200°

IBM cheats on Cell with NVIDIA Tesla for servers

The Cell chip that powers the PlayStation 3 has been good to IBM's high-performance computing (HPC) efforts, with Big Blue's supercomputers riding the game console chip to fame and glory in the biannual Top 500 Supercomputer List. But the writing may be on the wall for Cell, as IBM has just announced a server that can use two NVIDIA Tesla devices as coprocessors.

Read Full Story >>
arstechnica.com
Pandamobile5103d ago ShowReplies(3)
outwar60105103d ago Show
Killzone3Helghast5103d ago

so how does this article relate to console gaming in any way?

Pandamobile5103d ago

The CPU that powers the PS3 is being phased out in servers and other applications by its creator for third-party alternatives.

i_am_interested5103d ago (Edited 5103d ago )

yet this story has nothing to do with the ps3

is sony going to start replacing the cell in the ps3 with nvidia teslas seeing as how sony has a relationship with nvidia too?

no ones even come close releasing a game designed to run solely on a gpu and i doubt theyve even come close to programming one

this is just anti cell fud completely unrelated to the ps3

jerethdagryphon5103d ago

true
but the fact remains that cell is whats stated a lot of this gpu/cpu thinking

and in that aspect its done its job

until cell came we had x86 and ppc as statdard archatectures for systems
cell provides new ways of thinking thats what it should be considered a stepping stone

Marty83705103d ago

Only by IBM.

Toshiba makes Cell for Sony, thats used in PS3.

Cell isn't going nowhere.

hay5102d ago

@jerethdagryphon: Actually Cell is based on PPC. Haven't dwell on architecture and coding YET but difference shouldn't be huge.

GodsHand5102d ago

It was created by Sony, IBM, and Toshiba. Sony already said they stopped developement on it, so it was only inevitable the IBM would follow suite. I would not be surprised if Toshiba say the same thing in the upcoming months. But as long as the PS3 is around the chip will still be here. If there is a PS4, with backwards compatibility it will most likely need a cell chip.

DeadlyFire5102d ago

This means nothing. I don't see why people jump at every little thing.

As far as future Cell development IBM has confirmed they are not advancing it any further and said they will still release the next wave of more effcient chips in 2010. There will be nothing new beyond that. Maybe some rescaling and shrinking of chips on smaller scales. Sony could easily get Toshiba or IBM to restructure a Cell to be called a Cell 2. Its very easily possible. They can scale the chip up to 4 Ghz and throw in some more SPEs and another PPE and new chip is born. IBM is not advancing anymore research on Cell tech, but new chips for 2010 are still coming. IBM has new PowerPC A2 coming as well. Up to 16 cores. Runs on low clock though, but that isn't what is important. Just all depends on how the wind blows in next two years. It is very likely within two years we will hear of some more rumors and things. :)

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 5102d ago
spongeboob5103d ago (Edited 5103d ago )

It doesn't relate to games at all, it's just more FUD being spread by @sstechnica.

raztad5103d ago

It's not related in any way.

The Cell in those servers is a different processor.

Raf1k15103d ago

So it's being phased out in servers. Doesn't really affect the PS3.

ArmrdChaos5103d ago

I do recall a number of positive articles in the past that referenced the cell and what supercomputers were doing. It generated the usual pom pom waving party and comments of how the PS3 is the most powerful thing on the planet. I didn't see any comments on how that wasn't related back then, but now the information is negative and everyone wants to cry fud and unrelated. Well...which is it?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5102d ago
ArcFatalix5103d ago

will be friendly for developers and wont use cell i dunno why you microsoft customers are so happy.

raztad5103d ago (Edited 5103d ago )

It's up to Sony, not IBM, to decide what will be in the PS4. It's not crazy to think Sony would want to stick with a cell-like arch so they can keep B/C with PS3 games and all the existing know-how.

kaveti66165103d ago

If Sony creates some kind of mediator between the SPEs of the CELL and each of the compilers that are attached to each SPE, then that will make the CELL as easy to work with as a conventional unified architecture.

There's no reason to phase out the CELL from the PS brand because Sony invested heavily in it and it is extremely scalable. I heard there are CELL processors used by IBM that have 32 SPEs. If that's the case, then Sony might just have the same CELL processor in the PS4 with more SPEs, and since developers have gotten used to the architecture, things will be easier for them.

Raf1k15103d ago

I duno, it would make sense to keep it similar to the PS3 since devs are pretty much used to the tech now. Whatever Sony does I hope they don't make the PS4 as difficult to develop for as the PS3.

sikbeta5103d ago (Edited 5103d ago )

CELL2 will be there on the PS4, doesn't matter if Now there is an article about IBM using different architectures for Servers that got nothing to do with the PS3

The logical Step is, PS4 = Backward Compatible with PS3 Games, best way to do it = CELL

Trroy5103d ago (Edited 5103d ago )

The Cell isn't going away. All this is is another option, catering to people with high-end rendering needs, rather than generic supercomputing.

IBM Blade servers are made specifically to accomplish a certain subset of tasks -- They make them based on everything from PowerPCs, Intel Xeons and AMD processors, to CBE and apparently now Tegras. Only 2 of the about 20 Blade models available right now are Cell-based, and the "version" of the Cell they use is far more powerful (at specialized tasks) than the one in the PS3.

The Cell isn't leaving anytime soon. Its an entire processor line and concept -- the PS3 Cell is merely the most visible of the bunch.

Show all comments (43)
10°

PDC World Championship Darts: Pro Tour announced

O-Games announces PDC World Championship Darts: Pro Tour for PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and the Nintendo Wii wich will release in Q4 of 2010.

Read Full Story >>
translate.google.com
ian725096d ago

I don't see the point in a darts game for consoles. I have a proper dart board and darts which is way better than playing virtual darts on a console. Its cheaper to buy the real thing than a game, and you don't need much room to set up a dartboard. Its not like pool/snooker as you need a lot of room, and pool/snooker tables aren't cheap either, (for a good set up).

130°

HBO hits the PlayStation Network for PS3 & PSP

Gaming Age: "Apparently, the PlayStation 3 and PSP are now the first gaming systems to provide for HBO programming. And surprise, starting today, you can download episodes from pretty much all of their popular series (True Blood, Big Love, Entourage, Eastbound and Down, The Sopranos, Sex and the City, The Wire, Rome, Da Ali G Show, Curb Your Enthusiasm, and Flight of the Conchords), with more coming every week."

Read Full Story >>
gaming-age.com
TheHardware5097d ago

they throw in a super discount (when you become a PSN+ member) this might make more sense....

tdogchristy905097d ago

Wish they threw in some of there mini series like Band of Brothers.

Christopher5097d ago (Edited 5097d ago )

Wish there was an option to buy complete seasons of shows at a reduced price rather than everything costing a straight amount. Even iTunes has this feature and it makes purchasing multiple videos a lot easier and is a big incentive to buy multiple episodes rather than just one or two.

Socomer 19795097d ago

That's gonna sell well with the Rich People who enjoy thier PS3. Same high class society that bought MLBTV.

N4BmpS5097d ago

That's a pretty good move for Sony. Now they need to get a few other things on there.

Show all comments (8)
640°

Look out Xbox Live, PSN+ Eclipse is Near

The rumors continue to flood video game sites and blogs regarding the anticipated PSN+ announcement for E3. The PSN+ is the supposedly PlayStation Network premium services that will offer much more content for a monthly price. But how much more content are we talking about? And how much are you willing to pay for it? How does this match Xbox Live? But most importantly, what do gamers want to see on this service?

ShinMaster5097d ago

That would be a nice name for it, since normal PSN already gets full online services for free and the "+" would be for the extras.

LordMarius5097d ago (Edited 5097d ago )

It will fail if its not inserted into the mainstream, Sony has to advertise to make it a household name like LIVE....they should just call it PLUS

@below. It's more of a household name than PSN has ever been, you have a better chance of finding someone that knows what LIVE is than PSN

30sec5097d ago

Household name like Xbox Live? LOL! N4G is on fire with the jokes today.

RememberThe3575097d ago

Maybe in a dorm or something like that, but not in the average household.

darthv725097d ago

sony wont keep "FULL" online free for this service. I really think they will create a premium online with unrestricted online multiplayer as well as a slew of other features making it equal to and possibly exceeding live.

Sony has gone on record and said they will keep online free for all however they never said they couldnt impose limitations to that service. It would be absolutely true for them to still claim online is free for the non paid members while also limiting the player capacities in multiplayer games. For example, a free player would be able to connect to specific servers and game types that have caps as to the number of players available. This is not to disimilar to what is currently on the pc. It is no surprise they have used the pc as the model to which they created their network.

It is also no surprise sony has been studying live very closely to see how their service runs and makes $$ from the paid users (not just online multiplayer). I have gotten many people angry with me saying that sony would never charge for online play. That statement in its most simplistic view is true. However, they can create an incentive to be a paid member by limiting game sizes to free players and making them unlimited to paid members. This does not go against anything sony has ever stated and means the most logical sense.

There is $$ to be made in online. Sony knows this. The easiest way to score $$ is having a model of PSN with pay to play that is much more feature rich than the free version.

nveenio5097d ago

I RARELY play games online, so I wouldn't care if they did away with playing for free. I WOULD care, however, if they tried to make me start paying for LBP online or MNR online. In fact, I think having to start paying to play those games online would be a much stronger lawsuit against Sony than OtherOS was/is.

ShinMaster5096d ago (Edited 5096d ago )

Well by full online service, I was referring to being able to play online.
Besides Sony said they wouldn't take away any online features from current non-premium-paying customers.

AAACE55096d ago

I think what he means is more people will probably recognize Xbox Live if you were in a conversation! PSN sounds more like a website. Alot of people refer to it as Playstation Online and don't have a clue it's called PSN. Hell,i've had to persuade people to hook up and play online because they said they don't like online gaming. I keep telling them it's free, try it out! But I don't know what their problem is.

Sony should give gamers a free month of PSN+, so they can try it out and tell others about it! Or at least a 48 hour trial like MS does.

Old Greg5096d ago

And will always have more users, and a more organized online community.

Sony's efforts are too little, too late.

gtamike5096d ago

Pay for viewing ads no thank you M$

yippiechicken5096d ago

Hmmmm..... I've never had to watch an ad on Live unless I've chosen too. Am I missing something?

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 5096d ago
StanLee5097d ago

What will be these premium services and what will they cost is what I'm curious to see unveiled at E3.

sikbeta5097d ago

As long as On-line Gaming is Free, everything is OK with me, IF there is a PSN Premium I'll pay for it, but on-line Gaming needs to be FREE...

SixZeroFour5097d ago

agreed...sony is getting this right, and ms needs to follow this

ms already kinda do it, cause you cant go on twitter, fb or the halo waypoint (maybe other "apps" aswell, but these are the only ones i use that i notice) unless you have gold...but they should make gold for all extras while silver members have online for free

Anarki5097d ago

And with it ends the ONLY advantage the 360 has over the PS3...

Marty83705096d ago

The PS3 advantage is still ther, it called free online gaming. Something crapbox don't offer. As for the PSN+ thats optional, the point is online gaming remains free.

Inside_out5096d ago

It sounds great except....the part about $120 a year...I don't know...that seems kinda like....HIGHWAY ROBBERY!!!!!!...just saying...

BTW..expect Sony to say...ok...ok guys we will drop it to $8 because we love you guys so much....Sony...they care....

Terry Tate5096d ago

Because Sony is doing it. It's only highway robbery if Microsoft does it.
I already have Live, I'm not sure I would pay $120 a year for Sonys service on top of that.

RedDevils5096d ago

that the most stupid comments I heard all days I meant just now lol

vhero5096d ago

It will obviously be a set price for yearly like $70-$80 if it was that price. Nobody pays monthly for LIVE and if they do they too are getting ripped off.

NatalmovesU5096d ago

They will probably downgrade the free version of PSN to the point where you simply have to subscribe.

avengers19785096d ago

@darthv72 Sony has repeatedly said that the addition of pay service will not effect the current free PSN users at all. They are not changing anything about the free service just adding this PSN+ as an option for those who want it.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 5096d ago
aCHU5097d ago

or what about PSN PRO! ?? soundz koo to me :)

kaveti66165097d ago

That makes the people who don't pay for it sound like noobs. It's kind of alienating.

Falloutxii5097d ago (Edited 5097d ago )

If SONY makes a PSN premium service, As long as I can still play online for free i'm happy. : )

Fishy Fingers5097d ago

Then happy you will be;

"I can assure you that the current PSN as you know it will remain a free service" - Andrew House, president of SCEE

http://uk.playstation.com/h...

AutoCad5097d ago

doubt it will surpass XBL, but if they keep adding to the service through out the years it will.

RememberThe3575097d ago

From what Kaz said on it, it seems that hey just want a more static revenue stream then what is probably a very sporatic PSN.

BeaArthur5097d ago

Agreed, nothing Sony has done since XBL launched has lead me to believe that they are trying to one up XBL. They are trying to provide the best service for their hardware and fan base that maximizes revenue, same as MS.

vhero5096d ago

Surpass XBL?? I constantly read this but what does XBL gold have that PSN doesn't that's actually worth paying for?? I tell you.. NOTHING!! If MS made online play free to silver users you would see next to no Gold users at all. That in itself tells you Sony is on par and in fact I constantly read here on N4G that even though you pay for Gold the servers you play on cannot handle the online gaming and suffer lag.. I remember playing gears of war against Americans constant lag. I have never had lag on my PS3. To be fair I only ever had lag on gears on my 360 never on any of my other games when I had one but you pay for top servers you should get top servers...

Alcon Caper5097d ago

uhhhh...$120.00 a year...???? YOWZA

Godmars2905097d ago (Edited 5097d ago )

Rotating access to PSN/PS1 games? Warranty extension?

@below:
Taking it as meaning they'll be offering a small library of titles monthly, but on a use timer once Dl-ed. 30 days after DL, it becomes unplayable.

Doubt its going to be perfect, certainly wont offer RPGs and will have something you already have, but at least Sony's trying to get you to use it, not make you for basic service.

I'm still hoping for movie rentals. Access to streaming movie channels if not a Netflix DL-only option. Give me a reason to cancel my cable.

Pennywise5097d ago

Rotating games... Does this put a time limit on its use by the users? Or does this make it available for free a certain month which gives you ownership of the game?

I don't spend close to $120.00 a year for PSN/PS1 games, so I don't know how much this appeals to me.

Pennywise5097d ago

I am willing to listen, but not for that price.

BeaArthur5097d ago

It does seem kind of high. I mean Live only breaks down to $4 and some change a month. I mean Sony is offering up some cool stuff for the price but still too much for what is listed.

sikbeta5097d ago

The Price is High indeed, but if Sony take in consideration 2 ways, Month and Year Subscription, the first one is going to be more expensive and by that making the second More Appealing to the masses

Philaroni5097d ago

Well that is the monthly cost. I'm sure you can pay for a full year just like XBL. I think you look at 7.99 a month for XBL if you don't do the 12 month thing.

30sec5097d ago

Live is $96 a year, month to month too. You don't really think Sony won't have a yearly subscription, do you?

mcgrawgamer5097d ago

If you are paying 96.00 US dollars a year for Live, I got some beach front property on Mars I'm willing to sell. PM if you're interested.

Sheikh Yerbouti5097d ago

No one would pay monthly unless they were just checking it out or just silly with money.

30sec5097d ago (Edited 5097d ago )

$7.99(month-to-month price) x 12 months = $96.00. Is it that hard to understand? So since we're guessing at the unannounced PSN+, it wouldn't be a stretch to think the $9.99 price is month-to-month. Considering they surveyed a tiered pay structure that was around $60-80 per year US. But please, by all means, be stupid.

reckoner5097d ago (Edited 5097d ago )

Except no one in their right mind pays month-by-month for an entire year of Live. You can get an entire year for around $45, even cheaper.

mcgrawgamer5096d ago

once again if you are paying month to month for xbl don't forget to PM me about that property on mars. It's going dirt cheap.

The Maxx5096d ago

$96 a year? Where are you getting your mis-information from?

Arnon5096d ago

Agreed... that's just poor decision making.

$7.99/m for 12 months
or one payment of $49.99 for a year ($4.50/m)

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5096d ago
kneon5097d ago

As I only really care about the cloud based saves that's a bit steep. We'll have to see what else there is that would make it worth while. I don't mind paying if I'm getting my moneys worth. For example, if the extended warranty covers all my PS3s at no extra cost then that would be worth it. If I have to tack on extra for each additional one then probably not.

CaptainMarvelQ85097d ago (Edited 5097d ago )

• 4 Free movie rentals a month from the PSN store
• Free PSN magazine subscription – Qore-
• Free Avatars (2-4 a month)
• Early BETA and Demo access
• PSN store (subscriber exclusive) sales.

i believe if this is true,then its totally worth it

Marquis_de_Sade5096d ago

It represents decent value, but it's still quite pricey, also I wouldn't call anything on that list "free" if you're forking over $120 a year to access it.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 5096d ago
Show all comments (112)