2 ms·
Given the small amounts of compute and memory you get on each node (it’s certainly no Adapteva Epiphany or even Cell), it seems to me like it’s more of a replac
by mananaysiempre 2y ago
Given the small amounts of compute and memory you get on each node (it’s certainly no Adapteva Epiphany or even Cell), it seems to me like it’s more of a replacement for a (low-speed) FPGA than a CPU or even a micro.
And that’s not a bad pitch! Modern silicon certainly doesn’t like to be bent into a (single-layer) FPGA shape—the result is comparatively slow, expensive, and power-hungry—but accomodates specialized functional blocks very well, so a matrix of baby processors with accompanying memory sounds genuinely like a good idea for an FPGA-like application.
Unfortunately, the GA144 is the only game in town here, and at $500 per dev kit they sure aren’t interested in hobbyists. So I’m left to admire it from a distance. (And $20 per chip is not a bad price considering the competition—as I said, FPGAs are expensive—but it still falls into the expensive-chip bucket. Not a lot of places are going to build a design around a unique expensive chip from an obscure source.)
- cess11 2y agoChuck Moore has been pretty clear that he didn't come up with this as a replacement for x86 or ARM CPU:s. The way he talks about it is closer to what you hear among permacomputing folks, it's a platform for relatively fast general computation in low-energy settings. I've never implemented a gaussian blur on bitmaps with a FPGA, maybe it is simpler somehow than this example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwM0qfQqmdE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwM0qfQqmdE