Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!gatech!ncar!ames!oliveb!pyramid!prls!philabs!sbcs!root
From: root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Whay has commodore droped the transputer
Summary: Transputer, it isn't quick
Message-ID: <1554@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 30 Aug 88 18:23:29 GMT
References: <989@dsacg3.UUCP> <1544@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <88Aug29.235507edt.661@neat.ai.toronto.edu>
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 19

In article <88Aug29.235507edt.661@neat.ai.toronto.edu>, yann@ai.toronto.edu (Yann le Cun) writes:
> In article <1544@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (root) writes:
> >  One wonders what
> > the transputer might have become if fielded five years ago.  Today
> > (with 20 MIP RISC processors) it just isn't worth a second glance.
> 
> but the transputer *IS* a *cheap* 20 MIPS RISC processor, well, make 
> that 10 MIPS and put two of them.

	Yeah, and for certain problems you get superlinear speedup.  But on
	the "standard" benchmarks, ie dhrystone the transputer does perhaps
	7K dhrystone when running on chip.  Maybe 3K off chip.  On the 
	other hand the AMD29000 does about 20K+ dhrystones.  20K/3K=~6.7
	transputers + memory cost much more than one AMD29K.

> Yann le Cun                            yann@ai.toronto.edu

					Rick Spanbauer
					SUNY/Stony Brook