Timeline for Why create more faster processors despite of Processor Memory Bottleneck?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2020 at 18:09 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Apr 11, 2020 at 17:41 | answer | added | gnasher729 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 17, 2018 at 9:41 | comment | added | Evil | Trivially parallel computation with small memory usage still can benefit from more faster CPU's, right? And looking at GPU, these are neither fast nor massively parallel, with bottleneck in shared memory, but we still like to use them. | |
| Apr 17, 2018 at 8:10 | history | edited | Physicist | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 246 characters in body
|
| Apr 17, 2018 at 8:03 | comment | added | Physicist | Yes there are some ways to mitigate this bottleneck but it is already mentioned in the section that , the bottleneck has become more of a problem, a problem whose severity increases with every newer generation of CPU. Also you can compare the speed at which RAM can provide data to CPU. The "memory wall" is the growing disparity of speed between CPU and memory outside the CPU chip. From 1986 to 2000, CPU speed improved at an annual rate of 55% while memory speed only improved at 10%. | |
| Apr 17, 2018 at 7:41 | comment | added | Discrete lizard♦ | I'm not exactly sure what you're asking here. The section following the one you quoted provides methods to mitigate the problem. Why do you think this bottleneck would make constructing faster processors pointless? Please edit your question to provide more detail. | |
| Apr 17, 2018 at 7:00 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 17, 2018 at 7:41 | |||||
| Apr 17, 2018 at 6:55 | history | asked | Physicist | CC BY-SA 3.0 |