Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!lll-lcc!lll-winken!maddog!brooks
From: brooks@maddog.llnl.gov (Eugene Brooks)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: ETA-10: CMOS or ECL?
Keywords: ETA-10
Message-ID: <13529@lll-winken.llnl.gov>
Date: 31 Oct 88 06:35:25 GMT
References: <3539@phri.UUCP> <126@ecicrl.UUCP> <840@super.ORG> <3453@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Sender: usenet@lll-winken.llnl.gov
Reply-To: brooks@maddog.UUCP (Eugene Brooks)
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Lines: 11

In article <3453@pt.cs.cmu.edu> lindsay@k.gp.cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes:
>On the other hand, the Crays are faster. The Great White Hope at ETA is
>that they will learn how to roll these things out like cookies and 
>then the customers will spring for multiprocessors.
ETA likes to call the thing that their processor boards share "shared memory",
but when you look at it the only efficient accesses are stride 1 with transfers
to and from local memory.  To paraphrase a polititian of the 50's, if it looks
like a shared SSD, walks like a shared SSD, and quacks like a shared SSD;
it must be a shared SSD.

The Crays are not only faster, but they also have real honest to God shared
memory.