Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!mit-eddie!killer!lll-winken!maddog!brooks
From: brooks@maddog.llnl.gov (Eugene Brooks)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Don't look back
Message-ID: <20862@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>
Date: 24 Feb 89 05:59:18 GMT
References: <13582@winchester.mips.COM> <20667@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <7330@pyr.gatech.EDU> <656@m3.mfci.UUCP> <20821@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <661@m3.mfci.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV
Reply-To: brooks@maddog.llnl.gov.UUCP (Eugene Brooks)
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Lines: 17

In article <661@m3.mfci.UUCP> rodman@mfci.UUCP (Paul Rodman) writes:
A bit of a flame, followed by a statement that VLIW machines will dominate
the world of computing.

Some time back I posted a challenge to VLIW proponents to compile and run a
parallel Monte Carlo code of mine and compare the performance to a box full
of microprocessors.  There were no takers.  This challenge is still open.

I would also like to see a detailed justification for the statement that VLIW
processors will displace vector processors at what they do best.  A VLIW
machine has not yet outrun a vector processor yet on its favorite workload
and I do not see any technology trend that leads to this conclusion even for
the long term.


Is the news software incompatible with your mailer too?
brooks@maddog.llnl.gov, brooks@maddog.uucp, uunet!maddog.llnl.gov!brooks