3 ms·
I really hate this kind of clickbait. In general, GPU-databases are great for large vector operations against thousands or millions of entries. However, they pe
by jadbox 9y ago
I really hate this kind of clickbait. In general, GPU-databases are great for large vector operations against thousands or millions of entries. However, they perform perform poorly for typical DB usage: selecting random data as well as join operations. GPU-based DBs are just another tool that only pays for itself in extremely specialized use-cases.
- mrep 9y agoPlus, a top of the line volta gpu only has 16GB of memory where as i can provision a r4.16xl rds instance with 488 Gib of memory or even set up my own x1e.32xlarge with 3,904 Gib of memory. That's a 30 to 244 times increase in memory size.
- m_mueller 9y agoaccording to STREAM benchmarks, the GPU's random access memory bandwidth scales similarly to the CPU's as the sequential access one. Is the difference in the CPU's more sophisticated caching behaviour? Did you actually do any tests with random access on GPU?