BWAHAHAH, AMD NEEDS A CO-PROCESSOR!!!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

YO_KID37

Distinguished
Jan 15, 2006
1,277
0
19,280
what would be awesome, is that, if they do take the co processor, what about the physX chip? wonder if that will be ever integrated, or not.. looks pretty good to me. either way both companies will have a good performance boost

I would love to see the math co-processor and physics chip on future processors. It would rock the face of gaming.

Seriously. The original guy posting is bitching about adding something to processors that could make them completely awesome.

I swear watching this forum is like watching retarded kids fight with lightsabers made with flourescent light tubes filled with gasoline.

OmFg! that's so tru yo. Lol And I'm the Cartman one Who Acts REtarded so he can Rig the Special Olympics.
Yeha that's right we're just going at it because from what i see we have nothing else to do on March Break So most of the popel are just venting their No-girlfriend Anger on Processers(girl substitutes)
 

darth_farter

Distinguished
Dec 22, 2004
66
0
18,630
what would be awesome, is that, if they do take the co processor, what about the physX chip? wonder if that will be ever integrated, or not.. looks pretty good to me. either way both companies will have a good performance boost

I would love to see the math co-processor and physics chip on future processors. It would rock the face of gaming.

Seriously. The original guy posting is bitching about adding something to processors that could make them completely awesome.

I swear watching this forum is like watching retarded kids fight with lightsabers made with flourescent light tubes filled with gasoline.

the most intelligent reply in this thread...

not all hope is lost for this forum...
 

jkflipflop98

Distinguished
It is not only an idea that AMD and Intel could find a us of it, it is the future. Processes which can be threaded separetely can be calculated with less power on more cores with low freqfency than on one high freqfency. High freqfency chips are more complicated to produce and are making much more heat on square mm which is a very big problem for computers of all segments(mobile, desktop and server).
An clear example that proves this is the asymetric "Cell" architecture of the Sony Play Station 3 processor.
It has 9 cores on a single processor, 1 called the Power Element which intelgently divides and deliver jobs to the rest 8 cores caled the Synergistic Cores. This chip can calculate 192Gigafloops(My overclocked A64 Venice at 2.6GHz can only 5Gigafloops) and can perform more SIMD operations on same data at once. Thanks to its 300GB/s buses of each synergistic core and the capability of the Power Element to pass the curent procesed SIMD data from one core to another imidietly.
This architecture has been developed for few years by the giants IBM, Toshiba and Sony with a budget of US $400 million and 400 technical enginers at its development peak.

That is nothing but pure marketing drivel. I've seen a cell, and it's not really as special as its being hyped up to be.
 

Snorkius

Splendid
Sep 16, 2003
3,659
0
22,780
I know you're not worth it, but I'll respond like the mature adult I am:

AMD, currently and for sometime in the future - at least until Intel's 'Common Systems Interconnect' finally happens - will have a large advantage with it's interconnect technology.

Now, having a superior technology - especially when you consider the advantage Intel's upcoming server offerings will have in terms of raw performance - is it not only natural to leverage that technology as much as possible?

Imagine if you will, buying a server/computing platform that uses a chip to accelerate the specific application you intend to run on this system. A chip made by professionals that specialize in accelerating the very applications you intend to run. And this chip is connected with the rest of the system using the fastest (standard) interconnect technology available today: a technology that allows the two chips to 'talk' to each other directly through a high-speed link.

Just the possible FPGA-as-copreprocessor potential boggles the mind.


And all this is bad how exactly? Bad like the video card, I mean graphics coprocessor, you have in your PC?
 

Snorkius

Splendid
Sep 16, 2003
3,659
0
22,780
The more I think about it, the more an the idea of an actual graphics co-processor connected via coherent HT to the CPU sounds like a good thing for AMD to make. They'd have to partner with someone like Nvidia for it, and I don't think it's really doable but... imagine: a FX100+ super gaming chip.