Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!uw-beaver!fluke!ssc-vax!carroll From: carroll@ssc-vax (Jeff Carroll) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: iWarp Architecture Overview (was: LONG) Message-ID: <4077@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.UUCP> Date: 6 Jun 91 06:25:29 GMT Article-I.D.: ssc-bee.4077 References: <1991Jun3.172230.6901@iWarp.intel.com> <2622@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> Sender: news@ssc-vax.UUCP Reply-To: carroll@ssc-vax.UUCP (Jeff Carroll) Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics Lines: 52 In article <2622@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> mshute@cs.man.ac.uk (Malcolm Shute) writes: >Am I correct in assuming that this is Intel's answer to Inmos' Transputer? No, you're not. Professor Kung has been pushing the Warp project at CMU for a decade or so now, and Intel has been at work on iWarp for several years funded in part by the Department of Defense. Nobody I know who works for Intel has ever been of the opinion that Inmos has ever done anything that merited an answer. (I'm a transputer user too, and I think that there are some very nice things about the xputer architecture, but I also think that Inmos has done some things very wrong through the years.) Now, there are some interesting parallels between the iWarp architecture and the T9000 (nee H1) xputer, but there are also a couple of important differences. a) Intel has working silicon, now. I have seen it with my own eyes. I think nearly everyone will agree that Inmos is nowhere close to having a working (prototype, even) T9000. You can buy iWarp systems (in those wonderful gray cabinets) NOW. TODAY. b) Availability notwithstanding, my contacts at Intel have not convinced me that Galactic Intel is interested in marketing iWarp to the world at large. You may never see iWarp silicon available in quantity. >I would like both Intel and Inmos representatives take this bait... it has often been >pointed out in this group that "Manufacture-X versus Manufacturer-Y" wars >often through up quite a lot of useful information in all their smoke and fury, >and I've been disappointed that no-one at Inmos has yet responded to this >long, but interesting description of the iWARP. Perhaps the silence speaks for itself. I'm personally of the opinion that Inmos has already said far more than was really necessary about a chip that doesn't exist yet. I am fascinated about the geographically differing perceptions of the microprocessor market. I get the idea that the two most-talked-about micro architectures in the UK are the xputer and the ARM, both of which are practically unknown in the USA. Consequently I suppose that Inmos is seen in the UK as a major competitor of Intel. But then, they run funny network protocols over there, and drive on the wrong side of the road :^). -- Jeff Carroll carroll@ssc-vax.boeing.com "...and of their daughters it is written, 'Cursed be he who lies with any manner of animal.'" - Talmud