Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming.threads > #2681 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ramine <ramine@1.1> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-11-15 16:45 -0800 |
| Last post | 2014-11-24 15:23 +0100 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.programming.threads
About VISC architecture Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-11-15 16:45 -0800
Re: About VISC architecture Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-11-15 17:04 -0800
Re: About VISC architecture Tom <mail2devnull@web.de> - 2014-11-24 15:23 +0100
| From | Ramine <ramine@1.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-15 16:45 -0800 |
| Subject | About VISC architecture |
| Message-ID | <m48hgf$aos$3@dont-email.me> |
Hello, I have took a look at the following link about the performance of the VISC architecture of Soft Machines... http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/10/24/soft-machines-visc/1 Notice that they are saying that Soft Machines says that: "The result, the team behind the technology claims, is a boost in instructions per cycle of 3-4 times compared to existing technologies resulting in a 2-4 times boost in performance per watt on both single- and multi-threaded applications.:" Am i misunderstanding here? cause from what i know about parallel programming, that scalability is dependant also on the serial part of the Amdahl equation, so in a "more" memory bound application it can not scale to 2-4 times, so how can they say that in general there VISC architecture boosts performance by 2-4 times ? is it a marketing move ? Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ramine <ramine@1.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-15 17:04 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <m48ijd$ejo$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2681 |
Hello, Read here on the following link , they have come to the same conclusion as me, cause in a "more" memory bound parallel application , the serial part of the Amdahl's law will be bigger because multicore machines serializes the access to the memory bus, so it will not scale and you will even have a retrograde throughput because of contention on the memory bus , and that's the way it is with multicores machines and i think that's not different with VISC architecture of Soft Machines. Read here please: https://share.sandia.gov/news/resources/news_releases/more-chip-cores-can-mean-slower-supercomputing-sandia-simulation-shows/#.VGf2o4odhK8 Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom <mail2devnull@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-24 15:23 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20141124152314.8bc722bfbda4a61e2a445f87@web.de> |
| In reply to | #2682 |
the only one who responds to or comments on your posts is yourself. Does this tell you anything about the usefulness of your posts? or work? or life?
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | comp.programming.threads
csiph-web