Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!hubcap!bjornl
From: bjornl@tds.kth.se (Bj|rn Lisper)
Newsgroups: comp.parallel
Subject: Re: scalability of n-cubes, meshes (was: IPSC Communications)
Message-ID: <7373@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Date: 7 Dec 89 19:39:24 GMT
Sender: fpst@hubcap.clemson.edu
Lines: 15
Approved: parallel@hubcap.clemson.edu

In article <7274@hubcap.clemson.edu> gene@cs.bu.edu (Gene Itkis) writes:

%One problem with 3D mesh is that as the processors work the heat is
%generated(*). Obviously this heat has to be dissipated somehow. The heat
%created is proportional to the volume of the mesh, and the dissipation can
%happen only proportionally to the surface area. So, if you care about
%scalability, the 3D meshes are no good - they'll overheat, cook themselves.
%Thus the best you can hope for in our physics is 2D mesh.

You implicitly assume that the 3D mesh is a solid body. This is not
necessarily true. It could for instance consist of a stack of cards, with
air flowing between them, or have channels with coolant flowing through. In
this way, you get the same cooling area as for the 2D mesh.

Bjorn Lisper