[Beowulf] Re: vectors vs. loops
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Vincent Diepeveen diep at xs4all.nlThu May 5 05:33:04 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] dommande
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: vectors vs. loops
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
The point they seem to ignore is that a single chip can be cheap. A beowulf network with 1024 nodes always will cost millions. So creating faster chips is most important to keep prices cheap. Complaining about memory-bandwidth is just a side effect and not a convincing reason to not produce faster chips. Or do you disagree with that? Vincent At 06:14 AM 5/5/2005 -0400, Andrew Piskorski wrote: >On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 04:14:42PM +0200, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >> Those bottlenecks are derived because they use 1000s of chickens. > >Vincent, however expert you might be in your own field, you clearly >have no real idea what you're talking about in this one, and I suspect >all you've accomplished in this thread is convincing 90+% of the list >readers to simply ignore your posts as a waste of their time. > >I recommend reading more and talking less. Especially when folks like >RGB and Greg Lindahl have already pointed this out to you in Not So >Subtle terms. > >-- >Andrew Piskorski <atp at piskorski.com> >http://www.piskorski.com/ >_______________________________________________ >Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org >To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf > >
- Previous message: [Beowulf] dommande
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: vectors vs. loops
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
