The Extreme Edition 2.66GHz chip, dubbed Core 2 Extreme QX6700, is poised to launch this year in November. Like other "Extreme" chips from Intel, the estimated price tag is $999 for the new processor. The CPU is compatible with all second-generation Conroe-compatible Intel 975X motherboards, but not all "965" series motherboards.
Darts VR2 Bullseye is not simply a virtual reality darts game, but a concrete attempt to transform a traditional sport into a modern, competitive and surprisingly profound experience.
Growth driven by digital software and console hardware sales.
Probably down to the high cost of gaming. Controllers and racing wheels can cost as much as consoles.
A solo developer sold three million copies in early access. Two years on, Manor Lords finally feels structurally coherent. December 2025's Major Update 5 reworked food systems, overhauled castles, and added two new modes. Villages grow organically along roads with visual coherence remarkable for solo development. Still early access, still incomplete in places, but in 2026 the foundation is genuine.
Is it more powerful than the 1 core cell processor with 7 spe's? And if the cell is more powerful, why aren't high tech computers using its tech with the cost being obvously much cheaper than the quad core cpu's. I'm just curious. I know the 360's tri core cpu structure has 3 times the general purpose power of the Cell. So does that mean the quad processor is 4 times as powerful as the cell? And why is he quad core clocked at a lower rate than the tri core cpu stucture of the 360? Anyone who knows please explain. Links supporting your claims would be lovely. Thanks in advance.
BTW...here is a quote from the article about apples 8 processors. Much different than Sony's Cell 1 processor with 7 spe's. You see a Processor has 2 long threads. The cell's spe has 1 short thread that connects to the processor then bottle necks through the two long threads on the 3.2 processor. The 360 has 3 with 2 long threads per core. Much different than 7 spe's with one short thread connected to the one core which in turn has 2 long threads like "ONE" of the 360 cores. Here is a link about the 8 core processor thats was rumored for apple.
Apple's Mac Pro has an undocumented feature: it runs eight "physical" processors without breaking a sweat
http://www.dailytech.com/ar...
Quadcore chips. =] I saw that Apple's already getting dual-chip (a.k.a. 8-core) setups on its computers. Now all that's needed is the nVidia 8000 series and we'll be in upgrade heaven.
If you want to know why TopGamer, it's architecture isn't X86 based (like intel or AMD), and only 1/9th of its cores is PowerPC based. Cell isn't being used in consumer PCs because of this compatibility issue. IBM, Toshiba, and Sony took a big risk by starting everything from scratch and getting rid of the problems and performance bottlenecks of old PC architecture.
Cell is VERY power efficient, and runs relatively cool (especially for the number of cores). It also only relies on one transistor type, which simplifies overall complexity and thus assists in chip yields (x86 processors have something like 8 different transistor types).
Cell is a complete paradigm shift in computer programming, though not an impossible one. And it's performance superiority is unmatched by anything in the consumer market. It is being used by the military, in the medical field, and even for scientific research.
Microsoft's Xenon processor cannot boast any of this because it was simply an incremental upgrade of current PowerPC technology (with a few downgrades as well, such as the 1/2 speed L2 cache and a complete lack of branch prediction and branch hints due to its in-order architecture).
Luckily, Cell supports branch hints and has an insane amount of internal bandwidth (nearly 300GB/s). And the fact that it runs off of the fastest CPU ram on the market to ensure that its processors aren't starving for data all the time.
Cell is also being used in HDTVs and high-end servers. While it most likely won't be used in personal computers due to the fact that current operating systems aren't designed for it, that could soon change. IBM, Sony, and Toshiba are already working on a successor to Cell, and that successor will probably be aimed at the consumer market. They'll need the support of Microsoft or Apple, but it probably will happen.
Cell's built for very intensive number crunching (SIMD floating point) which games require an increasing amount of. In fact, a good 80~85% of CPU time is spent on SIMD, not general purpose code in games. And the gap just keeps widening. Luckily, this might fit in with Microsoft's plans of requiring high-performance architecture for its power hungry operating systems (i.e. Vista). And the adoption of Cell-based CPUs might end up benefiting Microsoft, as well as computer manufacturers. What will become of Intel and AMD if they stick with the old ways is yet to be seen.
Everyone can read for themselves and educate themselves...thats the beauty of the internet. The cell has one PPU and the SPE's run off of the PPU. The 360 has 3 PPU's optimized for Game coding. And the cell's PPU has 2 long threads and the cell's Spe's have 1 short thread each going to the PPU. Thus causing bottle necking.
Here are some links informing you on how this works and comparissons.
http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...
The Xbox 360 processor was designed to give game developers the power that they actually need, in an easy to use form. The Cell processor has impressive streaming floating-point power that is of limited use for games.
The majority of game code is a mixture of integer, floating-point, and vector math, with lots of branches and random memory accesses. This code is best handled by a general purpose CPU with a cache, branch predictor, and vector unit.
The Cell's seven DSPs (what Sony calls SPEs) have no cache, no direct access to memory, no branch predictor, and a different instruction set from the PS3's main CPU. They are not designed for or efficient at general purpose computing. DSPs are not appropriate for game programming.
Xbox 360 has three general purpose CPU cores. The Cell processor has only one.
http://arstechnica.com/arti...
On the above link look at the diagram of the Ps3's architechture. You will notice that the Spe's all connect to the PPE. Then compare to the 360's architechture on the same link but previous page. Its all there folks.
I don't think the Cell is as well designed for game development as Sony would have you believe. Some aspects of the SPEs, such as the lack of branch prediction, make them particularly unsuited to running most game code, which contains a lot of branches. They appear to be designed more for serialized streaming math code, more common in video codecs and audio processing, the traditional domain of digital signal processing chips. The memory architecture of the SPEs, specifically their lack of automatic cache coherency in favor of DMA transactions, seems like a lot of overhead is needed to feed work units to the SPEs and copy the results back to system memory.
The cell has "ONE" PPE. The 360 has 3 PPE's. The Cell has 7 SPE's connected to the 1 PPE. Its not really that complicated. Read the links folks and you will have a much better picture of the truth. Don't let anyone tell you that SPE and PPE is the same thing. THEY ARE NOT. Look it up in the wikipedia. Lots of Laughs. Why DJ continues to lie, I have no clue.
But you never specify about what it is that I supposedly lie about. SPEs and PPEs must be different. They have different names, so it's pretty obvious. =P
Why do you keep referring to Microsoft's obviously skewed article? Even IGN says that it's skewed and full of bias. Trusting Matt Lee is even more foolhardy. First off, he's a microsoft employee. Worse yet, he never worked an any critically or financially acclaimed titles.
The diagram shown there is very simplified, so simplified that it actually leaves out some very important information. The SPEs (as everyone knows) aren't under command of the PPE. All 9 processors are linked by the Element Interconnect Bus, which allows for 297 GB/s of data to be communicated either to each other or out through the Flex I/O.
http://www.blachford.info/c...
http://www.blachford.info/c...
That's the true version of what Cell is.
And here's a diagram of an SPE. http://www.blachford.info/c...
"There has been a lot of debate about how the Cell will perform on general purpose code with many saying it will not do well as it is a “specialised processor”. This is not correct, the Cell was designed as a general purpose processor, but optimised for high compute tasks. The PPE is a conventional processor and will act like one. The big difference will be in the SPEs as they were designed to accelerate specific types of code and will be notably better in some areas than others, however even the SPEs are general purpose. The Cell has in essence traded running everything at moderate speed for the ability to run certain types of code at high speed.
The PPE is a normal general purpose core and should have no problems on most code. That said PPE has a simplified architecture compared to other desktop processors and this seems to be taken in some quarters as a reason for not just low performance but very low performance on general purpose code. Few care to explain why this is or even what this “general purpose” code is. "
http://www.blachford.info/c...
THIS ARTICLE GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH PS3 YET YOU CHANGE THE TOPIC. YOU DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT CELL CAN DO SO JUST JUMP OUT... PLAY BEYOND PS3
YOUR SO FULL OF IGNORANCE YOU KEEP SAYING IM GONNA BUY PS3 BUT YOU KEEP BASHING DAMN YOUR FULL OF SH*T JUST STF^ AND GROW UP.
LOOK I HATE 360 BUT I NEVER GO 360 SECTION AN SAY 360 SUCKS .
ITS OK YOUR JUST JEALOUSES