It's exactly like I thought. Computers are going more towards a "neural network" approach simply because it's damn powerful and intelligent. Of course, this isn't anything like a neural network in terms of genetics, but in terms of processing, it's much more like an actual brain than a just a computer.
But you're right, it'll be a while until languages can adapt to this sort of thing. I wonder if this will give rise to functional languages.
80 cores in 5 years: Intel
Just thought I'd mention that I've recently been studying software transactional memory as a potential concurrency solution. Seems promising so far, assuming you have a lock free implementation.
Quote:Original post by okonomiyaki
It's exactly like I thought. Computers are going more towards a "neural network" approach simply because it's damn powerful and intelligent. Of course, this isn't anything like a neural network in terms of genetics, but in terms of processing, it's much more like an actual brain than a just a computer.
But you're right, it'll be a while until languages can adapt to this sort of thing. I wonder if this will give rise to functional languages.
I'm not sure it's like a "neural network" in terms of anything. It is like a network though. Also, like pretty much anything else, you have to deal with diminishing returns. There comes a point where throwing another processor at something won't really gain you anything, I would imagine the same is true here, but being that the cores are much closer together than multiple physical CPU's, it'll be interesting to see how high they can take it.
I predict that a new company will come out of the blue with a single core that will pretty much own any multicore processor out there due to its uniquely designed architecture. In fact, I am sure of this. :D
well now we don't have to worry about the earth or the sun cooling down , if that ever happens we can just stick a 3 bajillon core cpu in there & let it run without a fan
Quote:Original post by KnightBlade
I predict that a new company will come out of the blue with a single core that will pretty much own any multicore processor out there due to its uniquely designed architecture. In fact, I am sure of this. :D
What do you know ... spill the beans :)
Quote:Original post by ApochPiQ
That gravy train's gotta hit a brick wall if we don't have a massive language revolution soon. There's simply no practical benefit to all those cores when the majority of software in common use is not designed for massive concurrency - and given how much concurrency sucks in the dominant languages of today, that's going to be pretty slow to change.
that's a self fulfilling prophecy. Software isn't design for MP because MP doesn't have much benefit on single core systems, and the vast majority of systems are single core, and most systems are single core because we've been able to get away with it for so long by just bumping up clock speed.
wow! thats like 5x the speed of ps3's cell. thats dropped the ps3 being the fastest home pc from the expected 3 years down to only 1.5 years.
nvidia must be very worried.
exciting times
nvidia must be very worried.
exciting times
What kind of operating system is going to run on these machines? And what will the architecture of the chips be: x86? *shudders* [sick]
I have no idea about Vista's multi-core capability (I'm assuming it's fairly robust...or at least, it -should- be), but dealing with 80 cores seems a little difficult without some really clever work that would guarantee non-interference.
Either way, I'm glad I took courses on multi-threading and parallel programming now! [grin]
~Shiny
I have no idea about Vista's multi-core capability (I'm assuming it's fairly robust...or at least, it -should- be), but dealing with 80 cores seems a little difficult without some really clever work that would guarantee non-interference.
Either way, I'm glad I took courses on multi-threading and parallel programming now! [grin]
~Shiny
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
