or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Cell details
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cell details - Page 4

post #121 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by mattyj
Very interesting. Obviously the Cell was designed with current programming trends kept in mind.

so the CoreXXX thingy from apple will each get it's own processor-core :-D
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
post #122 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by Krassy
so the CoreXXX thingy from apple will each get it's own processor-core :-D


I don't think so, but this thought might have been conveyed in original poster's comments. It's my impression that these SPE cores will be assigned on the fly as needed, and data may be passed from one SPE to the next, maybe using several cores for one operation. As I said though, this is only my impression from a few things I've read.
post #123 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
Regarding updating an application's code for a Cell processor, an interesting observation was made over at AN, on the Power PC thread. Essentially, the idea is that existing applications only need be updated for Tiger, to use the core services. The core services in Tiger then would utilize Cell's SPEs for a dramatic performance increase. In this way, all the new and difficult coding is done by Apple when developing Tiger and core services. Cell's PPE runs the majority of an application code, which is unchanged. It seems like a workable idea to me. Only applications that use SPEs for other tasks need to have the new code.

This is just a rumor, and at best a speculation.

I would be pleased if it was true, but for the moment there is nothing official here.
post #124 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
This is just a rumor, and at best a speculation.

I would be pleased if it was true, but for the moment there is nothing official here.

I believe it was presented as speculation about how how things could work, nothing more.
post #125 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
I don't think so, but this thought might have been conveyed in original poster's comments. It's my impression that these SPE cores will be assigned on the fly as needed, and data may be passed from one SPE to the next, maybe using several cores for one operation. As I said though, this is only my impression from a few things I've read.

was just joking. the good thing seems to be that the specialized processing units can all be implemented with a very clean and efficient design and each of them could probably run at a variable multiple of the core-frequency. this would allow to configure such a processor excactly as needed for different purposes with the main view to performance or cost- or power-efficience... especially interesting would be the racer-stuff which has been discussed in rumors a few years ago. apple could even design it's own processing units which could be added to a cell-based processor.
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
post #126 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by mattyj
Very interesting. Obviously the Cell was designed with current programming trends kept in mind.

Or visa-versa.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #127 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by Programmer
Or visa-versa.

Care to elaborate?
Abhor the Stereotype, respect the Individual.
1.33Ghz 15" Powerbook: 80GB HD, 1GB RAM, OSX.4.7, Soundsticks II, 320GB LaCie FW800 EXT HD, iPod 20GB 4G
Reply
Abhor the Stereotype, respect the Individual.
1.33Ghz 15" Powerbook: 80GB HD, 1GB RAM, OSX.4.7, Soundsticks II, 320GB LaCie FW800 EXT HD, iPod 20GB 4G
Reply
post #128 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by mattyj
Care to elaborate?

I think Programmer implies that current (Cocoa) programming trends were designed with Cell in mind...

Please correct me if I am wrong...
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #129 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by MacRonin
I think Programmer implies that current (Cocoa) programming trends were designed with Cell in mind...

Please correct me if I am wrong...

Isn't cocoa more about the GUI, and the OO side of it.

As long as it's within the Mach-O Runtime Architecture I think it all should address whatever framework you wish. Maybe you need to use cocoa to use the frameworks, but I think you can use them otherwise, but Apple still has to supply some of the frameworks.

I'm not sure. I'm not much of a developer. I only dabble.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #130 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by MacRonin
I think Programmer implies that current (Cocoa) programming trends were designed with Cell in mind...

Please correct me if I am wrong...


Let's all take a shot at it. To me it means Tiger's core services seem to be developed with Cell in mind.
post #131 of 135
The people at apple are that swift, smart and forward thinking, I wouldn't put it past them to put cell archetecture and plans into the mix....

in fact I bet on it!

think different and alll!
post #132 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker

Isn't cocoa more about the GUI, and the OO side of it.

As long as it's within the Mach-O Runtime Architecture I think it all should address whatever framework you wish. Maybe you need to use cocoa to use the frameworks, but I think you can use them otherwise, but Apple still has to supply some of the frameworks.

I'm not sure. I'm not much of a developer. I only dabble.

&

Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy

Let's all take a shot at it. To me it means Tiger's core services seem to be developed with Cell in mind.

onlooker, I also am more dilettante than developer, I just threw Cocoa out there since it seemed to be what Apple preferred OS X devs working with.

snoopy, yeah, from speeding up iLife all the way up the (vertical) market to full-time real-time Apple Pro apps...

Imagine a Cell optimized Shake running through whatever uberXstation Apple dreams up in the future...

Imagine if Apple made a modern Cell powered version of this in the future:

SkyLab - A tale of early Apple distributed computing

Worth the read, for the thought it provokes... Meat (vision) is near the end of the article..
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #133 of 135
I am wondering what effect Cell processors will have on future graphics cards? It seems that Cell's SPEs can take over some functionality of a graphics chip set, if I interpret what I read correctly. Will Cell permit future graphics cards to be simpler and cheaper? Could the importance of graphics card begin to decline in future, Cell based hardware?

Just curious.
post #134 of 135
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
I am wondering what effect Cell processors will have on future graphics cards? . . .


The new article posted in the other Cell thread pretty much answered my question. It looks like Cell can take on some of the GPU functions, eventually maybe most of them, leading to a smaller role for graphics cards in Cell powered hardware.

http://homepage.mac.com/dke/FileSharing2.html
post #135 of 135
New cell article from PC stats:
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1727
I don't know if it says anything new, but its interesting. Check out the part about the link between cell CPUS.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Cell details