Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!tada From: tada@athena.mit.edu (Michael Zehr) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: RISC as a "technology window"? Summary: multiple CPU chips Message-ID: <10078@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> Date: 24 Mar 89 18:56:36 GMT References: <1552@vicom.COM> <15690@cup.portal.com> <1562@vicom.COM> <15702@clover.ICO.ISC.COM> <27681@apple.Apple.COM> <15695@winchester.mips.COM> Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU Reply-To: tada@athena.mit.edu (Michael Zehr) Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lines: 31 In article <15695@winchester.mips.COM> mash@mips.COM (John Mashey) writes: >In article <27681@apple.Apple.COM> jrg@Apple.COM (John R. Galloway) writes: >>In article <15702@clover.ICO.ISC.COM>, rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) writes: >>> In article <37196@bbn.COM>, slackey@bbn.com (Stan Lackey) writes: >>> > RISC is indeed a technology window, driven largely by the amount of >>> > stuff you can fit in a chip... >>> OK, fair 'nuff. As soon as we can put an unlimited amount of stuff on a >>Well actually only while the "extra" space is less than a full cpu, as soon >I suspect it will be some time before people replicate the CPUs on >a chip, just because there's nothing else to do with the silicon. > a) It's hard to get enough bandwidth in and out of these chips, > i.e., I/Os cost money. Professor Daly (sp?) of MIT has been saying something along those lines for a couple years. instead of having a whole bunch of memory chips with one path to a fast CPU and have a cache to prevent slow accesses, take each of those memory chips, halve the amoune of memory on them, and put a CPU on it. you no longer have a memory banchwith problem, because the memory and CPU are on the same (small, easy-to-make) chip. instead of putting a cache on the chip (you don't need one), put a communications circuit to transfer data to the other chips. If you're interested in more information, he's working on something called a J-machine, which will probably be in prototype stage sometime this summer (i think?). which would you rather have -- one CPU that runs at 50 MIPS with 72, 1Mbit memory chips (8 Megabytes * 9 chips per byte) or 72, 10 MIPS processors and 4 Megabytes of memory split among them? -michael j zehr