Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 1st Jun 2010 21:33 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 427685
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This "multiple low-powered core" technology is not gonna last on the desktop, the day people realize that only few problems scale well accross multiple cores.
You mean only few software programs scale well across multiple cores. There are many problems that can be decomposed into parallel tasks, you just need to build your software from the ground up to take advantage of large number of parallel execution units.
There are many things people do on desktop machines that benefit from multicore processors: audio/video encoding, digital photography, data rendering, be it a complex 3D scene or office/web document. And many new problems can be created to fill the demand for such hardware.
No one says that all existing software or all existing types of software should scale to multiple cores. It's more an issue of existing software taking advantage of parallel processing for different kinds of tasks.
Software like photoshop, 3ds max, even web browsers (scaling javascript and the rendering processes) can be modified to take advantage. Audio software can greatly be benefitted too (run multiple virtual effects/synthesizers each on a separate core), and of course videogames (physics simulation, renderingm etc).
So the target is to give more power to existing software, not asking it to be rewritten...




Member since:
2010-03-08
This "multiple low-powered core" technology is not gonna last on the desktop, the day people realize that only few problems scale well accross multiple cores.
For virtualization-oriented servers, on the other hand, putting that together with NUMA could do wonders. But as other people around, I think that bus bandwidth issues will kill this product.
Edited 2010-06-02 07:42 UTC