IBM and friends spice up CELL: 6GHz and 65nm right around the corner

The party over at the International Solid State Circuits Conference in San Francisco hasn't begun yet, we've still got a month to go, but thanks to the conference agenda, we've got a pretty good idea of what will be announced, and it's sounding pretty hot. Of most notable consumer relevance is the new CELL chip that IBM, Sony and Toshiba will be trotting out, sporting 6GHz speeds and a 65nm manufacturing process, compared to the 3.2GHz and 90nm specs of its predecessor. The chip will also feature a dual power supply design, that should speed up memory performance. No word yet if this will be making its way into some sort of beefed up PS3, but we're sure Sony and Toshiba will find something to do with all that horsepower. IBM will also be announcing its 5GHz Power6 server proc, while Intel goes all experimental on everyone with its 80 core test chips. Good times indeed.

[Via I4U]

[Lou @ Jan 4th 2007 3:18PM]

Anyone else second guessing Apple's jump to Intel now?

[Lee Glantz @ Jan 4th 2007 3:25PM]

Apple's decision to switch to Intel was best because of x86. With Intel, Apple has boot camp and can bring over many more switchers than if it had stayed with IBM.

[John @ Jan 4th 2007 3:31PM]

No, not at all. The 6ghz power6 chips would NEVER have found their way into an Apple system, even if they had stuck with IBM. The issues with heat management would have been just as bad (if not worse) than the Power5s, which caused Apple a great deal of headaches.

Besides, IBMs update schedule is far slower than Apple's or Intel's, meaning that a (lack of) chip development would seriously slow Apple's growth in the market.

[Castle @ Jan 4th 2007 3:31PM]

IBM is 34-core Cell in 2010 according to a recent Powerpoint presentation

2 PPEs (2-PowerPC cores)
32 SPEs (32 SPE Cores)
45nm SOI
~ 1TFLOPs
2010

http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/5576/cellroadmapxk3.jpg
http://www.ppcnux.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=6666

[Rick @ Jan 4th 2007 3:34PM]

This is cool, but considering IBM's chip yields, there will be one mega-PS3 we'll all have to time-share for six years.

[Cowboy Bob @ Jan 4th 2007 3:44PM]

Wow, that is fast, but i don't see anything using all of that power soon, or at least nothing for home use.

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 4th 2007 3:55PM]

The thing is, x86 support can and could be a gateway into Apple and a good fit for the laptop performance, but they can also maintain performance of desktops by sticking with the PowerPC architecture. There's nothing stopping them from flip-flopping at any time with OSX. As far as I'm aware, most of the binaries will work on either platform.

[Matt @ Jan 4th 2007 4:41PM]

Hopefully this leads to better and cheaper blu-ray players.

[Matt @ Jan 4th 2007 4:57PM]

The CELL processor has nothing to do with Bluray. The only connection between the two technology is that the PS3 uses both of them. Hoping that better CELL processors would lead to cheaper Bluray players is like hoping a more powerful internal combustion engine would lead to cheaper satellite radio.

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 4th 2007 5:44PM]

Well, I was gonna say, if the internal combustion engine was cheaper to produce, the engines in the machine that ferry the space shuttle to the pad, the trains that bring the parts and the other residual costs would be reduced. In that sense, putting a satellite in orbit would be cheaper and the service fees could be reduced...that or the CEO of the radio companies will get bigger checks because they did so much to reduce the cost.

[Liam @ Jan 4th 2007 5:59PM]

It's not x86, the vast majority of people will still not be interested.

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 4th 2007 6:09PM]

Windows is not the only OS in the world. OSX should be able to run on either x86 or PowerPC architecture (not sure about Cell) and Linux has kernel support for the Cell as well. Just because x86 seems to be the only architecture that Intel and AMD use right now, the steps AMD is taking may step the industry away from x86 instructions slowly (which is a good thing.) If you brush this off as meaningless because you can't put it in your PC tomorrow, you have a very short sighted (read Microsoft-centric) view of the industry.

[Mark @ Jan 4th 2007 6:14PM]

This will pave the way for cheaper PS3's netx year, same clock speed, 65nm process. Same performance, less heat (not that PS3 gets very hot anyway), less noise (not that PS3 is already almost silent). Smaller heatsinks, lighter constrution.

a 65nm based PS3 will seriously reduce the losses Sony make on the PS3, allowing a cheaper pricepoint or consumers.

[Castle @ Jan 4th 2007 6:14PM]

>>The CELL processor has nothing to do with Bluray. The only connection between the two technology is that the PS3 uses both of them. Hoping that better CELL processors would lead to cheaper Bluray players is like hoping a more powerful internal combustion engine would lead to cheaper satellite radio.

Actually both Sony and Toshiba are planning on using the cell as a decoder for Blu-ray/HD-DVD players. The reason is quite simple, they need cheap mass-produced processor that can decode Mpeg2/Mpeg4 H.264/VC-1 at 1920x0180 resolution in realtime.

[steve @ Jan 4th 2007 6:22PM]

mmmmmm.....6ghz of goodness

[Mark @ Jan 4th 2007 6:38PM]

This will pave the way for cheaper PS3's netx year, same clock speed, 65nm process. Same performance, less heat (not that PS3 gets very hot anyway), less noise (not that PS3 is already almost silent). Smaller heatsinks, lighter constrution.

a 65nm based PS3 will seriously reduce the losses Sony make on the PS3, allowing a cheaper pricepoint or consumers.

[Giltronic @ Jan 4th 2007 6:48PM]

what is everyones guess one what this chip is used for first?

[scott berfield @ Jan 4th 2007 6:49PM]

No way PS3 gets a new CPU. They couldn't afford to fragment the market like that.

[DynamicStability @ Jan 4th 2007 7:21PM]

It would be the same chip, just a different process.

I wonder how the Cell Yield is doing these days.

[Hello @ Jan 4th 2007 8:53PM]

Yeah this is going to push the market in the right direction as far as rendering goes. Hopefully it performs like it says.

[Dustin @ Jan 5th 2007 12:40AM]

I wouldn't find it unreasonable for IBM to supply sony with a smaller die version (read: lower-power consuption) of the current spec cell processor in the PS3, somewhere down the road. Microsoft is already sourcing cheaper and lower-powered spec 65nm chips for the 360. (due mid-07) Also, it may be cheaper in that, sony automatically disables ONE processor on the chip in the current PS3, in order to increase yield. In the future, with a better process, they may be able to design this out, lowering cost.

sources: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20050517041438.html
(PS3 & Cell)
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20061226101150.html
(MS & Chartered)

[Matt @ Jan 5th 2007 2:15AM]

Vocal tone doesn't travel well through the internets.

[Phil @ Jan 5th 2007 11:27PM]

Even if they did put this new chip in the ps3 I wouldn't buy the ps3 nor the xbox 360 until they add these specs.

These are the specs that will make a console last 10 years

PS3 xbox 360 zephyr
blu-ray/ hd-dvd drive blu-ray/ hd-dvd
hdmi port ATI R600 based graphics
wi-fi for all models built in wi-fi
512 MiB or 1GB of Rambus XDR DRAM 120 gb hd
6 GHZ cell processor 65mm 65 mm tri-core 4 GHZ
New RSX graphics card based on a 8900 GTX instead of the hdmi crappy 7800 GTX
PS3's RAM is only 256 MB. That's not a lot of RAM especially if you are going to run linix on the ps3. 512 MB minimum and 1 - 2 GB's of RAM would be appreciated.

[Phil @ Jan 5th 2007 11:38PM]

Even if they did put this new chip in the ps3 I wouldn't buy the ps3 nor the xbox 360 until they add these specs.

These are the specs that will make a console last 10 years

PS3 SE second edition
blu-ray/ hd-dvd drive
hdmi 1.3a port
wi-fi for all models
512 MiB or 1GB of Rambus XDR DRAM
6 GHZ cell processor 65mm
New RSX graphics card based on a 8900 GTX instead of the crappy 7800 GTX

XBOX 360 codename: ZEPHYR
blu-ray/ hd-dvd drive
hdmi 1.3a port
built in wi-fi for all models
4 GHZ tri-core 65 mm processor
New graphics card based on the ATI R600
Quiet Fan
- These specs will make both companys microsoft and sony a lot of dough. Both companys should make the hardware for next line of ps3's and xbox 360's upgrade compatible. Making the hardware upgrade compatible like that of a pc will allow gamers to take out there old 360 or ps3 graphics card and put in a new one when the company creates them.
PS3's RAM is only 256 MB. That's not a lot of RAM especially if you are going to run linix on the ps3. 512 MB minimum and 1 - 2 GB's of RAM would be appreciated. With these

[Phil @ Jan 5th 2007 11:47PM]

Even if they did put this new chip in the ps3 I wouldn't buy the ps3 nor the xbox 360 until they add these specs.

These are the specs that will make a console last 10 years

PS3 SE second edition
blu-ray - hd-dvd combo drive/ hdmi 1.3a port/ wi-fi for all models/ 512 MiB or 1GB of Rambus XDR DRAM/6 GHZ cell processor 65mm/ New RSX graphics card based on nVidia's upcoming 8900 GTX instead of the crappy 7800 GTX/ *Hardware upgrade compatibility


XBOX 360 codename: ZEPHYR
blu-ray - hd-dvd combo drive/ hdmi 1.3a port/ built in wi-fi for all models/ 4 GHZ tri-core 65 mm processor/ New graphics card based on the ATI R600/
Quiet Fan/ *Hardware upgrade compatibility


- These specs will make both companys microsoft and sony a lot of dough. Both companys should make the hardware for next line of ps3's and xbox 360's upgrade compatible. Making the hardware upgrade compatible like that of a pc will allow gamers to take out there old 360 or ps3 graphics card and put in a new one when the company creates them.
PS3's RAM is only 256 MB. That's not a lot of RAM especially if you are going to run linix on the ps3. 512 MB minimum and 1 - 2 GB's of RAM would be appreciated. With these

[kev @ Jun 18th 2008 2:23PM]

I am very sure that the difference in architecture would mean absolutely nothing to this CELL monster, Cell 3.2Ghz can emulate Windows with absolute ease in a Desktop environment i.e. has the required RAM to run Windows properly, I would imagine that with improved emulation software Cell 6GHz would run Windows better than Intel themselves without any emulation, and minus the Virus issues wihich could potentially be a massive business opportunity.

People just do not understand just how many light years the Cell is ahead of anything x86 chips can offer. Intel's 16-core due out soon(ish)isn't as good as the Cell 3.2Ghz, let alone the 6GHz version or the future Dual-Cell!!!!!!!

I am not saying that Intel and AMD days are numbered, what I am saying is that Cell has the power smash through emulation as if you wouldn't notice the difference excpet imporved performance on the Cell side.