Future of computer processors.

Seems that processor speed has hit the 'thermal barrier' hence the move
to 'duel core' etc...
Is that the future, several computers on one board, with their own memory
and drives etc? With some 'master computer' taking charge of the
out put?

"Bazzer Smith" wrote in message
...
Seems that processor speed has hit the 'thermal barrier' hence the move
to 'duel core' etc...
Is that the future, several computers on one board, with their own memory
and drives etc? With some 'master computer' taking charge of the
out put?


I read an article a few years back about multi-core cpu's.
As more computational power is needed...even if the actual CPU speed may not
keep increasing much...
more cores could be added.

As long as the OS and applications can make use of multi-cores...
CPU "power" can continue to increase even if the speed does not keep going
up.

The article I read was theorizing a machine with a numerous 5-core CPU's on
one motherboard.
Essentially a "super-computer" in a desktop!

No reason it can't happen.

Can you imagine what a great game of Hearts you will be able to play with
25 CPU cores "under the hood" , 20 gigs of RAM and a 1000 GB harddrive!

On Sat, 06 May 2006 03:15:58 GMT, "Bazzer Smith"
wrote:

Seems that processor speed has hit the 'thermal barrier' hence the move
to 'duel core' etc...

No, this is always what happens. Intel or AMD have a design
and ramp it up till the core can't go any higher then have
to redesign. With any of them, if they could've just kept
it cooler it would've gone higher... as overclockers knew,
but such extremes were expensive and the motherboards
themselves weren't designed to accomodate such current.

Similarly today motherboards and PSU are also becoming
limits, that today's and yesteryear's budgetized designs are
reaching (prudent) thermal density limits. They could be
made with more exotic parts but the cost would skyrocket.


Is that the future, several computers on one board, with their own memory
and drives etc? With some 'master computer' taking charge of the
out put?


Depends on what the system purpose is. The future would
seem to suggest users are on client systems that are smaller
and the central server (term used loosely) is for storage
and distribution. Special functions that require high
levels of processing will likely have specialized chips, but
just adding evermore processors will have limits, as it all
still has to fit within the budget for the target market.

Special functions that require high
levels of processing will likely have specialized chips, but
just adding evermore processors will have limits, as it all
still has to fit within the budget for the target market.

I can't say I agree as the processor costs fall over time.
Once you have covered the design costs the only
other cost are the raw materials (sand?) and a bit
of energy.
I have a set top box (digital TV decoder) with a processor
in it as powerful as my old Cryix Processor.

On Sat, 06 May 2006 18:57:48 GMT, "Bazzer Smith"
wrote:

Special functions that require high
levels of processing will likely have specialized chips, but
just adding evermore processors will have limits, as it all
still has to fit within the budget for the target market.

I can't say I agree as the processor costs fall over time.
Once you have covered the design costs the only
other cost are the raw materials (sand?) and a bit
of energy.

If it were true, then why haven't any others fallen in price
so dramatically?

The product lifecycle is far too short for that to happen,
instead the processors have technological depreciation and
end of product life.


I have a set top box (digital TV decoder) with a processor
in it as powerful as my old Cryix Processor.



Ok, but would you rather have 3 of those and a board for it
for $400, or an Athlon 64 and board for $200, with the
latter combo being 5X faster at any common tasks?