U.S. Air Force Buying 2,200 PlayStation 3s

[demonhorde665]

[citation][nom]Honis[/nom]If they're buying at market value Sony is going to lose huge amounts of $ on this.MS and Sony run on the Gillette model. Give the handle away and we'll make it up on them buying the razors. In this case the console isn't free, but they lose $ on each sale assuming you'll go and make up the loss in game and accessory sales. Also to those saying why not buy x CPUs, the PS3 can stomp any current x86 based processor in calculations. Also, to buy a PC then an advance GFX card that equals the PS3s processing power is more expensive in both hardware and development. The PS3 just requires minor changes to be made to programs written entirely in C and C++ to run thanks to Linux support. With 2,200 PS3s they have a massive super computer at a fraction of the cost in both hardware and development. I do hope they buy them at real cost ($500-$800) since Sony will never see a real return on it. Even at that price its a better buy then an equivalent super computer.[/citation]

1. no the ps3 procesor is not mroe powerfull than any x86 if you beleive that then you are brain smoked on sony's bull shit , the server processors by amd and intel both out perform a ps3 chip in calculation just they are not cheaper, for that matter a non x86 super computer makes the ps 3 look like 80's tech in shear calculating power , but again it is not cheap.

2. of coruse sony will go on and on about the processing power iof thier cell , to make every one thin k the ps3 rocks more, the cell architecture is that powerful NOT the actual chip put in the ps3 as the one in the ps3 is teh lowest end cell based chip you can get.

3. you are a fanboy

 

[demonhorde665]

"meaning that it will need all the older, larger models which support the installation of custom operating systems such as Linux. While the Air Force can do its own hard drive upgrades, it will have to run to grab the older hardware model before they're all gone."

marc are you trying to be funny or are you just dumb bro (teasing you don't take it personally) but seriously dude this is teh US goverment we are talking about , I'm sure sony would be wiling to whip them up a batch or two of the older ps3 version.

 

[amnotanoobie]

[citation][nom]manos[/nom]Tesla would be their answer. Power servers from Nvidia if they need the power and HD capabilities for their researches and shit.. Not PS3s that are now blocked fully. It just doesnt make any sence. [/citation]

1. Tesla is still quite a limited application hardware. Tesla/CUDA is really only beneficial when you're doing a lot of parallel number crunching. The cell is much more general purpose processor compared to a Tesla, so you can't do everything with it.

2. A Tesla setup would cost more than a PS3 unit. Do you even know how much a Quadro costs compared to your GeForce?

3. Tesla is overhyped, unless you already have the proper algorithm for implementation, it might be too costly to convert software to be used for CUDA.

 

[burfordg]

[citation][nom]Honis[/nom]If they're buying at market value Sony is going to lose huge amounts of $ on this.MS and Sony run on the Gillette model. Give the handle away and we'll make it up on them buying the razors. In this case the console isn't free, but they lose $ on each sale assuming you'll go and make up the loss in game and accessory sales. Also to those saying why not buy x CPUs, the PS3 can stomp any current x86 based processor in calculations. Also, to buy a PC then an advance GFX card that equals the PS3s processing power is more expensive in both hardware and development. The PS3 just requires minor changes to be made to programs written entirely in C and C++ to run thanks to Linux support. With 2,200 PS3s they have a massive super computer at a fraction of the cost in both hardware and development. I do hope they buy them at real cost ($500-$800) since Sony will never see a real return on it. Even at that price its a better buy then an equivalent super computer.[/citation]

The PS3's graphics card could hardly be considered advanced.

 

[ssddx]

Let me put it a different way to those who downrate the cell chip as the propper solution:

With the differences in price between solutions, prices does become important. How silly will your comparisons to x86 and Teslas be when compared with 5+ cell-based computing platforms (ps3)?

In some cases the best chip doesnt always win. In order to try and prove otherwise we would need to find out the max computing power of a ps3, its competition, and then compare total costs. As stated by others, I believe the cost difference would be significant.

In any case, they spent money developing software to utilize cell-based computing.. why would the usaf buy anything different? Doing so would be going back to day 1.

 

[buwish]

I agree. They should just buy the CPU's/boards and not the whole units. The six core Cell's are plenty powerful and I'm sure they don't need HDMI, sound, etc... for their operation.

 

[Guest]

wtf our shop @ robins afb doesn't even have a working AC yet their budget can buy ps3s. how bout reallocating the wealth to the other airmen!!!!

 

[anamaniac]

Ahh, the cell processor.
As it seems with every type of processor, everytime you get a more efficient architechutre, you use functionality.

Now IF my understanding is right, a x86 CPU can brute its way through just about anything. A GPU can only do simple equations. A cell in the middle groud 9somewhat).

And we all should know IBM can make the best processors. Hell, even the Xbox 360 had a 2.8GHz tricore with HT years ahead of its time.