Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #29196 > unrolled thread

Fwd: Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check.

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Fwd: Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 12:35 -0400

#29196 — Fwd: Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check.

On 1/12/2014 7:54 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) writes:
>>> The GA144 is fabricated at 180nm
>> Of course. It is interesting that they don't seem to worry using
>> 3 generations behind technology.
>
> Supposedly 180nm is where leakage current is the lowest.  They want to
> minimize idle power even at a cost in active power, since their approach
> involves keeping the cpu cores idle almost all the time, and switching
> on and off very quickly.

Pardon me coming late to the party...

Yes there is the increased leakage at smaller geometries, but also the
massively increased cost of a mask set.  I doubt GA ever had the funding
to produce anything at state of the art geometries.

Actually, I wonder if the leakage is significantly more for a single
transistor.  That is, would the exact same chip end up having a much
higher leakage current or is the problem with the newer processes only a
real issue when using 10's or 100's of millions of transistors.  I don't
recall how many transistors are in the GA144, but it is *far* below 1
million I'm sure.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web