7 ms·
The RAM example is terrible. Accumulating RAM is application-transparent. Processor accumulation is not. Two small shovels aren't the same as one big shovel,
by wheels 14y ago
The RAM example is terrible. Accumulating RAM is application-transparent. Processor accumulation is not.
Two small shovels aren't the same as one big shovel, but two small bags of dirt are basically the same as one big bag of dirt. If you're going to continue with the memory analogy, this would be like combining the graphics memory and general purpose RAM into a single figure.
- backprojection 14y agoSo a better analogy would be to quote total FLOPS.
- addandsubtract 14y agoIt would've been better to call it a hexa-core 800mHz machine.
- flurpitude 14y agoIsn't hexa-core six cores? Whereas this has sixteen.
- archangel_one 14y agoYes, probably it should be a hexadecicore or something along those lines.
- Arelius 14y agoI take pause at the term of "hexadecicore" and as we go up, it just starts to get more complicated... what would you call a 32 core machine? That just seems like an overly complicated and confusing approach to the problem.
- archangel_one 14y agoWell, I was obviously playing on "hexadecimal" which isn't great itself; it's a mish-mash of Latin and Greek, and should probably be "deca" instead of "deci" anyway. Regardless, it can't be worse than those stupid resolution acronyms like WUQXVGA which are, for some inexplicable reason, still managing to survive.