Re: 1teraflops cell processor possible?

"Del Cecchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In just rereading the IBM J. of Research and Development article
> http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/402/allen.html
>
> I was struck by the following paragraph.
> --------------------------------------------------
> More generally, thinking on algorithm and system design is still dominated
> by the invalid perception that compute units are the most expensive
resource
> in a computing system. Applications are designed to minimize the number of
> operations required to solve a problem. Systems are designed with enough
> memory and I/O to achieve a high usage of the compute units, even if this
> leads to low memory or disk utilization. In fact, the cost of systems is
> dominated by storage cost, and by the cost of the logic required to move
> data around (caches and buses). If one thinks anew from basic principles,
> the conclusion will often be that algorithms that use more computing but
> less memory, or use more computing but require less communication, coupled
> with systems designed to ensure more effective use of memory and
> communication, even at the expense of lower utilization of the processing
> units, are more cost-effective than conventional algorithms and systems.
>
> This is from 1999.  Is this the paper referred to earlier?
>
> del cecchi


Amen Brother Del! Or Brother Allen per Brother Dell.

The best way to design computers nowadays is to start
off from the memory subsystem, figure out the best cache
(or streaming, Brother Robert) hierarchy you can build,
match the register file, bypass network, and scheduler,
and only lastly to figure out how many ALUs and FMACs
are needed to consume everything that you can feed them.