[QUOTE="jakarai"][QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"]Larrabee is what teh cell failed at.horrowhip

They aren't even remotely similar in design...

The only things they have in common are:

1. A Ring Bus Terminal for quick communication between cores.

2. Heavy Parallel Processing focus.

Other than they the key differences are:

1. Cell was an unproven design a complete reliance on synergistic and specialized programming. Larrabee utilizes the proven Pentium 4 style of chipset(with major improvements all around) only in mass parallel, with the resulting processor being general purpose and the epitome of flexible.

2. The Cell didn't have a well known programming structure and was entirely foreign to developers. Larrabee uses the x86 instruction set and is basically just like programming a CPU.

3. The Cell had no API given for doing Software Rendering within the framework of the processor, meaning any graphics work done on the Cell has to be done from the ground up basically. Larrabee basically has one of the best Software Renderer's ever created, made by the guy who is better than anyone else in the world at making Software Renderer's run fast(Michael Abrash).

[QUOTE="PCgamer687"][QUOTE="jakarai"] They are very similar in design. Wouldn't be surprised if the next Cell chip will rival it if not be better.jakarai

It has been a long time since we have seen any footage or screenshots from this game, I wonder what it will look like as the Larrabee tech demo.

AnnoyedDragon

[QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"]Larrabee is what teh cell failed at.jakarai

[QUOTE="PCgamer687"]not a focus, but possible, and yeah the larrabee can do a lot of amazing things, i just personally feel that raytracing @ 70+fps is pretty amazing benchmark, but i guess we need to wait for the new stuff to release over next month, boy i cant wait.horrowhip

Keep in mind that scene was a relatively small room, with 1 light source, 4 million rays, and roughly 200K polygons.

It will be a step that way and hybrid Rasterizer/Ray-Tracers will probably start to get used, but a pure ray-tracer still has a massive performance barrier.

[QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"]pufff KZ2 does raytracing already have you seen teh lighting?horrowhip

Killzone 2 most certainly does not do ray-tracing. And don't like to the Gametrailers video where the booth attendee is mistaken, or to the making of video where he references Parallax Occlusion Mapping(used only for the Bulletholes in Killzone 2)...

[QUOTE="PCgamer687"][QUOTE="real45"]

With all the new toys they have to work with sound like theyre really enjoying making there game right now.

Raytracing is unlikely. Michael Abrash's entire GDC presentation about Larrabee is devoted to Rasterization on Larrabee. I doubt ray-tracing will be the focus. It will probably be faster, but I don't think it would necessarily be better than Rasterization at the low level it would be forced to run it in a real-time application. Specifically since they don't have that many reflective surfaces(the one real noticable advantage of a ray-tracer).

I think it is more likely we will see them leveraging the power of Larrabee to push the Physics, AI, and post processing. We will certainly know more in a few weeks.

With all the new toys they have to work with sound like theyre really enjoying making there game right now.

With all the new toys they have to work with sound like theyre really enjoying making there game right now.

real45

[QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"]Meh KZ2 will always look better.XaosII

Meh Crysis will always look better.

I'm so cool by completely dismissing a game that looks good by mentioning another game with even better graphics.