Forbes Tackles Cell

[Grifter]

Next Generation (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php) has posted an article (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2207&Itemid=2) from Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/global/2006/0213/070A_print.html)about the Cell chip.

Marc Tremblay, chief architect of the rival Niagra chip said, "The programming model [for the Cell] is a nightmare." True, it's in his best interest to downplay the chip, but software developers outside of the gaming industry may not be up to the challenge of working with an asymmetric design that utilizes a central processing core and eight co-processors. Nontheless, some tech manufacturers are buying into it.“We’re seeing stuff that goes dramatically beyond what we can do with the current generation [of games],” said Andrew Goldman, CEO of Pandemic Studios. “And what you will see over time is going to be even more amazing.”

[Reanimated]

Emotion Engine redux.

[bapenguin]

Multi threaded is the wave of the future. Cell or not it's going to be difficult as developers learn it.

[Dr Quincy]

The Forbes article mentions specifically defense contractor Raytheon's deep interest in the chip, which could be used in missles and artillery shells, among other applications.

And so it begins...

The Skynet Funding Bill is passed. The system goes on-line August 4th, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic defense. Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.

Ken Kutaragi, destroyer of worlds.

[Onea]

Forbes source wasn't listed, so here it is:

http://www.forbes.com/global/2006/0213/070A_print.html

[Schnoogs]

Cool stuff...can't wait for a Cell based add on card for my PC! ;)

Great for physics, graphics, and other highly parrallelized operations.

[Ghost_Saint]

The problem isn't multi-threaded. The 360 does that and people are raving about how great the dev tools make programming easy for it.

[The Continental]

With every new generation of console technologies comes these articles of various developers decrying the difficulty of developing for console X, lo and behold good games still come out and in the end it doesn't affect the consumer in any way whatsoever. If it means smaller studios won't be able to afford the same calibre of programmers to crank out their "me too" titles on the heels of whatever the current genre trend is, oh well.

Lots of middleware is already up and running on the PS3, the Unreal Engine being the most notable. Worst case scenario, developers go the smart route and license technology and focus on content.

[Mason]

Cell is "overkill" for the PC. It's just a freaking DSP. The PPC core would handle PC-related tasks, but no better than the PPC chips that Apple recently ditched for Intel.

To call the Cell-part of the Cell (the SPEs) "overkill" for the PC is like saying political satire is overkill for slicing tomatoes. It isn't just meaningless and silly, but also flat-out wrong, as there's no real way to get it to accomplish the task for which it's allegedly overkill.

The only weird thing in the article is the quote from Raytheon, which makes it sound like they've never thought of using DSP chips before, when in fact they've been buying them like candy for years. Maybe Cell will be a good thing for them, but it sure as hell isn't a new thing for them.

[chingtastic]

So, uhm, what does Forbes have to do with Playstation 3 other than trying to boost Sony's stock so their readers can invest?

That is my question.

[Ghost_Saint]

With every new generation of console technologies comes these articles of various developers decrying the difficulty of developing for console X, lo and behold good games still come out and in the end it doesn't affect the consumer in any way whatsoever.

So, why is everyone saying how great the 360 is to program? Why aren't they decrying it? It's not like it's got a standard processor arrangement with 3 2threaded CPUs.

[Captain Awesome]

Emotion Engine redux.


hahahaha I was about to say.

[bapenguin]

Forbes source wasn't listed, so here it is:

http://www.forbes.com/global/2006/0213/070A_print.html

Thanks, I updated the news post.

[Mason]

Cool stuff...can't wait for a Cell based add on card for my PC! ;)

Great for physics, graphics, and other highly parrallelized operations.
Physics and graphics aren't easily parallelized, though. That's the whole trick to this.

Sound is easily parallelized; you just dump what you need played to the sound subsystem and let it handle the rest. There's no output from the sound system which affects the other parts of the game. Hell, DirectX will even manage your circular buffers for you. But then sound has been run in parallel for a long time.

Physics, AI, game logic, and setting up the render can't be easily broken up. Those systems share the same data and you'll either end up with race conditions that blow up the game, or the overhead involved in read/write locking will eat up any of the performance gains from running in parallel.

PC CPUs could benefit a lot from access to more powerful AOS SIMD components, when it comes to things like physics and visibility checks. SSE3 improved on this some, prior to that it was like 7 SSE instructions just to get a scalar product.

[The Continental]

So, why is everyone saying how great the 360 is to program? Why aren't they decrying it? It's not like it's got a standard processor arrangement with 3 2threaded CPUs.

You're totally right! Quick everyone, go buy an Xbox 360 as the PS3 is doomed to fail! There will be absolutely no games as it's just too difficult to program for as was the PS2! I for one don't want to repeat the misery that is PS2 ownership again. Thank you Ghost_Saint, your unfounded fanboism has saved myself and countless others a shit load of money.

[Schnoogs]

Physics and graphics aren't easily parallelized, though. That's the whole trick to this.

What on earth are you talking about...GPUs by definition are highly parallelized...thats why GPUs are also being used now for Physics.

A Graphics Processing Unit or GPU (also occasionally called Visual Processing Unit or VPU) is a dedicated graphics rendering device for a personal computer or game console. Modern GPUs are very efficient at manipulating and displaying computer graphics, and their highly-parallel structure makes them more effective than typical CPUs for a range of complex algorithms.

[Schnoogs]

I think you were confusing synchronous with paralelized Mason.

[RevGored]

I love how good things look in print when they're designed to sell stock, and how underwhelmingly boring they are when they finally hit shelves.

[Mason]

What on earth are you talking about...GPUs by definition are highly parallelized...thats why GPUs are also being used now for Physics.
Wow, you have zero comprehension of a graphics pipeline? The actual render occurs on the GPU, and that's both internally parallel (what your quote was referring to) and asynchronous with the CPU, which can move on to other tasks once it has set up and started the render.

But that's already here. Our PCs have been doing that for years, and it has nothing to do with Cell.

The fact that you're quoting the Wikipedia entry on GPUs perhaps be a warning sign to you.

edit: I just now got that you thought that Cells would be useful in GPUs. Wow, you'd be able to go get a snack between texture reads on a system like that. GPUs are very specialized silicon, throwing a bunch of generalized DSPs at the problem would never be a competitive solution.

[Schnoogs]

Wow, you have zero comprehension of a graphics pipeline? The actual render occurs on the GPU, and that's both internally parallel (what your quote was referring to) and asynchronous with the CPU, which can move on to other tasks once it has set up and started the render.

But that's already here. Our PCs have been doing that for years, and it has nothing to do with Cell.

Seeing as I'm knee deep in my own game engine I think you should show a little respect.

My response to this post can only be "No fucking shit". And your original post wasn't addressing the parallelization I was talking about.

Unless you can argue against the fact that both rendering and physics benefit from highly parallelized execution man up and admit that you completely misinterpreted my post.

Your post was in regards to the actual game loop and how it may or may not be able to handle both physics and graphics in parellel where as my post was a more generalized statement about using a cell add on to due some physics calculations and the funny thing is that I didnt even mention whether it would be for game use not.

[Schnoogs]

It cracks me up when someone tries to lecture you about shit you do for a living (meanwhile I'm cranking out Direct3D code).

[Mason]

Seeing as I'm knee deep in my own game engine I think you should show a little respect.

My response to this post can only be "No fucking shit". And your original post wasn't addressing the parallelization I was talking about.

Unless you can argue against the fact that both rendering and physics benefit from highly parallelized execution man up and admit that you completely misinterpreted my post.

Your post was in regards to the actual game loop and how it may or may not be able to handle both physics and graphics in parellel where as my post was a more generalized statement about using a cell add on to due some physics calculations and the funny thing is that I didnt even mention whether it would be for game use not.
You said that Cell would be good for "physics and graphics", which it turns out you meant it'd be good as part of a GPU. That's just goofy. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you were trying to communicate the parallelization of the game loop.

[Mason]

It cracks me up when someone tries to lecture you about shit you do for a living (meanwhile I'm cranking out Direct3D code).
If you really believe that a PPC and some DSPs would make an adequate replacement for a GPU, then you've got a few more lectures ahead of you.

[Schnoogs]

You said that Cell would be good for "physics and graphics", which it turns out you meant it'd be good as part of a GPU. That's just goofy. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you were trying to communicate the parallelization of the game loop.

Find me one quote of mine where I say that it would be nice to have the cell a part of the GPU...the only thing goofy is your continuing misinterpretations.

I don't have the time or desire to continue this dialogue...I'll save my energy for responses that actually address what I'm talking about.

[Schnoogs]

If you really believe that a PPC and some DSPs would make an adequate replacement for a GPU, then you've got a few more lectures ahead of you.


See above post...first you misinterpreted what I said and now you're just making stuff up.

[Mason]

Cool stuff...can't wait for a Cell based add on card for my PC! ;)

Great for physics, graphics, and other highly parrallelized operations.

The original quote. You state that Cell is good for graphics, which you've since stated was referring to the actual render. And it is good for this because of its parallelization.

A standard Cell has 8 SPEs. A x1900 has 48 pixel processors and 16 texture units. The modern GPU is way more parallel than a Cell, in order to carry out its specialized task.

So that really makes complimenting the Cell for how its parallelization would help render graphics a bonehead comment, no?

[Schnoogs]

The original quote. You state that Cell is good for graphics, which you've since stated was referring to the actual render. And it is good for this because of its parallelization.

A standard Cell has 8 SPEs. A x1900 has 48 pixel processors and 16 texture units. The modern GPU is way more parallel than a Cell, in order to carry out its specialized task.

So that really makes complimenting the Cell for how its parallelization would help render graphics a bonehead comment, no?

I really did give you more intellectually credit in that other thread than you deserve...first off cells are designed to work in groups...did I mention how many cell processors? No.

Did I mention what aspect of rendering? Maybe I'm gonna use them for non-realtime raytracing.

I really can't afford to waste my precious lunch time arguing with you over misinterpretations and assumptions.

It's very clear why you and GrinR butt heads so often...

Peace out man...I'll be happy to show you my game demo in the coming months and maybe then we can have an intelligent conversation free of misinterpretations.

I tried to shut you up before but I'll try again...unless you can show that cells aren't good for parallelized execution why in gods name are you even continuing this conversation.

Like I said...I'm too busy for silly conversations like this...I can't argue against things that I didn't say and your misinterpretations of what I did say.

[Mason]

See above post...first you misinterpreted what I said and now you're just making stuff up.
You first clarified that "parallelized graphics" referred to GPU tasks ("GPUs by definition are highly parallelized"), and when I pointed out how goofy that was you shifted your focus entirely over to physics ("my post was a more generalized statement about using a cell add on to due some physics calculations"). That's creative editing, you originally stated it was for physics and graphics.

You made a throw-away comment about the Cell serving in a GPU role, without thinking about it. I corrected it. It isn't that big of a deal.

[Mason]

I tried to shut you up before but I'll try again...unless you can show that cells aren't good for parallelized execution why in gods name are you even continuing this conversation.
Each SPE has 21 million transistors. Each of ATI's pixel processors is 2 million. So no, there's really no competition there when it comes to how well the various approaches can parallelize the graphics pipeline.

And yet again, trying to rewrite your argument. If you'd just said that they were good for parallelized operations, we wouldn't have had this discussion at all. Which would've been 100% fine with me.

Did I mention what aspect of rendering? Maybe I'm gonna use them for non-realtime raytracing.

Then why'd you bring up GPUs in the first place? You looked up "GPU" in Wikipedia, for crying out loud.

[Schnoogs]

Each SPE has 21 million transistors. Each of ATI's pixel processors is 2 million. So no, there's really no competition there when it comes to how well the various approaches can parallelize the graphics pipeline.

And yet again, trying to rewrite your argument. If you'd just said that they were good for parallelized operations, we wouldn't have had this discussion at all. Which would've been 100% fine with me.

I never rewrote my argument...I had to keep addressing your misinterpretations which in turn moved the conversation away from my initial point which was that I would LOVE TO EXPERIMENT WITH CELL PROCESSORS FOR GRAPHICS AND PHYSICS. Does that not compute? Are you inferring that in fact I'm lying and that I actually do not want to experiment with them?

You seem to be completely clueless about the simple fact that people often like to tinker and toy with technology. You're the one who jumped to conclusions after completely misinterpeting the word parellization.

I never once said that a single Cell would be faster than a GPU. GPU's came up during the definition of parallelization.

What kind of a genius would try to argue to someone that they shouldnt be able to experiment with hardware? And in the case of this hardware it would be logical to apply it to parralelized tasks such as physics and graphics.

Please educate me on what I would enjoy experimenting with...seeing as you know me so well ;)

[Schnoogs]

Each SPE has 21 million transistors. Each of ATI's pixel processors is 2 million. So no, there's really no competition there when it comes to how well the various approaches can parallelize the graphics pipeline.

And yet again, trying to rewrite your argument. If you'd just said that they were good for parallelized operations, we wouldn't have had this discussion at all. Which would've been 100% fine with me.



Then why'd you bring up GPUs in the first place? You looked up "GPU" in Wikipedia, for crying out loud.

It was brought up to illustrate what definition of parallelization I was referring to...

[Schnoogs]

Again...simple logic would suggest that if PS3 developers are using cells for physics then it should not be blasphemy to try that same technique on a PC....last time I checked I'm free to tinker with stuff and experiment.

[Mason]

It was brought up to illustrate what definition of parallelization I was referring to...
...which you said Cell would be great at. We're in a fruit loop here, man.

And of course experimentation is fun. I'm a lot more excited about the GPGPU stuff, though.

[Schnoogs]

...which you said Cell would be great at. We're in a fruit loop here, man.

And of course experimentation is fun. I'm a lot more excited about the GPGPU stuff, though.

Cells ARE designed for parallelization.

[Mason]

Cells ARE designed for parallelization.
Okay, final trip around the fruit loop.

1) You said that Cells would be great at parallelizing graphics.
2) You offer up the GPU as an example of the parallelization of graphics (that Cells would be great at, from statement 1)
3) I disagree, noting that modern GPUs are already way more parallel and way better suited to rendering.
4) You say I misinterpreted you by alternately forgetting that you said either 1 or 2.

You also keep on trying to narrow your statement back to only including physics, when the whole discussion was about the graphics part of your statement.

Like I said earlier, this is not a big deal. If you never shared the (common) misconception that Cells would be adequate replacements for CPUs or GPUs, then you have no reason to defend this line of reasoning. The truculence just seems like an ego thing at this point.

[Goronmon]

Just to stir the pot a bit, I believe Mason's in the right on this one.

[Mason]

Just to stir the pot a bit, I believe Mason's in the right on this one.
Ugh, don't do that.

[Reanimated]

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/02/01/emotion.engine.idg/

[Schnoogs]

Okay, final trip around the fruit loop.

1) You said that Cells would be great at parallelizing graphics.
2) You offer up the GPU as an example of the parallelization of graphics (that Cells would be great at, from statement 1)
3) I disagree, noting that modern GPUs are already way more parallel and way better suited to rendering.
4) You say I misinterpreted you by alternately forgetting that you said either 1 or 2.

You also keep on trying to narrow your statement back to only including physics, when the whole discussion was about the graphics part of your statement.

Like I said earlier, this is not a big deal. If you never shared the (common) misconception that Cells would be adequate replacements for CPUs or GPUs, then you have no reason to defend this line of reasoning. The truculence just seems like an ego thing at this point.

Yawn...

You live in a dream world...wake up!! Please!!

You seem to think that because I stated that a Cell could be used for graphics calculations that I meant that it would be better...this is a delusion that exists only in your little universe.

Find me one quote in which I say it would be better...you use the word great which doesnt imply better so your point 3 is meaningless since I sure as heck never suggested this...I can use the CPU for graohics does that mean I'm implying that its better???

Can you see the root of your misinterpretation? Just because I state that something is well suited for a task is not the same as me saying its the best choice...plus you contunie to assume that I mean to use the cell as the primary renderer to power the display. Another wrong assumption...

You're definitly an usual person...trying to argue to someone your opinion about what they meant when they typed something. I continuously pointed out that you misinterpreted me and for some bizarre reason you continue to profess that you know more about what I meant to say than I did.

Talk about a God complex...are you that voice in my head???

Keep dreaming man...

[Schnoogs]

Just to stir the pot a bit, I believe Mason's in the right on this one.

Mason knows more about my opinions than I do? Wow..are you the other voice in my head?

[Goronmon]

Ugh, don't do that.
Oh come on, you are having an argument over a public forum, stirring the pot is like...a rule...or something...

[Mason]

Would your Pentium 4 do a "great" job as a GPU, by any reasonable standard?

I made my point well enough, in my opinion. If you want to slam doors and stomp the floor on our exit from this discussion, that's your business.

[Schnoogs]

) I disagree, noting that modern GPUs are already way more parallel and way better suited to rendering.

Ha...can't believe I overlooked this little gem. My original statement was that I wanted to mess with cells to do physics and graphics. I never stated I wanted to do this because it was better than a GPU.

If you read his point 3 Mason alludes to the fact that it is possible to do graphics on a cell because he doesnt say "its impossible" he says "GPUs are better".

So why on earth would anyone argue for 3 pages when they seem to know that doing graphics or physics on a cell is possible???

[Schnoogs]

Would your Pentium 4 do a "great" job as a GPU, by any reasonable standard?

I made my point well enough, in my opinion. If you want to slam doors and stomp the floor on our exit from this discussion, that's your business.

God you are clueless...if someone wanted to make a pure software rendered all the power to them. Its a free country and they just might have fun doing it. Who are you to determine what people can and cannot do??? Where do you get off suggesting that if you don't program for a GPU you're doign something wrong.

Are you the police? Big Brother?

Oh and I'm still waiting for you to find a quote from me stating that I wanted to mess with the cell because I thought it was BETTER.

[copasetic]

This has been fun to follow. It seems to me that Mason misunderstood the intitial post, as Assasin did say 'great' and that is subjective.

[Schnoogs]

This has been fun to follow. It seems to me that Mason misunderstood the intitial post, as Assasin did say 'great' and that is subjective.

Thank you...my initial post was very inncocent and didnt warrant 3 pages of arguments.

I still stand by my original statement...I would love to mess with cells. I'm an engineer at heart and I love to tinker with things. My whole programmng life has been spent dealing with x86 and DirectX compliant GPUs. Cells represent an unknown frontier of experimentation.

Not sure why Mason thinks he needs to comment on my curiosity...

[Goronmon]

Actually, the initial posts by both parties were pretty innocent. Assassin says "Cell great for graphics", Mason says "I disagree", flamewar ensues...

Not sure why Mason thinks he needs to comment on my curiosity...
If you're adverse to people commenting on your thoughts, posting on a message board might not be the best place for you.

[Schnoogs]

Actually, the initial posts by both parties were pretty innocent. Assassin says "Cell great for graphics", Mason says "I disagree", flamewar ensues...


If you're adverse to people commenting on your thoughts, posting on a message board might not be the best place for you.

I should be free to post what I'm curious about...whats weird is when people try to argue that in fact you arent curious about something.

I think I know my likes and dislikes better than anyone! ;)

[Goronmon]

I should be free to post what I'm curious about...whats weird is when people try to argue that in fact you arent curious about something.
Oh come on, you know no one is trying to argue that you aren't curious about the Cell, stop sidestepping. ;)

[Schnoogs]

Oh come on, you know no one is trying to argue that you aren't curious about the Cell, stop sidestepping. ;)

Then what was Mason trying to argue?

[Goronmon]

Then what was Mason trying to argue?
That the Cell wouldn't be that "great" at rendering graphics.

[Schnoogs]

That the Cell wouldn't be that "great" at rendering graphics.

If that's what he was trying to say he should have simply posted what you just typed.

[Morratut]

Wow I'm always amazed at how threads get out of hand. The internet and forums are funny places when people misunderstand each other.

[Schnoogs]

Wow I'm always amazed at how threads get out of hand. The internet and forums are funny places when people misunderstand each other.

Whats even better is when someone misunderstands you and you try to clarify to them what you meant and they refuse to believe your clarification. Like they know better about what you we're trying to say. I think it's safe to say everyone is an expert about their own opinions and intentions.

[Kelegacy]

Holy Macaroni. Change the thread title to Assassin vs. Mason please.

Weird wild stuff.

[51|RandoM]

I am a sun geek for a living-just a little disclaimer.

That aside, I find it interesting that people consider niagra as a competitor to cell. While they are similar in aspect, they've been marketed to very different segments. What this does bring up is the possibility of Sun pushing Niagra into different markets. Multithreading and by extension multithreading on top of multicore is the future of computing(my opinion). It has become the favorite 'workaround' to bypass Moore's Law, while providing increased compute horsepower per individual box.

Cell has zero chance of acceptance in the market Sun targets with Niagra, so if there is competition, it means Sun broadening its focus... which could be good or bad.

Niagra is one of the cornerstones of the rebirth of Sun. I hope they don't dilute their resources with it by trying to expand into markets they've not previously addressed. Sun gets re-engineered by McNealy whenever it is required. He has done it twice before, I've got a good deal of confidence that he'll do it again.

Well, to wind down, I'm still strong on Sun, and see them as an ongoing player in the midrange to highend compute platform, with increasing presence in the low-end.

[bobbler]

That was probably the most heated semantics debate I've seen in a while. Neither of you were necessarily wrong from what I read (a few silly statements you guys stuck to, ignoring the fact that the rest of what you guys were saying were essentially in agreement). Graphics are, to borrow a phrase, embarassingly parallel in a lot of ways (hence the reason for dozens of pixel/vertex shaders now days), but Cell wouldn't be all that fantastic as a GPU because it lacks about 100m transistors worth of fixed function hardware for things like texture lookups (although you could pull it off with the dma engine, I guess), mipmaps/filtering, etc, etc. If all you wanted to do was create polygons, then Cell would probably be pretty sweet.

Physics is another story, it may be silly fast or stupidly slow, depending on how you write the engine. If you give each SPE a certain task that has little interaction with the others, then it'l likely rip through it like nobody's business (assuming you can work within the 256kb of sram or efficiently stream what you need in -- ack).

AI you can manage if you play with your conditionals and avoid the nasty branches.

There are many ways to solve the same problem (arguably, thats part of the 'fun' -- and many of the ways we do things now aren't necessarily the best, but we've gotten around them because our CPUs carried the weight for us... doesn't necessarily work on either console).

(down with AoS)

[bobbler]

I am a sun geek for a living-just a little disclaimer.

That aside, I find it interesting that people consider niagra as a competitor to cell. While they are similar in aspect, they've been marketed to very different segments. What this does bring up is the possibility of Sun pushing Niagra into different markets. Multithreading and by extension multithreading on top of multicore is the future of computing(my opinion). It has become the favorite 'workaround' to bypass Moore's Law, while providing increased compute horsepower per individual box.

Cell has zero chance of acceptance in the market Sun targets with Niagra, so if there is competition, it means Sun broadening its focus... which could be good or bad.

Niagra is one of the cornerstones of the rebirth of Sun. I hope they don't dilute their resources with it by trying to expand into markets they've not previously addressed. Sun gets re-engineered by McNealy whenever it is required. He has done it twice before, I've got a good deal of confidence that he'll do it again.

Well, to wind down, I'm still strong on Sun, and see them as an ongoing player in the midrange to highend compute platform, with increasing presence in the low-end.

Everyone knows that Alpha was the king!

Although, Niagara looks to be a rather interesting (if not semi obvious, considering the general direction that the industry is going)...

[Dr Quincy]

PS3 gonna be it innit coz they gots Japan smarts yo.

[Grifter]

PS3 gonna be it innit coz they gots Japan smarts yo.

YO! YO! YO! foo you come in here spoutin off like you da shizzle yo! da big M gonna tear through this joint n pop a cap yo! Da big M gots tha bling yo! Aint no jap man gonna take dem down! 360 IN DA HIZZOUSE!!!

[Lord Dongkey]

I feel a bit more stupid after reading this thread in its entirety.

My only comment: When you post on a forum, you have the luxury of both proofreading your post, editing your post, and also checking this little site (http://www.dictionary.com)

I could care less about what either party says at this point (much like at the point before I read this thread, damn you EA and your train-wreck-esque threads), but if you're going to attack/argue/debate/inflame/annoy/etc someone, at least do your best to be articulate about it. We speak/type a language, and it has rules, and showing a lack of respect for those rules or a lack of understanding of them clearly states something about your character and intellect, respectively.

[/language police]

[Serapth]

Wow... what better way to end a 2 way flame fest, then with a grammar nazi post! :D

All we need is a midget and we got us a full blown circus here!

I was going to comment on the origonal article, but at this point... nah :) And yeah, ALPHA was king!

[Grifter]

Wow... what better way to end a 2 way flame fest, then with a grammar nazi post! :D

All we need is a midget and we got us a full blown circus here!

I was going to comment on the origonal article, but at this point... nah :) And yeah, ALPHA was king!


What? no love for the ebonics?

[Serapth]

There iz uh tyme an' uh place fo' ebonix an' dis here iz neither da tyme nor da place. sho 'nuff!

Thanks to the translator at http://www.joel.net/EBONICS/translator.asp

Er, I mean

Thanks ta da translator at http://www.joel.net/EBONICS/translator.asp all ye damn hood ratz..

[Lord Dongkey]

It's not the ebonics that the grammar nazi was referring to...

:)

[Grifter]

I feel uh bit mo' mad stupid afta reading dis here thread in its entirety.

My only comment: When ya post on uh forum, ya gots da luxury o' both proofreading yo' post, editing yo' post, an' also checking dis here little site

I could care less about what either party says at dis here point (much like at da point 'bfoe I read dis here thread, damn ya EA an' yo' train-wreck-esque threads), but if you going ta attack/argue/debate/inflame/annoy/etc someone, at least do yo' bomb ta be articulate about it. We speak/type uh language, an' it has rules, an' showing uh lack o' respect fo' those rules or uh lack o' understanding o' dem clearly states somethin' about yo' character an' branez, respectively. Jus' like Orenthawl James.

I fixed it for you:D

[Lord Dongkey]

/cry

(My message isn't long enough for the EA gods. I need to lengthen it... heh... lengthen)

[Schnoogs]

Hmmm...we could use Cell processors to translate and fix grammar errors.

Giddy up!

(waiting for Masons response..."NO!!! You can't use Cell for that!!")

[Lord Dongkey]

Well, first, the Cell would have to actually fix the English language, since it's such a steaming mutt-pile of dung. Then, the Cell would have to take a step back from "crashing the internet", I believe Katarugi said one time, and it would also have to stop "performing 1957135819034141^wang-a-flops a millisecond" (artistic license taken with that... ahem... quotation. QUOTATION-the noun. not QUOTE-the verb).

THEN, and only then, could the almighty Cell Processor descend from on high and translate and fix grammar errors.

[Schnoogs]

Well, first, the Cell would have to actually fix the English language, since it's such a steaming mutt-pile of dung. Then, the Cell would have to take a step back from "crashing the internet", I believe Katarugi said one time, and it would also have to stop "performing 1957135819034141^wang-a-flops a millisecond" (artistic license taken with that... ahem... quotation. QUOTATION-the noun. not QUOTE-the verb).

THEN, and only then, could the almighty Cell Processor descend from on high and translate and fix grammar errors.

HAHAHA! ;)

Can I quote you on Wang-a-flops?

[Lord Dongkey]

Sir, the entire WORLD can quote me on Wang-a-flops. I believe that sums up the seriousness of the upcoming console wars quite succinctly.

That, and it's a phrase that includes both Wang... and flop.

[Schnoogs]

Oh the irony...recent quote from IBM in regards to Cell.

The IBM chip will be a new challenger to graphic chip makers ATI Technologies Inc., Nvidia Corp. and semiconductor giant Intel Corp.,

I guess IBM should have consulted Mason since he's informed us and the world that Cells are a waste of time for graphics! ;) ;) ;)

IBM brings hyper-realistic imagery closer with new chip (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060209.RIBM09/TPStory/Business)

[bobbler]

Cell yield's not so bad (http://www.joystiq.com/2006/02/09/good-news-for-ps3-launch-supply/)

From what I've heard Cell yields are fantastic, and likely better than XCpu yields (which makes sense considering the way yields often work and the cpu's design).