Re: Next Generation of Language
- From: "mark.hoemmen@xxxxxxxxx" <mark.hoemmen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Jan 2007 12:47:27 -0800
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
Of course, all this is predicated on there being enough memory
bandwidth that everything doesn't just starve. I dunno how good
current seriously-multicore systems are in this respect.
Intel's proposed 80-core architecture will have DRAM attached to each
core -- sort of how Cell has "local stores" attached to each SPE.
That's how they plan to solve the BW problem -- amortize it over all
the cores.
Basically it means that scicomp people like me get a huge job advantage
'cause we know how to deal with these issues (that's what i'm hoping
anyway ;P ).
mfh
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Next Generation of Language
- From: Tim Bradshaw
- Re: Next Generation of Language
- References:
- Next Generation of Language
- From: sailormoontw@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Next Generation of Language
- From: Tim Bradshaw
- Next Generation of Language
- Prev by Date: Re: Making a local variable like "static" in C
- Next by Date: Re: Making a local variable like "static" in C
- Previous by thread: Re: Next Generation of Language
- Next by thread: Re: Next Generation of Language
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|