81–90 of 101 posts
How is this different than FORTH processors, like http://www.greenarraychips.com/ http://www.forth.org/cores.html http://www.ultratechnology.com/chips.htm https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth2007/papers... http://wiki.c2.com/?ChuckMoore etc.
Those do stack based computation?
What does the memory interface look like for this? None of the papers I can find indicate how you can get so much parallelism out of the CPU memory interface. An interesting approach to non-Von Neumann computing is to put ALUs in memory, to take advantage of the fact that DRAMs have far more internal bandwidth than what is exposed in traditional systems: http://researcher.ibm.com/researcher/files/us-leejinho/tvlsi...…
which effectively extended the MTA thread pool to...infinity
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Versus, what? No public funding? No private utilization of public research? Public research should fall in the public domain, free of IP and open for any use. If anything, we should be doing more of this... create dedicated academic R&D funding streams by taxing established or dying industries in order to publicly explore new fields, and use X Prize-style programs or NASA's COTS/CRS programs to incentivize private co…
"Versus, what? No public funding? No private utilization of public research?" Versus the taxpayer-funded I.P. being licensed to all parties in the country that funded it with the big corporations being forced to compete on better implementations delivered faster to customers. Big players can try to make billions, small players can innovate on top of same I.P. without a lawsuit, and individuals can even attempt to hom…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Versus, what? No public funding? No private utilization of public research?" Versus the taxpayer-funded I.P. being licensed to all parties in the country that funded it with the big corporations being forced to compete on better implementations delivered faster to customers. Big players can try to make billions, small players can innovate on top of same I.P. without a lawsuit, and individuals can even attempt to hom…
There is no sign in the article that only Intel and Qualcomm will have rights to the new design.
Can't wait for this publicly funded research to make some private corporation billions!
Maybe the money taxed from that said corporation could be channeled to pay for universal income.
How is this different than FORTH processors, like http://www.greenarraychips.com/ http://www.forth.org/cores.html http://www.ultratechnology.com/chips.htm https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth2007/papers... http://wiki.c2.com/?ChuckMoore etc.
Those do stack based computation?
Similar to the machine found in TIS-100:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
CPU logic on DRAM process is apparently a solved problem: http://venraytechnology.com/Implementations.htm
You can make logic on a DRAM process, but either your logic will be slow or you'll have to increase the cost of your cost/power consumption of your DRAM cells. With separate chips connected with TSVs you can have your cake and eat it too (each process can be specialized for it's components) plus you get the added benefit of increased yields (chips are smaller, no special processing steps).
However, their business model presumes "Wait until a DRAM manufacturer buys us", which IMO is why nothing's moved forward. DRAM manufacture is low-margin and not really the place to look for this kind of risky introduction to the market. I'd love to see this form of parallelism, and their take on breaking the memory bandwidth wall; it meshes great with the types of problems I work on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they used false information to manipulate Comey into making a statement -- which required them to know how conflicted he was over interference in the Clinton e-mail thing Sidenote: Comey strongly implied (damn near said it really) in his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee yesterday that this did not actually happen and the news articles were way off. Makes you wonder what did actually happen.
I think the comment is referring to this story: http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/26/politics/james-comey-fbi-inves... I missed this exchange in the livestream, relevant bit: "BURR: Were there other things that contributed to that that you can describe in an open session? COMEY: There were other things that contributed to that. One significant item I can’t, I know the committee’s been briefed on. There’s been some public ac…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can make logic on a DRAM process, but either your logic will be slow or you'll have to increase the cost of your cost/power consumption of your DRAM cells. With separate chips connected with TSVs you can have your cake and eat it too (each process can be specialized for it's components) plus you get the added benefit of increased yields (chips are smaller, no special processing steps).
That's kind of the entire point of Venray's claims: The CPUs are both plentiful and fast, and with far lower power consumption than computationally equivalent strength discrete CPU + RAM combos. They apparently only add a couple percent to the die size of the DRAMs. However, their business model presumes "Wait until a DRAM manufacturer buys us", which IMO is why nothing's moved forward. DRAM manufacture is low-margin…