2 ms·
From my understanding the CELL was meant to be the GPU for the PS3 but Sony instead found the same issues and could not program a reasonable performing SDK usin
by tibbydudeza 4y ago
From my understanding the CELL was meant to be the GPU for the PS3 but Sony instead found the same issues and could not program a reasonable performing SDK using it within the time limits (MS Xbox 360) and added in a Nvidia RSX GPU.
Another oddball architecture that went nowhere.
- ethbr0 4y ago> could not program a reasonable performing SDK using it within the time limits It feels like "within the time limits" has always been the problem of difficult to program for software-dependant architectures: time vs competitors. E.g. in the time it takes to write an intelligent compiler (IA-64), your better-resourced (because they're getting revenue from the current market) competitor has surpassed your performance via brute evolution force. There are use cases out there (early supercomputing, NVIDIA) where radical, development-heavy architectures have been successful, but they generally lack of competitor (the former) or iterate ruthlessly themselves (the latter).
- tibbydudeza 4y ago"radical, development-heavy architectures" = niche use case Connection machine = only had one customer afaik (NSA) Transmeta - interesting technology but nobody in that market wanted to run anything besides Windows+x86.