Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c arch |
On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 21:34:03 +0000, Michael S wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 21:10:00 +0000
mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 15:06:50 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:>
"Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> writes:>On 9/17/24 8:44 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:>On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 23:45:50 +0000, MitchAlsup1 wrote:>
"the CPUs are simply I/O managers to the Inference Engines and>
GPUs."
That particular Wheel of Reincarnation will never turn that way.
>
Why? It comes down to RAM. Those addon processors will never
have access to the sheer quantity of RAM that is available to
the CPU. And motherboard-based CPU RAM is upgradeable, as well,
whereas addon cards tend not to offer this option.
My guess would be that CPU RAM will decrease in upgradability.
LDO's statement "will never have access to the sheer quantity of
RAM that is available to the CPU" is flat out wrong.
>
Marvell already offers a CXL add-on processor card that supports
up to 4TB of DRAM with 16 high-end ARM64 V series cores.
At somewhere near 3× the latency to DRAM.
Where did you find this figure?
I calculated it based on how messages get passed up and down PCIe
linkages and that that plug in memory has to be enough wire distance
to need a PCIe switch between CPU die and Plug. Then add on typical
memory controller and DRAM controller, and that is what you have.
I have read both product brief and press release and didn't see any
latency numbers mentioned, not even an order of magnitude.
>
I suppose, in order to get real datasheet one would have to sign
NDA.
>
Somehow I don't see how anything running over PCIe-like link can be
as fast as you suggest.
I was not suggesting it is fast, I was suggesting it is slow.
If the size works for your application--great !
If the latency does not work for you--less great.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.