OT: Cell Processor Decodes 48 MPEG2 Streams

fldave wrote on 11/10/2005, 5:34 PM
Simultaneously.

I've said before, and I'll say again, I want a cell processor on a PC. Recent talk of using NVidea GPUs to encode video, the Cell processor should dust that. Real time HDV, multiple streams.

Toshiba Demonstrates Cell Microprocessor Simultaneously Decoding 48 MPEG-2 Streams, The Link Is Here

Comments

p@mast3rs wrote on 11/10/2005, 5:50 PM
how much power consumption do Cells use? Im sure the cost would be extremely high in the beginning as well. Still, very impressive.
fldave wrote on 11/10/2005, 6:07 PM
I've heard that they are very power conscious, as well as there will be a Cell processor in Sony's PlayStation 3. I've also read that the price is rapidly decreasing, as they are very soon able to produce in mass quantities. More Info
apit34356 wrote on 11/10/2005, 10:14 PM
The cell cpu is very powerful compared to the Intel or AMD offerings. But lets hope that group continues to refuse Microsoft's OS to be moved to it. Just image how many virus programs can be running on it, with the MS's OS coma-like operation status. These type of designs are best kept offline, too much resources, man-hours, required to protect from hackers using MS type products back doors. Actually, with MS OS, hackers just drive the semitruck thru the front door.
John_Cline wrote on 11/10/2005, 11:32 PM
Oh sure, I want to buy a cell processor and then not be able to run the literally thousands of programs I can run under Windows. That would truly be, "all dressed up and no place to go." I don't run Linux because there simply isn't a decent selection of useful programs. Besides, if 95% of the world's computers were running the Linux OS, you can bet that they would be releasing security patches every bit as often as Microsoft does with Windows. Windows is the target because of sheer market penetration, not because it is inherently a poorly written OS. Heck, I noticed that Apple just released a couple of security patches in the last day or two.

In my opinion, you and all the others that complain about Microsoft are, quite literally, biting the hand that feeds you.

John
JohnnyRoy wrote on 11/11/2005, 5:41 AM
> I don't run Linux because there simply isn't a decent selection of useful programs.

That depends on what you do. IBM has a standard desktop software load that they place on all of their internal computers for employees and they have versions for both Windows XP and Linux. That’s a full business office suite with all the bells and whistles of Windows running on a Linux desktop used to conduct IBM's business. I’ve been running Linux since 1995.

So your statement is relative. BTW, I don't own a Mac because there simply isn't a decent selection of useful programs. But people still buy them. ;-)

~jr
John_Cline wrote on 11/11/2005, 6:43 AM
Johnny,

Yes, it would have more appropriate to say that there isn't a decent selection of programs for Linux that suit my needs. Unix and its variants have been around for decades and there is plenty of software, just not much in the way of video/audio editing and graphics. I'm really kind of platform agnostic, I decide what software does the job I need done and get the machine and OS that runs it. 99.9% of the time, that means Windows. I do have a MAC though and it makes a incredibly stylish doorstop.

By the way, here is a ZDNET news story from the 7th of November...

New worm targets Linux systems

John
Coursedesign wrote on 11/11/2005, 7:13 AM
The major flaw in the current generation of Windows is that many daily-use applications run properly only at Administrator or Power User level.

This is totally in violation of what was figured out a long time ago in other major OSes.

Apple fixed this in OS X, and Vista will fix it when it comes out in a year or two.

Except when you put in a SonyBMG disc, this crashes Vista spectacularly according to a recent report.