30% giving it the equivalent processing power of roughly 4x Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz processors. The increase in performance is due to the ability to perform dual precision floating point math 50% faster than the Cell B/E. The Cell 2, which is due out in 2010, will be a 2x PPE/32 SPE chip @ 4Ghz and will be a true Teraflop+ chip. Currently the Cell and its' derivatives are the most powerful processors on the planet.

The Intel Larrabee which will be introduced in 2010 accroding to Intel is very similar in design concept to the Cell. The inital processor is supposed to be a 32 core unit as well. Unfortunately due to it's dependency and use of simpler x86 cores cannot match the performance of the Cell. Intel released a tech demo of the chip which was an 80 core unit which just surpassed the 1 Teraflop mark. Granted through further R&D and improved manufacturing they will be able to improve the performance of the chip but based on initial numbers the 32 core Larrabee should clock in at about 600-700 gigaFLOPS as opposed to the Cell 2's 1+ Teraflop.

Both processors are very impressive but I do truly hope that IBM, Sony, Toshiba and their partners are able to make the Cell a mainstream processor. The x86 is a dinosaur and is holding back computing in the name of backwards compatibility with legacy software. The only way to progress any further is to eliminate the dependency on these legacy applications and operating systems and migrate to a new, more efficient and powerful platform. That platform being the Cell B/E.

Qdog3321d ago

I think you may have missed the part about this card not being a videocard, or in any way aimed at ATI or Nvidia's end of the market. This card is supposed to act as a secondary processor, and take alot of the brunt of video encoding/decoding.....ah what's the use, if you didnt read my first comment, you probably wont read my second one. Please do research before you compare two different hardware components in function.

IdleLeeSiuLung3321d ago

This article has little to do with the PS3 other than similar technology, but notice how this again re-inforces that the Cell architecture was intended for number crunching and not a multipurpose processor for gaming related tasks.

I don't care how powerful the darn thing is, if it isn't doing what I bought the device for so give me the games that going to bring the PS3 above and beyond 360 level graphics. I'm not talking about the small barely noticeable differences in graphics between PS3 and 360. I want to see what Sony promised me! No more of that Motorstorm pre-render videos and cr*p like that.

Qdog3321d ago (Edited 3321d ago )

The problem is not the technology, it's the software having to make leaps and bounds catching up with the tech, to please people that want graphics, graphics, graphics. Dont get me wrong The visual aspect of a game is very important, but I think TOO MANY people overlook, the finer points that make a game either crap or gold. Such as physics, AI, cache management, inclusion of extras, extended play(play+), etc that ultimately get ignored by the gamer, but took no less work to bring together. I believe as a gamer, that you can get greater enjoyment(appreciation) from games, if you understand how they work, the same goes for life(for me, at least). The multipurposing I assume your referring too, is almost irrelevant on a console, that is almost independent from a background OS, versus gaming on a Windows Vista platform(or PC), where extra resources are needed to run OS only tasks, outisde of what the game actually needs. The 360/wii/ps3 are closed platforms, and the OS have been minimalized specifically to re-appropriate system resources while the console fulfills it's number one purpose, to provide a medium in which reality is overly exagerated, and consequences are re-thought, in order to provide the satisfaction of epic accomplishment, that would in all probability be impossible in reality, due to preset constraints(videogaming). In closing I dont mean to target you specifically, but if the shoe fits... and last, with games like Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, Resistance: Fall of Man 2, Killzone 2(beta right now), already playable, your request has already been filled. Show me games that have the graphical finesse or all-important physics related jargon that Uncharted has, for instance, did you know that every explosion in Uncharted is a carefully calculated volumetric effect in real-time, not preset?...I just think it's ironic, how the masses keep asking for what is already there in front of them,(a superior gaming experience) but they judge with closed eyes, and made up minds, based on what they heard.

Darkseider3321d ago

The article reinforces that the Cell is excellent at number crunching if that is what it is tasked to do in that specific instance. It is capable of far more when tasked to and does it well. This is due to the flexibility of the archtiecture and its' surrounding components, XDR, RSX, FlexIO, etc... IF, notice I said IF, one could get a PC based on a 45nm Cell B/E with 1 Gig XDR RAM and a fully accessible RSX chip what could be done is amazing. The sheer amount of processing power in that unit would be incredible. Slap on some Linux and you're golden. Personally, IF (there I said IF again) someone were to introduce a desktop similar to the one I just mentioned for $3000 or under I would have one on order the day it was announced. Currently I do alot of work with IBM QS21 blade servers and the performance they yield dwarfs even the big iron Suns that we have. So for me to see a desktop PC w/ a fully accessible RSX GPU and 1 Gig RAM would be a dream come true.

Ju3321d ago

There where some rumors about a cell/rsx based workstation, but I have never seen any products coming to live, yet. Does anybody know, if Sony ever sold (sells) the RSX based workstations ? ( http://www.engadget.com/200... )

Darkseider3321d ago

That would be the Sony Zego, I think.

http://pro.sony.com/bbsccms...

It also has an optional DVI output board so you can hook it up directly to a display. I have yet to find any pricing info on the unit. Would be nice to have one but I don't see this being any less that $8k - $9k USD. Would be nice though.

kopicha3321d ago

Fox is retarded. ignore him. He doesnt even know the real concept behind what he owns before he open his stinky mouth.

Ju3321d ago (Edited 3321d ago )

@Darksider. Thx. Yes that's what I was looking for. Kinda weird design. 1GB + 1GB SDRAM, and DVI-board "expansion". But, 19" rack. Hm, doesn't look like it could become a regular product, and not just because of the price. That would require main mem upgradeable (sockets!) and some PCIe slots. But the rest would do, I think. How does one get a PS3 dev unit ? Doesn't differ much from the PS3, hah ? (guess you have to apply for a dev license with a game idea, is that so ?)

Edit. Sony should bring a new PSX-3 or so. 1GB XDRAM, KB&Mouse, and a BD Burner + TV Tuner. (Sure, for games only the 256 would work, but you could run linux on it, and it should contain a PVR SW right in the XMB). But that would be it, even if sold for $1500. That'll be alright.

uie4rhig3320d ago

the fact that its saying PS3's CELL GPU.. makes this article fail

GIJeff3320d ago

comparing an i7 to a cell is freaking funny. You have WAY too much faith in Intel. How long did it take for Intel to include the memory controller on the chip? lol. Intel is ridiculous. Always touting clock speeds and pushing "hyper threading" like its useful. I'm sorry, but go ahead and do any encoding benchmark with your i7 clocked at whatever you can, and then compare it to this cell. You will suddenly be very disappointed in your Intel purchase.

+ Show (18) more repliesLast reply 3320d ago
pp3321d ago

PS3 Graphics Chip for PCs = FLOP

Fishy Fingers3321d ago

It's not for use as a GPU for running PC games. Read the article before commenting, you might save yourself looking quite so foolish.

ultimolu3321d ago

Fishy...pp usually makes no logical sense.
Don't bother explaining anything to him. You'll only get a headache. -_-

Foxgod3321d ago

well, he does have a point, theres no console gpu out there that can match the latest geforce and radeon cards, current pc cards are +- 10 times as powerful as the gpu's in the ps3 and the 360.

ruibing3321d ago

@Fishy Fingers
I wouldn't think too much on it. Some people don't really read the articles, they just give a negative spin any titles with the word PS3.

snipermk03320d ago

Are you people retarded? PP purely commented that PS3 graphics chip for the PC = Flop. And he never said that its use as a gaming processor is flop but, as a graphics chip in whole. I guess you guys should make sense of another person post before commenting. That way, you avoid looking stupid. ;)

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3320d ago
Bolts3321d ago

Why not just use any of the Nvidia or ATI chipset thats flooding the market. Its not like they can't be used for 264 encoding.

Foxgod3321d ago

No idea, its not even cheap, if it was a 99 E card it could have been attractive for people that do a lot of video (r)endcoding, but with 200 pounds its kind of steep.

sloth4urluv3321d ago (Edited 3321d ago )

Kinda confused at this too, would think you would want more memory for video editing. Guess it would mainly be used on performing merging operations or applying effects since it can only hold like 16 frames @1080, if you move up to movie theater resolution it drops to like 4.

Would be good for encoding, but so is a CUDA graphics card.

thewhoopimen3321d ago

My guess is this Cell video encoder mayhap is faster than most if all not all video encoders/decoders out there? (for its price)

j4gs143321d ago

they need to mainstream the cell so people become more custom to it and learn how to use it. instead of sticking to what they know.

Foxgod3321d ago (Edited 3321d ago )

That would be good for the cell.

But to pull that off they would have to design a Cell2 that is fast enough to offer competition to the Nvidia, Radeon, Intel and IBM Chips, cores, Cpu's and GPU's.
And they would have to release it simultaniously with the competition.

If you would make a Cell Video card for PC's now from the current existing cell, it would horribly fail against the latest GPU's from Nvidia/Radeon.

Because the current cell is too outdated, its speed and power are meaningless on the PC market.

Otherwise companies like Asus and Gigabyte would create videocards with Cell GPU's instead of Nvidia/Radeon GPU's, they always go for the best you know.

Darkseider3321d ago (Edited 3321d ago )

Foxgod I noticed you neglected to reply to me in the gamer zone and then I see you here spreading misinformation and FUD. For those that just hit the open zone, here ya go.

The i7 is nifty but let's clear things up. A full on Cell 1 PPE/8 SPE has the equivalent processing power of approx. 3x Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz processors. The new PowerXCell 8i increases the performance by nearly 30% giving it the equivalent processing power of roughly 4x Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz processors. The increase in performance is due to the ability to perform dual precision floating point math 50% faster than the Cell B/E. The Cell 2, which is due out in 2010, will be a 2x PPE/32 SPE chip @ 4Ghz and will be a true Teraflop+ chip. Currently the Cell and its' derivatives are the most powerful processors on the planet.

The Intel Larrabee which will be introduced in 2010 accroding to Intel is very similar in design concept to the Cell. The inital processor is supposed to be a 32 core unit as well. Unfortunately due to it's dependency and use of simpler x86 cores cannot match the performance of the Cell. Intel released a tech demo of the chip which was an 80 core unit which just surpassed the 1 Teraflop mark. Granted through further R&D and improved manufacturing they will be able to improve the performance of the chip but based on initial numbers the 32 core Larrabee should clock in at about 600-700 gigaFLOPS as opposed to the Cell 2's 1+ Teraflop.

Both processors are very impressive but I do truly hope that IBM, Sony, Toshiba and their partners are able to make the Cell a mainstream processor. The x86 is a dinosaur and is holding back computing in the name of backwards compatibility with legacy software. The only way to progress any further is to eliminate the dependency on these legacy applications and operating systems and migrate to a new, more efficient and powerful platform. That platform being the Cell B/E.

EDIT: The cell outdated? The Cell B/E is just as relevant if not more in todays PC market. Simply due to the improvements made to the architecture, PowerXCell 8i, and the improvements made to the compilers and SDKs for the unit.

blackbeld3321d ago

Agree with Darkseider.. AMEN.

thematrix12983321d ago

Some of you have no idea about hardware...all you know is button smash in games. XDR ram is very very fast so it makes sense for them to release it for video editing. Memory is not everything. A comparison would be Ferrari which can't take more than 2 person(load) and a 16 wheeler which can take 1000kg+ but ferrari can still kill it in speed. In that sense if you have a 6800 card with 1gb memory it will still loose to 9800 128mb card[if it exist].

Show all comments (51)
The story is too old to be commented.