Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dali.cs.montana.edu!milton!hlab
From: gilbertd@project4.computer-science.manchester.ac.uk (Dave Gilbert)
Newsgroups: sci.virtual-worlds
Subject: Re: Real-time raytrace -- get serious!
Message-ID: <1991May21.220619.23439@milton.u.washington.edu>
Date: 21 May 91 07:53:29 GMT
References: <1991May15.050715.28438@milton.u.washington.edu> <1991May16.055359.2
Sender: hlab@milton.u.washington.edu (Human Int. Technology Lab)
Organization: University of Washington
Lines: 24
Approved: cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu



The idea of using loads of cheap low power CPU's doesnt hold.  OK all your CPU's
are going to be cheap - but what about the cost of all the glue and the RAM
and othere useful stuff like that.  Then you probably find the comms over
head of shifting fairly large amounts of data around between low power
CPU's is enourmous.

The trick (in my opinion) is to use cheap powerful chips - OK this would
sound like a contradiction in terms but it realy means RISC - Risc chips are
dirt cheap - say #40 (pounds sterling) - and deliver a reasonable through put.

I did here it quoted that for true Real time ray tracing (i.e. a reasonable
amount of stuff in 1/50th second - sorry all you Americans wanting 1/60th
you'll just need more processor power) you would need about 8GFlops - thats
a hell of a lot of power.

Dave

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Dave Gilbert - gilbertd@p4.cs.man.ac.uk - The MTBF of a piece of equipment  -
-                G7FHJ@GB7NWP             - is inversly proportional to its   -
------------------------------------------- importance                        -