QuicksearchDisclaimerThe individual owning this blog works for Oracle in Germany. The opinions expressed here are his own, are not necessarily reviewed in advance by anyone but the individual author, and neither Oracle nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.
|
On GPUs and CPUsSunday, May 25. 2008Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Think only about the 12 core proc announced by AMD. Interesting times are lying in front of us.
But, So why should I be so happy about the future that hardware vendors promise? They think a magic bullet will come along to make multicores speed up my kind of work; I think it’s a pipe dream. (No—that’s the wrong metaphor! "Pipelines" actually work for me, but threads don’t. Maybe the word I want is "bubble.") and ... To me, it looks more or less like the hardware designers have run out of ideas, and that they’re trying to pass the blame for the future demise of Moore’s Law to the software writers by giving us machines that work faster only on a few key benchmarks! I won’t be surprised at all if the whole multithreading idea turns out to be a flop, worse than the "Itanium" approach that was supposed to be so terrific—until it turned out that the wished-for compilers were basically impossible to write. Donald Knuth It's of course somewhat interesting, but I doubt it will gain momentum.
The problem: Given the actual and forseeable technology in CPU design there is no alternative to multicore.
And Mr. Knuth forgets that many tasks can be ported to multiple CPU engines quite well. SMP systems are state of the art for a long time. Databases are scaling quite good, Webserver are scaling quite good, even other database services are scaling quite good. Raytracing scales quite good. Billing scales quite good. When you look on almost all tasks in computing, they can be done at least with a few parallel asks. Just the actual implementations aren´t capable of doing so ... Multicore processors are just the circle of life of all gear in computing. Making the existent systems smaller. A T2 is a E10K in a 2 RU box. At the end it´s a kind of SMP.
This is true for desktop processing, where the number of task is limited by the way the user is working.
But in my opinion, this limit is not at 4 or 8 Tasks. It would be nice, if the 16 Task processor could use the power for GPU purposes and enable a leaner grafic. With power management for the processors up to a complete shutdown, it would enable lowering the power consumption in idle state (me reading, thinking!) a lot. Since this does not happen for unused RAM-Moduls, it is not likely to happen for processors.
>Raytracing scales quite good.
It scales to some degree. Maya e.g. scales best with two cores, it doesn't scale as good with four cores. You would expect something more. The same is true e.g. for 3D Studio Max (maybe Windows is the limiting factor) or even Maxon Cinema. I did see some nice graphs for example Mysql and FreeBSD with eight cores but it's a rather different story for different applications. So yes it will scale, but to what degree? I don't think some scheduler can do the magic for every application out there from 2 to xx cores. Or maybe we will see the advent of badly coded applications and the need for more cores to compensate this lack of optimization. |
+1The LKSF bookThe book with the consolidated Less known Solaris Tutorials is available for download here
Web 2.0Contact
Networking xing.com My photos Buttons![]() This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Germany License
![]() ![]() ![]() Blog AdministrationDonateOkay, okay ... as several people have asked for it ... but you know my opinion.
|