On the PS3, one is disabled for yield purposes. :eyebrowlift: So technically, the OS sees 7. In fact, one is reserved for the kernel, I am not sure if it still applies when running Linux, but most apps/softwares can only access 6 SPEs.
I haven’t read much on compilers lately, but if off-the-shelf compilers like GCC can generate efficient SIMD for the SPE, then I guess PS3 might prove its effectiveness in rendering. However, I still have a feeling a lot of the algorithm has to be tweaked to suit the SIMD instruction types better.
But the lack of RAM on the PS3 still concerns me, alot. Raytracing is generally not RAM hungry, especially when the model is untextured. But if you throw in a couple of 2k by 2k texture with mipmaps, even with bucket rendering, there is going to be a lot of swapping going on.
Lastly, on the issue of cost, PC hardwares are constantly updated and price-adjusted on a monthly basis. Consoles, on the other hand, remain relatively static for 3-4 years. If devs can’t realize the full potential of the PS3 in 12 month, then we might as well not try, because by then a comparable x86 PC will only cost $500.
…and purchase two HP Pavilion 6133.sc with A 2.4ghz core2-Quad + 8 gigs of ram, and
you´ll have a small 8-core renderfarm with 16 gigs of memory total for under 2000€
Why not port blender’s internal renderer to CUDA so we can use it on GeForce8 series cards that use an unbelievable number of stream processors? I have 224 stream processors already in my comp right now, would be nice to use them for more than gaming Would it be possible?
I am not a tech wiz / developer, but as I understand it, graphic cards use a completely different approach than render engines. In fact, they are limited in what they can do, they simply do what they can do insanely fast. AFAIK, the only place you can really accelerate Blender by tapping into graphic cards is the GUI, because it’s in OpenGL.
I may be wrong, and hope I am. Graphic card prices are in free fall, and tapping any such potentil would be very sweet…
$11286.45 (CDN) for the same mac pro with 32 gb RAM from memoryexpress.com instead of apple’s RAM. Plus you’ll actually have 2gb extra of the original mac ram.
Eh. You can get a quad core system with 4GB RAM from Dell for just around $1000. You can get a dual core system with 2 GB RAM for around $400. You do the math.
well the stock configuration of the mac pro with dual quad 2.8 with 2GB + 2GB from online retailer, with 64 bit OS, only one system to configure, one powersupply, and quality internals, the math, to me, is in favor of the Mac. Time and simplicity to me is more important…but let’s not start any flame wars
If money is an issue, I can build a nice q6600 system with 4gb ram for less than $1000 and overclock it to 3.2. I won’t lock into any Vendor other than Apple if I can build it myself. Support means nothing to me…only warranty.
And would you believe it - our company just received a Dell-Offer for 600$
for a QUAD 6600 pc with 2GB ram and ram costing around 60 bucks for the additional 2GB so…660$ for a 4GB Q6600 pc … :eek:
And…thats in DENMARK which is one of the more expensive countries in the world…
I think that even without the PS3, it would still be vaulable to pursue in the long run. IBM obviously isn’t finished with developing the cell processor, (I imagine the Power line will start to incorporate features from the Cell design) and I think other architectures will soon start pursuing asynchronous core designs as well. In another 4 years, processors with dedicated floating point cores may very well be within the price range of consumer desktops.
Today only (and not even sure how long it will last)… woot.com has Gateway Quad Core Intel boxes w/3GB RAM for $599. They’re refurbs and have Vista (yikes!), but you can always wipe that out an go for a Ubuntu or something.
Would it be possible?
= Grenouille, take a R not a W