4 ms·
Exactly, that was my point with the tree of NVswitches. That's the obvious next progression. But to have an interconnect that fast, as I wrote, is also a change
by m_mueller 8y ago
Exactly, that was my point with the tree of NVswitches. That's the obvious next progression. But to have an interconnect that fast, as I wrote, is also a change in mindset in how you can treat that system. A unified address space is no fun if only a small fraction of the memory is available with high throughput on a specific card, so you are essentially back to a version of cache locality optimizations that are really painful to program for in anything that's not a simple parallel data layout. Having that bandwidth to the whole DGX allows entirely new use usecases.
- shaklee3 8y agoYup. There was a great talk at the last GPU tech conference in san jose where a guy from nvidia showed benchmarks of local memory accesses compared to remote (another GPU over nvlink/nvswitch). There was almost no difference once you got to a large enough transfer size, which is the most common. And the beauty was the only difference is the pointer happened to be on another GPU rather than yours. No special programming was required. Of course, this locks you into Nvidia, but their intent is clear with CUDA already.