You can always start your own project with discrete components or 3d print your design. Or use FPGAs. It's delusional to think that x86 is the be all and end all of architectures.
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
Delusional is a bit strong of a word. x86, PPC, and sort of SPARC were the only architectures with a modular system on a consumer level. PPC and SPARC dropped out of the PC market a long time ago, so that just leaves x86. All other architectures are either under-performing, single-board systems, or SoCs. FPGAs are not ideal for everyday computing purposes. They make good hobbyist projects, not so much high-end enthusiast rigs.
Originally Posted by caligula
I personally own 3 different ARM platforms and I'm interested in getting a MIPS or PPC based system - I'm probably a lot more open to other architectures than most people on these forums (or in general). But at the end of the day, I want to sit down and use a computer that is well supported. I also want a computer that was put together with parts I picked out, and I just don't see that happening in the future, x86 or otherwise. When you look at how tiny things like the odroid U2 are and how capable it is, you know the future of enthusiast hardware is coming to an end.
Here's the real question ....
So tell me, just how many of you WTF'ers and whiners happens to have a 40 core cluster sitting on your desk?
None of you. That's what I figured. So please keep your petty comments to yourself. It must be hard to be so small minded.
To the gentleman who built this wonderful cluster.....
Well done Sir. Keep up the good work. You have a bright future before you. And please ignore the WTF'ers and the Why Not'ers. They are just jealous of what you have accomplished.
I don't think anyone here was whining about it. It's more of a "what was the point of this?" than anything. A single GTX 680 or a R9 290X costs a lot less, takes up less space, has more practical uses, and probably has more processing power than that entire cluster (theoretical and actual). Of course, that takes away a lot of the fun of making such an elegant machine. Obviously if the creator seriously cared about performance, he wouldn't have chosen the Pi. I think we can all easily admit the cluster was amazingly well designed, but what we don't understand is why the Pi was used when it was probably the worst possible system (within reason) that could be used for this. To put it in another way - the cluster was obsolete and cost ineffective before it was even made. The Pi is cheap but spend another $400-$600 (which is really negligible for a 40-system cluster) and the system could've been at least 3x more powerful, and maybe could've been a little smaller.
Originally Posted by georgezilla