4 ms·

I see what you're saying and I think you're probably right. But if you can design and build a kick-ass multicore processor that blows everyone else out of the w

by Mapou 18y ago

I see what you're saying and I think you're probably right. But if you can design and build a kick-ass multicore processor that blows everyone else out of the water in terms of performance, energy efficiency and ease of programming, it makes sense to give all your dev tools away for free. Heck, you could even throw in an OS and a nice browser for good measure. I realize that I'm biased since I happen to think that multicore design is the most exciting thing out there. In my opinion, whoever solves the multicore/parallel programming problem will dominate computing for the rest of the century. The rest of the industry, including Intel, IBM, AMD, APPLE, etc... would flock like migratory birds to come and worship at your feet.

immad 18y ago
If I gave you $100k could you build me a kick-ass multicore processor that beats Intel+AMD? Seems like its not a good space to be a startup in. But I don't know that much about it...
- Mapou 18y ago
  Not $100k, of course. But I think $5 or $6 million dollars could do it. For that, you'd get a scalable, self-balancing 16 or 32-core processor compatible with existing motherboards and chip sets, visual dev tools using multi-touch screens, and a fully built computer with an extensible parallel OS including a good set of device drivers. The whole engineering/design phase would take about two years. After that, you enter the marketing and production phase which will require several busloads of dough but that's not my department.
  - rw 18y ago
    Intel/AMD aren't exactly resting on their laurels, friend.
    - Mapou 18y ago
      In my opinion, that's exactly what they are doing. They have adopted a paralllel computing model (multithreading) that is known to be a pain in the ass to program. So far, they have no plans to change the model. They either don't know how or they are stuck in a rut because they need to maintain compatibility with legacy systems. They are in a state of panic right now, spending money left and right trying to find a solution that does not exist for their chosen model. This is a great opportunity for some other company (or a startup) to come on the scene and make a killing.
paul 18y ago
If you could design and build a flying car that runs on tap water, that would be even better. Unfortunately, that's easier said than done. Competing with Intel, AMD, etc in the processor market is also not easy -- many have tried, and generally failed.
- Mapou 18y ago
  Yeah, but this is a different ball game. The big players have an Achilles' heel. They are clueless as to what the future holds for multicore processors and they don't seem close to a solution. Parallel programming is a pain in the ass. There is even panic in the air because the big vendors have no real idea how to proceed. The solution is out there though. Some unknown startup may sneak behind them and steal the pot of gold while they're busy fighting amongst themselves.
  - paul 18y ago
    Anything is possible, but so far the flying car and parallel programming startups have all failed :). (Moller and Peakstream come to mind)
    - Mapou 18y ago
      Which parallel programming startups are you referring to? Sure, the established companies are adapting their exisiting tools to address the new multicore processors but I am not aware of any new parallel programming tools startups that failed. Most of the multicore processor startups are still around. Tilera, Ambric, Pico, etc... are still hanging in there. Pico is doing great. Israel's Plurality is just now beginning to get recognition for its self-balancing 64 to 256-core hypercore chip. My point is that there are very few new multicore startups and I think that the reason is not that too many of them failed in the past but that only a few have had anything really interesting or disruptive to offer. It remains that there is a big problem that needs to be solved right now and whoever solves it will grab a lion share of the CPU market in this century.
      - aswanson 18y ago
axod 18y ago
How is it exciting? What problem does it solve? How to write programs even lazier and introduce more complexity? Multicores seem like a bad hack to me - a stop gap until chip speeds increase. A single core has to be the most efficient. When everything is moving onto the web, consumers don't have much of a need to multicore processors. Maybe in high end db servers or something :/

by Mapou 18y ago

immad 18y ago

If I gave you $100k could you build me a kick-ass multicore processor that beats Intel+AMD? Seems like its not a good space to be a startup in. But I don't know that much about it...

Mapou 18y ago
Not $100k, of course. But I think $5 or $6 million dollars could do it. For that, you'd get a scalable, self-balancing 16 or 32-core processor compatible with existing motherboards and chip sets, visual dev tools using multi-touch screens, and a fully built computer with an extensible parallel OS including a good set of device drivers. The whole engineering/design phase would take about two years. After that, you enter the marketing and production phase which will require several busloads of dough but that's not my department.
- rw 18y ago
  Intel/AMD aren't exactly resting on their laurels, friend.
  - Mapou 18y ago
    In my opinion, that's exactly what they are doing. They have adopted a paralllel computing model (multithreading) that is known to be a pain in the ass to program. So far, they have no plans to change the model. They either don't know how or they are stuck in a rut because they need to maintain compatibility with legacy systems. They are in a state of panic right now, spending money left and right trying to find a solution that does not exist for their chosen model. This is a great opportunity for some other company (or a startup) to come on the scene and make a killing.

paul 18y ago

If you could design and build a flying car that runs on tap water, that would be even better. Unfortunately, that's easier said than done. Competing with Intel, AMD, etc in the processor market is also not easy -- many have tried, and generally failed.

Mapou 18y ago
Yeah, but this is a different ball game. The big players have an Achilles' heel. They are clueless as to what the future holds for multicore processors and they don't seem close to a solution. Parallel programming is a pain in the ass. There is even panic in the air because the big vendors have no real idea how to proceed. The solution is out there though. Some unknown startup may sneak behind them and steal the pot of gold while they're busy fighting amongst themselves.
- paul 18y ago
  Anything is possible, but so far the flying car and parallel programming startups have all failed :). (Moller and Peakstream come to mind)
  - Mapou 18y ago
    Which parallel programming startups are you referring to? Sure, the established companies are adapting their exisiting tools to address the new multicore processors but I am not aware of any new parallel programming tools startups that failed. Most of the multicore processor startups are still around. Tilera, Ambric, Pico, etc... are still hanging in there. Pico is doing great. Israel's Plurality is just now beginning to get recognition for its self-balancing 64 to 256-core hypercore chip. My point is that there are very few new multicore startups and I think that the reason is not that too many of them failed in the past but that only a few have had anything really interesting or disruptive to offer. It remains that there is a big problem that needs to be solved right now and whoever solves it will grab a lion share of the CPU market in this century.
    - aswanson 18y ago

axod 18y ago

How is it exciting? What problem does it solve? How to write programs even lazier and introduce more complexity? Multicores seem like a bad hack to me - a stop gap until chip speeds increase. A single core has to be the most efficient. When everything is moving onto the web, consumers don't have much of a need to multicore processors. Maybe in high end db servers or something :/