• Happy holidays, folks! Thanks to each and every one of you for being part of the Tom's Hardware community!

News Conversation With ChatGPT Was Enough to Develop Part of a CPU

Of course, automating parts of this process will be a definite boon.

I do believe I remember reading articles that AMD used automation to help design Phenom-Bulldozer processor families because it was cheaper and faster than using engineers through the entire process, even though it resulted in massive die waste, inefficiency, and an inferior product, and that Zen was the first archetecture to go back to human designed from the ground up, which is why the gains were so massive over even Piledriver.
 
Using an AI-written HDL could also turn out to be risky in Chip design methodology. These test cases may not provide enough data to draw formal statistical conclusions.

While they still created an 8-bit accumulator-based microprocessor (von Neumann type design) with the same kinds of functionality as a comparable PIC product, I'm not sure whether we can solely depend on AI's outcome in this chip design process.

Also, since they did not automate any part of this process, and each conversation was done manually, this can seriously limit the scale of this experiment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: bit_user
It appears that although ChatGPT-4 performed adequately, it still required human feedback for most conversations to be both successful and compliant.

It also had problem and difficulty understanding exactly what specific Verilog lines would cause the error messages from "iverilog", hence while fixing even "minor" errors, ChatGPT-4 would often require several messages.

If we focus on these scripted benchmark tests, the final and overall outcome actually "heavily" relies on these early instructions, initial prompt and feedback. Even IF suppose there are MINOR errors, it will take several iterations of feedback, because LLMs can't fully correlate between an Error and the fix required.

So if the early prompts are not satisfactory, the conversation needs to be "restarted" from an earlier point. There were also bugs and discrepancies when the processor got into the "simulation" stage, after running some programs on it.

So this proof of concept experiment is kind of a mixed bag, but this is just my own "constructive" criticism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bit_user
I do believe I remember reading articles that AMD used automation to help design Phenom-Bulldozer processor families because it was cheaper and faster than using engineers through the entire process, even though it resulted in massive die waste, inefficiency, and an inferior product,
I thought that was motivated by their desire to use the same toolchain and design flow for the CPU team as the GPU team was using, to facilitate the creation of APUs.

Anyway, you can't compare the state of the art in layout & routing between 15 years ago and today. BTW, that's also the backend part of the design process, and not at all what the article is talking about.

Zen was the first archetecture to go back to human designed from the ground up, which is why the gains were so massive over even Piledriver.
That's far too simplistic. Zen wasn't just a redesign, but a re-think about how AMD approached CPU architectures. Jim Keller described it as protocol-driven.

"We used to build computers such that you had a front end, a fetch, a dispatch, an execute, a load store, an L2 cache. If you looked at the boundaries between them, you'd see 100 wires doing random things that were dependent on exactly what cycle or what phase of the clock it was. Now these interfaces tend to look less like instruction boundaries – if I send an instruction from here to there, now I have a protocol. So the computer inside doesn't look like a big mess of stuff connected together, it looks like eight computers hooked together that do different things. There’s a fetch computer and a dispatch computer, an execution computer, and a floating-point computer. If you do that properly, you can change the floating-point without touching anything else.

That's less of an instruction set thing – it’s more ‘what was your design principle when you build it’, and then how did you do it. The thing is, if you get to a problem, you could say ‘if I could just have these five wires between these two boxes, I could get rid of this problem’. But every time you do that, every time you violate the abstraction layer, you've created a problem for future Jim. I've done that so many times, and like if you solve it properly, it would still be clean, but at some point if you hack it a little bit, then that kills you over time."

Source: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16762/an-anandtech-interview-with-jim-keller-laziest-person-at-tesla

Of course, I'm sure there were other differences, as well. But, the gains in Zen definitely weren't simply due to using full-custom layout.
 
This is called "cheating" not true AI , when you give the program hints inside your chat ...

Stop the propaganda ! this AI is fake. will never work without including information where to look !
 
This is called "cheating" not true AI , when you give the program hints inside your chat ...

Stop the propaganda ! this AI is fake. will never work without including information where to look !
You know the "A" in "AI" stands for "Artificial", right? They're not saying it's a general intelligence, just that it can do certain complex tasks.

BTW, try training a human engineer to design microprocessors without hints or feedback.
 
A team of New York University researchers followed the ChatGPT prompt rabbit hole for long enough to develop a functional 8-bit accumulator-based microprocessor architecture that's part of a CPU.

Conversation With ChatGPT Was Enough to Develop Part of a CPU : Read more
"This may sound hyperbolic, and yes, it’s on the absolute low end of the possibility scale;"
Nothing is impossible. It's how probable something can happen. And where humans are involved, the probabilities increase rapidly.
 
This is called "cheating" not true AI , when you give the program hints inside your chat ...

Stop the propaganda ! this AI is fake. will never work without including information where to look !
I agree on 50% of this, GPT 4 is basically auto suggest on steroids so it's not actually that intelligent but it's only going to accelerate growth for better models in the future.
 
Imagine AI teaching kids and students in schools and universities in future, online that it. Not classroom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bit_user
You know the "A" in "AI" stands for "Artificial", right? They're not saying it's a general intelligence, just that it can do certain complex tasks.

BTW, try training a human engineer to design microprocessors without hints or feedback.

you re kidding yourself ... This is no way like training a human engineer ... it does not LEARN. and it does not build a true Knowledge data bank NOR knows how to connect the objects it finds nor give a solution by itself. more over it does not know how to decide between two contradicting information.
 
you re kidding yourself ... This is no way like training a human engineer ...
I didn't say it was exactly the same. However, if you're being honest, you should acknowledge that human engineers need hints and guidance as they learn to do this sort of thing.

more over it does not know how to decide between two contradicting information.
I think it can at least do that much, to a greater degree than you give it credit for. Don't forget that we're talking about a model which wasn't trained to do specifically this job. So, the fact that it can be guided to produce a working circuit is pretty impressive.
 
So, the fact that it can be guided to produce a working circuit is pretty impressive.
It did not "produce" anything . the terms being used is the propaganda here ... a "working" circuit should be "tested" before "producing" by a true AI ... this is a huge LIE. call it what it is ! "copying texts in a smart way" !
 
Awesome, Germany has no issues writing a 10B € cheque for Intel, but yet they hesitate to spend a few hundred Mio bucks on building their own solar industry. instead they seem to be perfectly fine to depend on china on this. it seems the war and the resulting lack of gas has not taught them enough...