This is definately the direction things are headed. Processors are going to eventually have tons of cores. The main problem with the design you mentioned though is that the overhead of having all those processors would almost not make it worth it because of how slow they are. And also, bus speed becomes a serious bottleneck. If each of those processors had its own 1MB of local memory (like a cache) that only it could access then I'd say that would be great. I think writing programs these days that don't scale well to atleast 32 threads, if they are programs that require lots of resources, is basically irresponsible and certainly shortsighted. Just my thoughts though.
- Nick On 3/9/07, Chris Fant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wouldn't it be cool if Intel or AMD would release a CPU with a primary core somewhere close to today's state of the art along with oh, say, about 256 lower-tech, existing-design cores. Like 386s or something. Definitely the mini-cores would have to be 32 bit, but they don't need floating point operations (at least for for running MC simulations). Or if that's a bad design, then use 486s that come with the floating point unit. That would be cool. _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
