Live data from Hacker News

A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

vcl.ece.ucdavis.edu

11–20 of 107 posts

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#11
post #5

So how do you program such a beast? What progress is being made on that front? Cache coherency seems really hard to give up on, and even CPU-GPU cache coherency is becoming the expected norm, with even ARM delivering it.

It's very hard. In the mid 1980s there was a CPU called a "Transputer" [1] made some of the people who moved to ARM. These CPUs could be connected together in huge networks and directly talk to each other. The network of CPU's could auto-discover its topology, but coding for so many CPU's was difficult. Some specific algorithms scaled well with the number of CPUs, but most did not. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T…

Occam did it quite nicely.

I think the reason transputers didn't 'make it' is not because they were super hard to program (it was only a little bit harder than programming a regular computer), but because the price premium you paid for a transputer set-up was too high and x86 got faster very rapidly.

This is right around the time when the first 386 machines were launched and in a very short time we went from 12-20 MHz 286 boxes (and some 68K machines for the lucky ones) to 33 MHz 386 machines with a ton of RAM.

So the advantage that transputers had was eroded very quickly and I don't think INMOS was ready to match pace.

Now that we've reached the end of the line for that kind of speed increase we are seeing a renewed interest in multi-cpu fabric architectures, of which the transputer was an instance.

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#12
post #8
post #7

Does anyone have a link or the name of another weird architecture that was posted a while ago? (~3 months maybe?) I remember that there were a large number of cores that all communicated with each other in some weird way and that they like didn't have main system memory or something like that...

Sutherlands 'Fleet'?

Doesn't look like it... there was an established website for the project. It seemed to have some big names from processor design and such behind it as well (at least from what I gathered on their wikipedia pages ;) )

For future reference, here is a link talking about the arch mentioned so that no one else has to wade through google's results for "fleet architecture":

http://arc.cecs.pdx.edu/publications

edit:

previous (2009) discussion about fleet: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=723882

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#13
post #7

Does anyone have a link or the name of another weird architecture that was posted a while ago? (~3 months maybe?) I remember that there were a large number of cores that all communicated with each other in some weird way and that they like didn't have main system memory or something like that...

Maybe this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11845698

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#14
post #7

Does anyone have a link or the name of another weird architecture that was posted a while ago? (~3 months maybe?) I remember that there were a large number of cores that all communicated with each other in some weird way and that they like didn't have main system memory or something like that...

Could be a number of things. The Connection Machine? GreenArrays?

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#15
post #13
post #7

Does anyone have a link or the name of another weird architecture that was posted a while ago? (~3 months maybe?) I remember that there were a large number of cores that all communicated with each other in some weird way and that they like didn't have main system memory or something like that...

Maybe this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11845698

No :/ Thank you both for your suggestions though, they are appreciated :) If it helps it had the same sort of feel as the Mill architecture, in that it was a small project being developed by very enthusiastic people.

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#16

So how do you program such a beast? What progress is being made on that front? Cache coherency seems really hard to give up on, and even CPU-GPU cache coherency is becoming the expected norm, with even ARM delivering it.

[deleted]

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#17
post #15
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11845698

No :/ Thank you both for your suggestions though, they are appreciated :) If it helps it had the same sort of feel as the Mill architecture, in that it was a small project being developed by very enthusiastic people.

Rex computing neo chip? I know the founders and did a bit of contract work (virtual hve) on it and I think they wouldn't like being compared to mill :)

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#18
It is surprising the paper makes no comparisons with GPUs. So I will do it.

For starters it looks like they are talking about integer operations (I only skimmed the paper and it mentions an ALU, not an FPU), whereas my GPU numbers below are single precision floating point numbers. So it is apples vs oranges.

So, a modern 14-16nm GPU like the Tesla P100 or RX 480 does about 5 to 10 trillion ops/sec at 200-300 W, and approximately 30 pJ/op. So GPUs are about 5x less power efficient. The paper authors did a good job. However GPUs are not optimized for absolute power efficiency, but mostly for performance per $.

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#19
post #7

Does anyone have a link or the name of another weird architecture that was posted a while ago? (~3 months maybe?) I remember that there were a large number of cores that all communicated with each other in some weird way and that they like didn't have main system memory or something like that...

There's Tilera, and Parallella, but they're older than just a few months.

Re: A 32nm 1000-Processor Array

#20
post #14
post #7

Does anyone have a link or the name of another weird architecture that was posted a while ago? (~3 months maybe?) I remember that there were a large number of cores that all communicated with each other in some weird way and that they like didn't have main system memory or something like that...

Could be a number of things. The Connection Machine? GreenArrays?

I think it was GreenArrays. Although in my searching Adapteva also seemed like it, but GreenArrays seems like the more likely candidate, plus it's come up more often here. I'll have to check when I get back on my desktop. Thanks much!
Post reply on HN