Top
770°

IBM show how Cell can render real-time without RSX

This week at Game Developers Conference IBM will show a Linux based PS3 real-time rendering a complex (3 million triangle) urban landscape, at 1080p resolution, using only software rendering techniques (iRT).

At the link you can download a video of the demo (not full resolution). The full 1080p output which when H.264 compresssed results in a 600MB file that most machines can't even decode at 30 frames/sec.

To put this into perspective, if this render job was performed through 3dsMax's default ray-tracer on a Centrino Duo (dual core x86) it would take one hour and eight minutes to render one frame, something that takes the Cell and the iRt software less than one half of a second.

Read Full Story >>
gametomorrow.com
The story is too old to be commented.
jpod3700d ago

Good news for the developers.

Torch3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

I can attest to that, as I was precisely trying to convey a few nights ago, after watching that absolutely stunning Littlebigworld demo.

That seemingly-simple game is real-time CGI in action, folks. With physics to boot.

Good times ahead!

happygamer3699d ago

At the link you can download a video of the demo (not full resolution). The full 1080p output which when H.264 compresssed results in a 600MB file that most machines can’t even decode at 30 frames/sec.

To put this into perspective, if this render job was performed through 3dsMax's default ray-tracer on a Centrino Duo (dual core x86) it would take one hour and eight minutes to render one frame, something that takes the Cell and the iRt software less than one half of a second.

wow i didnt know it could do all that i dont know much about whats inside of my 360 or ps3 but can my 360 do that also?

techie3699d ago

Well I don't know, but I believe the architecture of the 360 relies on it's "better" GPU. Whereas the Cell is almost a GPU in itself...as we can see here.

360 fans...that was a MAYBE, I DON@'T KNOW...

Torch3699d ago

Just a guess, but I would bet my money on "absolutely not." Correct me if I'm wrong, but is the 360 nothing more than a specialized PC (similar to the original XBox, of which the primary guts were comprised of a PIII-700, and a GeForce 2 GTS card?) If this is indeed the case, I'd have to deduce that the Cell is in an entirely different league of its own; I've yet to use a PC that can accurately render raytracing anywhere close to real-time.

From the spectacular stuff I've seen so far, my humble opinion is that the PS3 hasn't even begun to stretch its legs yet.

Aeroglyphics3699d ago

If one PS3 could render raytracing real time then we would have life like graphics already. What they describe in the article is rendering through networks, where in the cell divides the tasks and assigns them to blades or other PS3 to render. Then the PS3 pulls the info back in rendered completely. This will probably have some kind of use with online games in the PS3's future, but as much as i wish it could, it won't affect games being run locally.

Killer Cop3699d ago

We are only seeing the very first beginning of the power behind PS3. This video on stand-alone PS3 or not, it shows us the raw power behind Cell.

Xi3699d ago

Remeber it requires all cells to do this, it breaks the image apart into 7 parts, renders each part and puts the image back together. though strong this isn't very useful in gaming as you'd not be able to run much of anything else. The 360 can do this in a simular way but relies on the gpu, the fact it did this without the rsx is the amazing part.

Bunnyslippers3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

...this was news I was waiting for. I remember a year ago, IBM was talking about the potential of connecting multiple PS3's through a network. Ech PS3 could render a part of a GIGANTIC online gameworld.

This is great news for online gaming on the PS3.

FINALLY conformation and 'proof'from IBM.

shotty3699d ago

Basically the xbox 360 and ps3 cpus are stripped down cpus and alot of the higher order functions are removed to a) cut costs b) boast frequecies (Ghz). It also allows for more raw calculations per seconds. The Cell therectically has more peak power than the Xenon CPU but the xbox 360's Xenos GPU is atleast 1 GPU ahead of the RSX. The xenos can do this like Anti alaisng, Z senciling without ever affecting the main GPU while on the RSX it would take a pretty significant hit which is somewhat offset by the Cell. All in All the powers are neck and neck. The xbox 360 has the added advantage of the unified memery where a majority can be allocated on the fly to system memerory and the memory hog of the GPU can use the EDRAM thats allow present for the xbox 360.

D3acon3699d ago

This how I thought the original PSN was going to work, it was going to be more peer to peer, with each PS3 sharing a portion of power to create a near lag free gaming enviornement.

This will probably benefit more from the home service and MMORPGS could be on the horizon. It maybe cheaper and more efficient to create a persistant world using connected PS3s. The reasons why I bought a ps3 :)

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3699d ago
weekapaugh3699d ago

360 was built for today, the ps3 was built for tomorrow...

cuco333699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

which is why i bought my 360 today (2 months ago) and will get a ps3 tomorrow (1-2 years from now)
even though the ps3 or ps3's cell isn't capable of what was mentioned in the article it still is good news in my eyes. if the ps3 is capable of doing anything similar to this in the long run years out, i'll be happy with a ps3 purchase when i make one. i would love to see what this means in terms of gaming in the near future for the ps3, not multiple cell chips running a graphical demo

dragunrising3699d ago

It seems to me that the PS3 is a glorified blu-ray player with a few big name exclusives. You should say, buy an Xbox 360 now and buy a blu-ray player later. Once the players drop down to $300 in a year or so there might not be too many reasons to buy a PS3.

OldSchoolGamer3699d ago

Its a multiple Cell's in a Blade Network Server configuration running linux. No stand alone PS3, or even single cell based motherboard could do the decoding. Interesting for high end servers though, but can't even begin to imagine the cost.

Syko3699d ago

*Wildly applauds the reading comprehension no one else seems to have!*

Anerythristic263699d ago

Is one of my favorite people on this site. Unbiased , just stating facts FTW !

BIadestarX3699d ago

Is funny how Sony fanboys start jumping of joy and imediately bring up the PS3 beats the crap out of the 360 when in reality it has nothing to do with the PS3. As indicated above it's talking about another cell processor not the one shipped with the PS3. (Bubble bursted).
Unless you work for a company that makes CGI movies or content look away this is not for you.

sak5003699d ago

Good one, i was getting amused by the naiveté or rather idiocy of these feeble minded sony fanboys. They just jumped on some article about cell processor used in some sort of server farm to render something. And already imagining games in CGI quality on a single machine.

I remember sony touting ps2 as having the capability to produce toy story level graphics. Their ps3 till date cannot even do that.

Neutral Gamer3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

I agree with OldSchoolGamer - most of the comments for this article seemed to have conveniently ignored the start of the second paragraph:

"...smart little system will reach out across the network and leverage multiple IBM QS20 blades to render the complex model..."

I hate fan boy comments for ANY console because they always give a skewed version of the truth, ignoring facts that contradict their views - much like religious fanatics hey!

Deepbrown mate, I respect the comments you normally make and articles you contribute, but I think here you were an (involuntary) catalyst for all the fanboy comments. If you had just changed the title to:

"IBM show how the Cell can render real-time without RSX by using networked computers / PS3's"

Or anything mentioning distributed processing of some kind would have portrayed a more accurate representation of the article. Again I don't think you deliberately did this, you just missed it out.

It just goes to show how changing an article's title by just a little bit can make such a big implied difference and when done incorrectly can start the usual (annoying) flame wars.

techie3699d ago

Neutral Gamer. After realising that the title may have been misleading, I went to change the title but NewsBot had already approved it...it didn't get any approvements from seperate people...so if the comments were raised I would have changed it. Hopefully this thread has finished and it's just another article fading into the background.

Neutral Gamer3699d ago

Wow - you replied very quicky to my comment!

Yeah, I had a feeling that you wouldn't have deliberately written a title appealing to fanboys.

All is forgiven mate and to all the fanboys: see what just happened here; reasonable criticism and constructive reply. That's the way to comment!

xDaveManx3699d ago

I came here to say exactly what OLD SCHOOL GAMER said. This has absolutely nothing to do with the rendering power of the PS3 alone. It does, however, have everything to do with the computational power of the cell processor. It can piece together one heckuva tech demo.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3699d ago
Show all comments (68)
The story is too old to be commented.