Top
390°

PlayStation3 cluster apes human visual system

Those of you familiar with past coverage of the Sony-IBM collaboration on Cell processors should be familiar with Jon Stokes' take on the matter: the Cell is a high-performance chip that happens to be okay at running games.

This makes it a good fit for clusters, either via independent hardware or the independent SPEs in a Cell. Given the choice, the winning project did both: it networked a cluster of three PS3s and got the primitive recognition and matching implemented in a way that it can run independently in an SPE. The net result was a PlayStation cluster that could recognize specific objects in a second. By way of comparison, a single Core 2 Duo took three minutes to perform the task.

Read Full Story >>
arstechnica.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Cartesian3D3499d ago

ps3 did well ( except in EA products becuz they are in MASS production so there is no quality)

and this article proves (and many other ones) that PS3 made for 10 years of improvment .

cant wait to see 2008 games and compare it to current games..

Canidae3499d ago

It's true, I don't think anyone can deny the PS3 is a powerful system. Should be interesting to look back on the PS3 a few years from now, and compare the beginning PS3 games, to the then current games.

SmokeyMcBear3499d ago

all you gotta do is look at the difficulty of the emotion engine to programmers. Look at the first year ps2 games, then look at god of war 2

nasim3498d ago

The net result was a PlayStation cluster that could recognize specific objects in a second. By way of comparison, a single Core 2 Duo took three minutes to perform the task.

However we all know that a CELL is around 8x more powerful than a typical QUAD CORE processor

ProjectX3499d ago

That's why some articles said PS3 games only use 20%-30% of its power. I think it's true because Sony always has the reputation to be the hardest platform to program. With how current games look now I couldn't imagine how games will be like by the end of next year or two.

Kholinar3499d ago (Edited 3499d ago )

I want one. (either a single or a cluster will do.) :p

I do think the cell excels at this, but... the numbers here don't tell us much in terms of benchmarks/ps3 using 20-30% of its power.

One Core 2 Duo (no ghz mentioned) took 3 minutes, 3 ps3s with multiple cores (not just two) did it in a second. Impressive. But sorry, that says very little other than that 3 of them are much, much faster than the poor, little computer by itself. We aren't told the operating system used on the core duo, the memory, etc.

It's a cool use, but it means nothing in terms of power.

Proxy3499d ago

It's true about the Core 2, but I would presume it was a 3 ghz or higher. Completely a guess though.

As for OS, with thing such as this OS probably doesn't matter a whole lot, as they'd probably by pass the OS for the most part and access the hardware directly. Hell, most games do this to some degree anyways, if your game freezes, you have to restart the whole computer, because the game is running parallel with the OS.

Kholinar3499d ago

It definitely does matter. The ps3 os is optimize for the threading that the cell excels at. The os is going to affect how things are processed, how large the free memory footprint is, etc. It makes a huge difference.

Like how something like Unreal works on Vista vs. Linux. Night and day.

ProjectX3499d ago

I was just speaking purely from a game system point of view. True I agreed with you that the article doesn't give a fair comparison. As far as OS, Ps3 probably using Linux and the Intel probably using Linux/Windows, they both have overheads. Memory wise, Ps3 has no chance. Both are can do parallel processing but 1 sec (21 cores) compared to 180 sec (2 cores), that means you need 360 cores to match it (theoretically). It's funny how it ends up with 360?

Kholinar3498d ago

"Both are can do parallel processing but 1 sec (21 cores) compared to 180 sec (2 cores), that means you need 360 cores to match it (theoretically)."

Err... yeah. That's precisely why I said this said little to nothing about the power involved. It causes people to think in way to linear of a manner. If one of the ps3 cores is assumed to be 21 times slower then it would calculate to 21 seconds by itself. Whereas the single core of the duo would, like you said take 360 seconds. That would mean that a single core in the ps3 is 17 times more powerful.

That's ridiculous. If it was true, adoption would be much higher in server side hardware.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3498d ago
mountaindewtab3499d ago

for gaming? Like if I link up two of these suckers up is it going to run better,,, probly not huh. Maybe load times will be faster but thats about it. Maybe no framerate slowdown that could be sweet. But probably not worth buying a second console.

Kholinar3499d ago

Ah... but you could process two games at once.

Like... have a Dance-Frag-Revolution O_o

kn3499d ago

Sure the Cell is a cool piece of technology. Blu Ray, too, for that matter... Some games and a lower selling price. Stay on topic, Sony...

Proxy3499d ago

This has far more to do with Intel then Sony. Intel is mearly showing their hardware design, which happens to be manifest in the PS3.

Show all comments (16)