Advertisement
X360 'Folding@home' possible News
Xbox 360 News by Games Industry.biz
Microsoft games boss Peter Moore has indicated that the company would seriously consider running a research project similar to Sony's Folding@home initiative, on the Xbox 360, GamesIndustry.biz reports.
The Folding@home project allows multiple, connected PlayStation 3's to calculate data to aid medical research for Stanford University.
Sony's assistance has been widely praised for bringing attention to such schemes, where idle home consoles are able to simulate the processing power of multiple PCs.
"If we truly believe that we can in some way marshal the resources of a much larger installed base of Xbox 360 owners, with a processor that's of equal power to the PS3, then you have my commitment that we'll look at that," commented Moore, corporate VP of interactive entertainment at Microsoft, to The Mercury News.
"And if we believe we can add value to solving a gnarly problem such as medical problems and the health problems that Folding@home seems to be doing, then we'll certainly look at that very strongly."
So far, over 250,000 registered PlayStation 3 users have signed for the Folding@home project, although Moore is still wary of the actual results
"I'm not quite sure yet whether we're seeing real tangible results from the PlayStation 3 Folding@home initiative. We continue to look at this and see whether there's real value," he added.
For "Moore" industry news, check in regularly with GamesIndustry.biz.
Advertisement
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Poster
|
kangarootoo
09/05/07 @ 12:45
0
"If we truly believe that we can in some way marshal the resources of a much larger installed base of Xbox 360 owners, with a processor that's of equal power to the PS3, then you have my commitment that we'll look at that"
Hehehe. I have no opinion on that statement, other than chuckling at how opportunity was taken to spin some PR :) |
|
kangarootoo
09/05/07 @ 12:46
0
BTW EG, why have you started weighting certain news stories toward the top of the list? It makes seeing what is new rather awkward to say the least.
|
|
AusFreelancer
09/05/07 @ 12:50
0
They "could" if they had the hardware build quality of the ps3...shame really, would be a good boost for the whole project.
|
|
0
Unles the 360 processor is of at least equal strength as Cell, MS won’t let this happen. Would prevent them from spreading FUD. I predict no folding for xbox and more FUD on PS3’s part in the programme. Quite funny that he explicitly attacks the PS3 contribution and not the whole programme, which in this case can’t really be separated.
|
|
CrumpledPaper
09/05/07 @ 13:21
0
"Unles the 360 processor is of at least equal strength as Cell, MS won’t let this happen."
The Folding@Home people don't think so: "the cell processor in the PS3 is much more powerful for our calculations than the CPU in the Xbox 360." http://www.pro-g.co.uk/news/03-05-2007-5... However, maybe they could make a client that taps the GPU also, or instead. Might be more useful. |
|
0
Using this subject as an excuse to tout your console's power/popularity is really tacky.
I doubt I'd run F@H on my 360 anyway, the noise it makes is so annoying if you haven't got game noise to drown it out. Also, I treat every minute that my launch 360 runs without breaking down as a gift from god. |
|
tonynibbles
09/05/07 @ 13:40
0
Hang on.
The raw processing power of the CELL is higher than that of the processor in the 360... This isn't a game, this is a little app that purely does calculations. I'm really not sure the comment "with a processor that's of equal power to the PS3" is very true in this case, is it. If they get it going, great. |
|
0
Please no... PS3 has already wasted too much energy doing this.
" I'm really not sure the comment "with a processor that's of equal power to the PS3" is very true in this case, is it. " The ATI GPU version of Folding@Home is faster than Cell, so I am sure they would use that version. "the noise it makes is so annoying if you haven't got game noise to drown it out" 360 doesn't make noise when running Dashboard apps.
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 09/05/07 @ 14:46
|
|
0
'I like the idea but want this sort of application to run in the background with smaller work units Currently leaving my 200 Watt PS3 for eight hours at a time so it can complete one work unit doesn't seem the most efficient approach to using the platform.'
yes it's much easier to use your pc with it's 450-550 watt power supply, much more efficient!! |
|
0
"yes it's much easier to use your pc with it's 450-550 watt power supply, much more efficient!! "
A PC does this when you work using idle cycles. So it is much more efficient. Modern CPUs of course have good power saving code so it used to be more efficient 10 years ago. Still running it on your PC WHILE YOU DO SOMETHING ON IT, is the best way to use this. Not turning on your PS3 all night and *gasp* stare at the pretty pictures on your big fat plasma. |
|
kangarootoo
09/05/07 @ 14:12
0
@tonynibbles
"This isn't a game, this is a little app that purely does calculations." Are you sure that is actually what you meant to say? |
|
0
I listened to one of the Folding@Home guys at an AMD event recently where they were just discussing Folding on a GPU. The ATI GPu's that are already supported (X1900 and higher I think) already are faster than the PS3 and the new cards coming in a week will be even faster. I don't think that the Xbox360 would need to fold on the CPU and instead could fold on the GPU. Or maybe even both.
However - something I didn't know was that while the GPu's and the Cell can burn through more work-units than Dual-Core and SIngle-Core CPU's, the instead are less flexible than these. Basically it was the inverse. So a Single Core CPU was the most flexible and thus could be assigned any workunit. The GPU's and the Cell on the other hand was less flexible and right now could only run water simulations. So they still need a lot of regular CPU's. He did actually mention that "the other next-gen console maker" hadn't contacted them but that they would love to work with them. |
|
kangarootoo
09/05/07 @ 14:13
0
@Dizzy
I don't think we can really presume one way or the other how Folding@home would run, and therefore whether extra CPU cooling would be required or not. how you launch the title is hardly the deciding factor. |
|
0
@Dizzy
You can't waste energy, physics you know. The whole 'energy abuse' argument is kind of far fetched, but then again, that’s what fanboys do… I think that you can fairly accurately state that every minute of gaming is more of a 'waste' than a minute contributing to something like folding@home. |
|
Mr_Whacker
09/05/07 @ 14:29
0
Sorry to any ill types but if he thinks I'm going to overheat my X360 running this all night then he's wrong. All your proteins will just have to stay flat.
|
|
0
>You can't waste energy, physics you know.
Right.. prize for most stupid comment ever. While, if we talk about physics, your statement is technically correct... it is still an utterly stupid thing to say. Leaving your PS3 all night to do "good" is debatable at best. Running F@H on your PC while at work is a better alternative and a lesser waste of energy. |
|
kangarootoo
09/05/07 @ 14:37
0
@Les
"You can't waste energy, physics you know" Oops. I think "destroy" is the word you meant to use. Ah, I see Dizzy has already commented, so I'll leave it there. |
|
0
"While, if we talk about physics, your statement is technically correct... it is still an utterly stupid thing to say."
Of course it is correct, otherwise I wouldn't have made it. But even if it wasn't, the definition of waste is completely subjective, so there’s little point in arguing about it. Bringing it up could be considered ‘utterly stupid’ as well. There is a fundamental flaw in the argument about ‘preserving’ energy that the environmentalists use. As is often the case with people attacking a problem, they focus on the symptom (energy use), rather than the cause (the fact that the production of (the majority of) energy causes pollution). Whether PC CPU’s, even when only using idle cycles, are more energy efficient than the PS3 for the same calculations that Cell is good at, I don’t know. You might be right. |
|
0
There is a fundamental flaw in the argument about ‘preserving’ energy that the environmentalists use. As is often the case with people attacking a problem, they focus on the symptom (energy use), rather than the cause (the fact that the production of (the majority of) energy causes pollution).
So: Using less energy = less pollution no? It's not about preserving energy, it's about using less so that less has to be produced (or in fact converted from one form to another in a polluting fashion). So where's the fundamental flaw in this?
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 09/05/07 @ 15:58
|
|
JediMasterMalik
09/05/07 @ 15:00
0
That was cringeworthy to read tbh. So many points at which he wastaking unnecessary digs.
It'd be good if it could happen, and if it does. Folding FTW. Boo to the naysayers! :D |
|
0
@Moggsy
"So where's the fundamental flaw in this?" Not really a flaw, but (personally) I think we should do more to research renewable sources in addition to reducing usage. If you think this is a waste of energy, then isn't gaming wasting energy too? The solution would be to switch to a supplier which only supplies energy from renewable sources. |
|
0
“It's not about preserving energy, it's about using less so that less has to be produced (or producing energy in a less polluting way). So where's the fundamental flaw in this?”
There’s no reason to use less energy if energy is ‘clean’. So energy consumption in itself is not a problem: why put restrictions on it? The flaw seems quite clear to me. |
|
0
It'd be good if it could happen, and if it does. Folding FTW.
A good thing eh? Good for lining the pockets of my energy supplier. I'm not a big waster and usually have everything off as much as possible and even with that my bill was higher last year. I don't think I need another avoidable power drain tyvm. Now if they would have some kind of refund... |
|
0
"@Les - I dont want to leave the ps3 on consuming power that I am paying for when Im not using it is that a problem to you or should I check with you next time I switch my ps3 on that I am allowed to turn it off?"
Did I say so anywhere? Whether you want to use folding@home (and thus pay for the energy consumption) or not is your own choice. I just hate it when discussions are poluted with all kind of silly arguments. |
|
0
"You quoted me directly and sounded rather up your own backside about it to be honest."
You said you didn't want to leave your console powered on if you weren't using it. Which is a fair position. I just pointed out that running folding@home is using your console. So it's just not a good argument against using folding@home. Not wanting to run it because it costs you money is. |
|
kangarootoo
09/05/07 @ 16:05
0
@Les
"Of course it is correct, otherwise I wouldn't have made it." Heeheehee, thats good. A basic dictionary def of waste is "to consume, spend, or employ uselessly or without adequate return; use to no avail or profit; squander". You can absolutely do that with energy. But you cannot destroy it, physics you know. "There’s no reason to use less energy if energy is ‘clean’. So energy consumption in itself is not a problem: why put restrictions on it?" You are talking hyperthetically here. No one has yet found a way of creating energy in a totally clean way. So IF the energy is clean we shouldn't put restriction on its use, but in reality it ISN'T, so we should. The "fundamental flaw" in the environmentalists argument that you describe is in fact REALITY. Hmmm, I guess that might be the fundamental flaw in my argument too, but I can live with that. P.s. "I just hate it when discussions are poluted with all kind of silly arguments." This is also a winner, right up alongside the first quote in this post. |
|
0
@kanga
"You are talking hyperthetically here. No one has yet found a way of creating energy in a totally clean way. So IF the energy is clean we shouldn't put restriction on its use, but in reality it ISN'T, so we should." How can you say wind/solar power isn't totally clean? It's not very efficient, but I think its pretty clean. Theres also a pretty cool article in NewScientist on room temp nuclear fusion. I think the hard part is finding out whether your provider supplies clean power, or from a multitude of sources, both reneweable and non. |
|
0
“How can you say wind/solar power isn't totally clean?”
He’s probably referring to the fact that creating the facilities to produce the energy creates some pollution as well. I don’t know whether that’s avoidable or not, I’m no engineer. All I say is we should put more effort in creating clean energy than in reducing energy consumption. Environmentalists are focusing too much on the latter, which distracts attention from the real problem. |
|
kangarootoo
09/05/07 @ 16:25
0
@zuljin
Because you have to build the turbines. Besides which, even a running turbine needs unclean maintenance (oil for bearings etc). And I'm sure room temp fusion still needs a big box, probably made from concrete. I'm not saying we should give up and all bugger off into space, but the idea you can stop restricting energy on the basis that it is clean is a phallacy. Energy production will never be 100% clean, so it seems unwise to destrict energy use 100%. Everything we ever do is about reduction. Elimination is simply not realistic (the rest of the world doesn't work that way, so I doubt our modern energy usage ever could). Incidentally whilst we are on a related subject. Everything in this area is doomed because our population just keeps expanding at a phenomenal rate. The very greenest thing you can do is not have kids, and all your efforts to reduce your carbon footprint will be rendered moot if you have a kid or two. Not a happy thought if you are feeling broody, but its the truth :) |
|
SeesThroughAll
09/05/07 @ 16:29
0
I'm not quite sure yet whether we're seeing real tangible results from the PlayStation 3 Folding@home initiative.
What a load of bullshit. Stanford Uni already revealed that the simulations are currently running at almost triple the speed they did before F@A was done on the PS3. I very much would like to see a 360 client that uses the GPU, as it would further boost the project ENORMOUSLY, but this kind of PR crap is pointless. |
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
