[ydl-gen] No video hardware acceleration on PS3

[Derick Centeno]

  Norberto Quintanar wrote:
> http://www.apple.com/macmini/
> --- Luke Scharf <lscharf at vt.edu> wrote:
>
>   
>> If I were to buy a PS3 for my home, it would need a
>> fully-functional and 
>> accelerated X-server.  But, at the $600 price-point in my living
>> room, 
>> it's really competing with the Mac Mini.  :-)
>>     
Individuals interpret value v. price very differently.  These are not 
the same, nor are they reasoned by individuals in similar ways at all.  
One approach in examining what value, if any, exists along with the 
price (whether it be the PS3 or other computer) is to compare computer 
processing performance of Cell v Intel, in this case a Mac mini - since 
they are offered at about the same price.  One could also take the time 
to compare other Intel computers selling for the same price.  A quick 
view of just what is available within the same price range may be 
revealing, here are some links:

http://www1.epinions.com/PC_Laptops--reviews--intel--prices--price_range_0_600

http://reviews.cnet.com/4566-3118_7-0.html

http://www.mysimon.com/4566-3000_8-0.html?filter=100021_10530723_

The specs for the Mac mini, as mentioned elsewhere, are here:

http://www.apple.com/macmini/

One of the most infuriating aspects of interpreting the technical 
information Apple provides has been comparing what they present against 
standard fundamental comparisons which other vendors use. However, many 
companies don't present that kind of information in a format which is 
plainly or easily discoverable.

So let's use what can be found quickly.

In considering this particular problem I found 2 meaningful sources, 
from amongst a flood of others, referring to the Cell:

1.  2 straightforward meaningful numbers from here:
http://www.ps3.net/ps3-specs.php

2 numbers which caught my eye are:
1.8 Tera-flops floating point performance for the GPU
2 Tera-flops System Floating Point Performance
 
2.  A different report from the ISSCC:
http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT022805234129

This report is perhaps more interesting than others which have been 
referred to because it's purpose is to clarify and analyze, as opposed 
to present something impressive.  They mention what is often overlooked, 
1Tera-flop is equivalent to 1 Billion instructions per second.

Let's return to Apple's Mac Mini whose floating point numbers are on 
that same page.  What is that value?  26.3

Now let's be fair, Apple is comparing it's current model against it's 
older one -- and there is a significant improvement.
That is not what interests me here.  I am interested in extracting 
information which will help me ascribe a value which can help inform my 
personal view in comparing against another similarly priced computer.

We have 26.3 floating point compared against 1.8 Teraflops floating 
point.  That's 1.8 Billion instructions per second for processing 
floating point based calculations.  In the fields such as advanced 
financing (Stock Market institutions), and sciences (dna processing, 
muscle and nerve innervation analysis, biochemical analyses of all 
sorts, astronomy, weather analyses, earth sciences, etc.) where tiny and 
unimaginably huge values are are needed to analyze interactions and 
events accurately the access to such technology is of huge importance.  
These people have homes and families (who themselves may appreciate an 
inexpensive computer they can reliably work with utilizing advanced 
precision) , and other persons not as well established in their careers 
or life who have the knowledge can certainly utilize this kind of power 
and make their own contributions in these same fields as well in various 
ways because of the open source concept and a free web, via this same 
inexpensive system.

Although I did not discover the system wide performance numbers for 
current Intel based machines I frankly don't have that much time to 
pursue this question further.  However, I have not heard of any other 
computer system being at anywhere near 2 Teraflops for system wide 
floating point performance, except the Cell (a joint venture of Sony, 
IBM and Toshiba).

There are other computers performing at the level of the Cell or 
better.  However IBM according to the NY Times, Feb. 9, 2006, "IBM 
Unveils Server Line That Uses Game Chips" by Steve Lohr, sells those 
computers starting from 20-30K ($20,000 - $30,000).  Given this added 
published fact, the value in my view is with the Cell.  For $600 there 
is the opportunity and chance to learn and acquire skills approaching 
that used in very high end systems.  In my view, that is value indeed.

I personally comprehend what that value is because I have accumulated 
over 15+ years of technically advanced work experience with high end 
computer systems from IBM, Stratus and others.  I have a profound 
respect and great enjoyment in having worked with these advanced systems 
and look forward to the continued availability of such powerful systems 
returned to the public and commercial market at such an amazing price.