OPM: CELL-ebrate Good Times!

**Damnit** · 08-17-2005

This is a very small but interesting interview that 1up posted today about the Cell processor inside PS3.

Please enjoy reading it.

IBM explains why the PS3's CELL processor is leading the charge into new territory

by OPM Staff 08.17.2005 Orginially publish in OPM #96 September 2005

You know the Cell processor is a big deal. Companies (especially ones as big as IBM, Sony, and Toshiba) don't often get together and come up with proprietary technology with the intent of it being a small-time project. But the processor is a big deal for a few reasons. Not only is it powering the PlayStation 3 hardware, but it's also marking a fundamental shift in hardware design—a shift that could potentially leave companies like Intel scrambling to keep up. We spoke with Dr. Peter Hofstee, a lead engineer from the Cell design team, to get some more information on the Cell processor and how, with the help of the PS3, it will become the next big thing.

OPM: How did the Cell project get started?

DR. PETER HOFSTEE: It got started with a CEO-level conversation between Sony and IBM. In that conversation, they identified the synergy between IBM and its strength as a technology company, and Sony in the media and content space. They saw a basis for working together, so in the summer of 2000—with Toshiba as a technology partner--representatives from the three companies got together and started hammering out a concept for what became the Cell processor.

OPM: Was it always a goal to design a new type of architecture?

PH: We looked at a number of alternatives—a rather broad number, some of them being sort of more in line with what you would expect from general trends in computing. I think it was Mr. Kutaragi who said that we should go beyond that and do something that was more specifically suited for media and gaming in this new space that is supposed to support a new vision of interactivity.

OPM: How is the architecture of the Cell processor specifically beneficial to gaming?

PH: [We had] three main targets. The first was to provide a level of performance in this chip that would be far beyond what you would see in a PC processor today. [For] the second goal, even though the structure of this processor was derived from a server-type expertise that IBM has, we brought in a lot of real-time controls that you wouldn't find in server processors. This is important for gaming. Also, because we were very much thinking of this processor as something that sits between a user and a network, we paid a lot of attention to the security architecture. There's a good bit of innovation in this chip that provides a hardware basis for security and privacy. The last goal: [While] it's important to note that the next-generation game system was the driving force to do this, the vision from the very start was that this would be an architecture more broadly applied. We really defined it to be a standard architecture, something that will hopefully be used for a long time and have many iterations.

OPM: How has the education process for developers progressed? Have they been receptive to the idea of what the Cell processor is?

PH: We had the benefit of having a software team inside the design center. We had representatives from all three companies working very closely with us. We actually went through a number of iterations on the architecture itself based on the feedback from the software team. We wanted to make sure not only that what we created had impressive peak performance numbers, but also that a reasonable programming effort could get to those numbers. Only in the last few months have we talked about programming models, but in the next few months we will publish more information on the models and the architecture of the chip. Right now, it's sort of a mix of reactions. There are people that have come from embedded backgrounds and are very excited about the architecture. For people that come from a more general-purpose programming background, we're heading toward an adjustment in [hardware]. But it takes programmers about three months to become familiar with it and become very enthusiastic.

OPM: How is the multicore design different from just having multiple processors?

PH: We felt we had to do something about the phenomenon known as the memory wall. In the last 20 years, microprocessors have gotten faster by a factor of 1,000, but the memory latency, or the amount of time it takes for memory to keep up with the processor, hasn't changed. It's like a bucket brigade with 100 people between you and the water, but because you can only get five buckets going, that immediately tells you that it's going to be inefficient. For Cell, what we did was use a technique [to make the process much more efficient].

OPM: Is there a point of comparison for the power of the Cell processor?

PH: If you just look at the eight synergistic processors on the chip and the power core as well, on media applications, each of these processors can outperform a PC processor. We usually see a factor-of-10 performance advantage against PC processors, but if you're doing something with a more traditional workload, then you probably won't see that type of performance improvement.

Side bar: CELLPOWER
As Dr. Hofstee explains it, "The Cell processor itself has in excess of 200 gigaflops, which is 200 billion operations per second. So, imagine if you had 5 billion people in the world doing 40 calculations a second—that would be pretty amazing."

http://1up.com/do/feature?cId=3142805&did=1

**The Chocobo Kid** · 08-17-2005

good job. this is some helpful info on cell. I happy to get one in my psp. I looking to hope there will be a logo.

**Aquanox** · 08-17-2005

I couldn't help a very deep and loud "Give me a freaking break IBM!" after reading this:

If you just look at the eight synergistic processors on the chip and the power core as well, on media applications, each of these processors can outperform a PC processor. We usually see a factor-of-10 performance advantage against PC processors, but if you're doing something with a more traditional workload, then you probably won't see that type of performance improvement.

Come on guys, the developers have already stated that it's an Ok Processor, not bad at all, but not even in dreams as powerful as this guy says.

**Lefein** · 08-17-2005

It can stream a process across its SPEs at a rate far closer to it's theoretical floating point performance than any other chip available to the consumer. That should be something worth bragging about, don't you think?

**Aquanox** · 08-17-2005

It is in fact theoreticaly impressive, but the ones working with them do not think the same, so I'd take this with a grain of sand.

**The Chocobo Kid** · 08-17-2005

will see the power of the cell when it come's out. that will be reall cool.

**shadowofomioc** · 08-17-2005

Who exactly are you talking about Aquanox? I'm sure your talking about the dude from ID lol, for some reason can't think up his name right now.

Woooo, take the statement from someone whos worked with the PS3 for about a month now, and totally forget about Epics statements saying how powerful the architecture is, and incognitos, and Bandais, and Square-Enix's, and Rockstars. Geez, give me a break people.

**Steroyd** · 08-17-2005

But it takes programmers about three months to become familiar with it and become very enthusiastic.

well they do say it takes time, anyway didn't that guy from ID slate the Xbox 360 and now he likes it, you'll have to wait until final dev kits come out before we know which, satisfy's the developers needs more.

**Nucleus** · 08-17-2005

I think they should change floating point performance to floating point potential becuase there each SPE has its own performance but that doesnt mean working together you will get that kind of output becuase the spe still has to wait on the cell to give it a job they then have to perform the job then the cell has to process the outcome on top of that SPEs are single threaded and cannot operate independently of the mother processor.

**Hypx** · 08-17-2005

Is it me, or is Aquanox in full damage control mode now?

Anyways, this is a nice article from OPM, in particular the details on Cell.

**Steroyd** · 08-17-2005

Originally Posted by Nucleus

I think they should change floating point performance to floating point potential becuase there each SPE has its own performance but that doesnt mean working together you will get that kind of output becuase the spe still has to wait on the cell to give it a job they then have to perform the job then the cell has to process the outcome on top of that SPEs are single threaded and cannot operate independently of the mother processor.

each SPE is a mini processor, that acts independantly to the PPE, that's what makes Cell so "special"

**mjolnirV** · 08-17-2005

1 word. T. H. E. O. R. E. T. I. C. A. L.

The devs said the Cell is powerful, but barely more powerful than an AMD 64 or Pentium D. This guy says each one of those tiny little SPEs are more powerful than a PC processor. What a stinking load of manuer.

**shadowofomioc** · 08-17-2005

Is it me, or is Aquanox in full damage control mode now?

Yes, yes he is. Anyone who has to put crap info like the " actual value " of all those little accessories like a remote control ... wow ... then your in damage control. It's too funny.

**Steroyd** · 08-17-2005

Originally Posted by mjolnirV

1 word. T. H. E. O. R. E. T. I. C. A. L.

The devs said the Cell is powerful, but barely more powerful than an AMD 64 or Pentium D. This guy says each one of those tiny little SPEs are more powerful than a PC processor. What a stinking load of manuer.

yeah but then he goes and says.

If you just look at the eight synergistic processors on the chip and the power core as well, on media applications, each of these processors can outperform a PC processor. We usually see a factor-of-10 performance advantage against PC processors, but if you're doing something with a more traditional workload, then you probably won't see that type of performance improvement.

they even say that with traditional workload you won't see that performance.

**Nucleus** · 08-17-2005

Seroyd wrote.

each SPE is a mini processor, that acts independantly to the PPE, that's what makes Cell so "special"

They are mini processors but.

The PowerPC core is not the sole processor. Instead, it's more of a "managing processor." It delegates processing to the eight other processors on the chip, the Synergistic Processing Elements.

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com...ion-three2.htm

**Aquanox** · 08-17-2005

Originally Posted by Hypx

Is it me, or is Aquanox in full damage control mode now?

Anyways, this is a nice article from OPM, in particular the details on Cell.

lmao...

Nah, not at all, it's just that it surprises me to read something as overhyped as this, and see even experienced users actually believing it.

**Hunnter** · 08-18-2005

Hm, people cant read, it said that it outperforms in media, not traditional workloads, and you said someone needs to read more...hmm sure

**unr3stricted** · 08-18-2005

Originally Posted by Aquanox

It is in fact theoreticaly impressive, but the ones working with them do not think the same, so I'd take this with a grain of sand.

And I can theoretically do a long jump of 28 feet. :P

**Hunnter** · 08-18-2005

Aw man you beat me but 3 feet, ah good game

Also, because we were very much thinking of this processor as something that sits between a user and a network, we paid a lot of attention to the security architecture. There's a good bit of innovation in this chip that provides a hardware basis for security and privacy.

I like that bit hehe, i want to hear more about online though, we know the hardware is there, the security is there, its the services we need! lol

**shadowofomioc** · 08-18-2005

Difference here is, I am hearing IBM talking about using the Cell architecture in other areas such as supercomputers and servers, because its so good.

Yet, ummm .. where is this talk from IBM about the CPU architecture of the 360? Can anyone find me this article where IBM says they would love to use the architecure of the 360 in anything else besides the 360? Anyone? Please? How about other companies wanting a piece of the 360 CPU? Nope .. none .. ahh dang.

Its simply amazing. IBM and Toshiba and Sony, 3 of the biggest names in computing and home electronics and supercomputers get together and build this amazing new architecture that brings out supercomputer level mathematic capability on 9 processors only, and people say its not very impressive. LOL. GOD, i love console gamers. So spoiled, so ignorant.

**JT21378** · 08-18-2005

Hi there, I'm new to the forums. I have to say that was a really good article, and I can't wait to see what the cell processor can really do!

**DarkChild** · 08-18-2005

Originally Posted by Aquanox

I couldn't help a very deep and loud "Give me a freaking break IBM!" after reading this:

If you just look at the eight synergistic processors on the chip and the power core as well, on media applications, each of these processors can outperform a PC processor. We usually see a factor-of-10 performance advantage against PC processors, but if you're doing something with a more traditional workload, then you probably won't see that type of performance improvement.

Come on guys, the developers have already stated that it's an Ok Processor, not bad at all, but not even in dreams as powerful as this guy says.

you know what I used to have respect for you because at one point I thought that you were really sincere in your post and looked at things with an open mind but lately I've realized that you go against everything that has to do with the PS3, rsx don't tell me you didn't cause we had a long discussion on that, ps3 price, cell, and probably blu-ray though I can't confirm that one. but you've lost all my respect. I can understand that you feel real strongly for the xbox and you want everyone to see it the way you do but to try and talk down everything PS3 is lame, and to be honest it sad now to see you waste so much of your time stressing the PS3 so much, it shows me how threatened you are for the xbox when it comes to the ps3. now the xbox is not a bad system by any means but let's atleast give credit where credit is due. maybe then you'll earn my respect again.

you'll probably respond by stating that you don't need my respect or how you were just stating something that make logical sense and that I should look into things a bit more because that is not what you were saying at all, and if you have nothing to say then you'll probably say you're not going to waste your time on this discussion because you've made you point clear. i've heard or should i say read it all before, it becomes very repetitive.

**The Chocobo Kid** · 08-18-2005

this whole cell thing is killing me inside. I want to see it in action or something. They should show cell in a tec demo or something like that so people can see it's power. they shoud do something like that for the TGS.

**shadowofomioc** · 08-18-2005

this whole cell thing is killing me inside. I want to see it in action or something. They should show cell in a tec demo or something like that so people can see it's power. they shoud do something like that for the TGS.

They already have. The duck demo at E3 was pure Cell. The video streaming demo was pure cell. The video with those 500,000 or so fully detailed leaves flowing about in a funnel was pure Cell, and each leaf had its own audio channel, pure cell. The Cell is so powerful at first Sony was going to use it as THE graphic processor of the PS3, but they decided it would be financially better to utilize the next gen Nvidia technology instead. Also, the 2 bits of data turning into a massive landscape, fully detailed with fully detailed clouds and all that was purely Cell. Also, the video for The Getaway was purely Cell processor.

Heck most of what we have seen from the PS3 demos were mostly thanks to Cell, since the RSX still isnt completely finalized yet. Nvidia says it will be faster then dual 6800's in SLI configuration ( aka, faster then the 7800 which is about double the power of dual 6800's ). But the actual chip isnt fully done yet.

I'll look up some links for you to those tech demos of the Cell at work, they are highly impressive.

**Jap Attack** · 08-18-2005

Well you keep on getting on the Cell proccessor so much and IBM Aquanox. You do know that IBM also developed MS's proccessor right? I would think that IBM knows what there talking about and i believe CELL is what they say. I don't see them trying to hype or sell the 360's proccessor to anyone. Do you?