Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
A Kernel Maintainer's Prediction On The CPU Architecture Landscape For 2030
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Weasel View PostHe's either a clown, or trolling.
For a long time, I have been involved in the 'word-length-growth' of processors at a more technical level than most, starting with Intel's '4004 / 4040' and Japanese 4-bit CPUs, to where we are now.
There was always an upward pressure, early on, so that, aside from the need to address more memory, more instructions could be accommodated by one word; an 8-bit word (field) for the Instruction Register allows for 2**8, or 256 BASIC instructions (let's forget the pedantic, artificial definition of 'word'). That 'problem' was solved completely with a 32-bit word's being able to contain not only the op-code for somewhat more than 256 instructions (how many basic instructions does one really need? How much memory do you HAVE to have?), but also any references to any of the machine's registers or memory locations (a quick 'sanity check': 2**32 = 4 Gigabytes--1 KB=1024 B) which might be dictated or implied by the instruction.
The higher resolution and speed of conversion guaranteed by a 128-bit word-length used in analog-digital-analog applications is not even a valid reason--almost all A / D and D /A applications I have ever encountered are inherently limited to 32 bits--and usually much less--by the physical constraints of the processes themselves.
.
I would tend to lean more towards the fact that the pressure to move to 128-bit processors is due more to the 'mountain-climber's syndrome' than anything else: "...because it's there...". Or the 'hacker's syndrome: "...because I can..."; but I would really like to get another well-thought-out (actually, a lot of them) opinion on this subject.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ALRBP View PostThat said, silicon computer will definitely, and I believe quickly, hit their own physical limitation. Due to their size getting closer to atomic scale, integrated circuit components will stop to be more compact every other generation. At this point, there will still be room for optimization, but without transition to another base material than silicon, which will also have limits, a transition that could lead to serious changes in the market, the growth of computing power will slow down and stop.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by pal666 View Postyou have plenty of room to grow in third dimensionLast edited by ALRBP; 31 August 2020, 11:16 AM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostSince modern x86 CPUs are said to be RISC-like at their core with additional features and whatnot added on, I wonder why AMD or Intel don't move on to RISC-V or (Open)Power and then figure out how to add on all the x86 stuff on, preferably in a modular, dual-cpu like, way so we can remove the hardware security hole if or when we don't need it. Imagine, instead of having to buy entire new systems every couple of years we could get by with buying a newer instruction set module.
How much of your 2010-1014 hardware is still perfectly viable outside of not having AVX8675309? I feel like a plug-in interface for CPU instructions could reduce a lot of computing waste and, if they go that route, an open CPU platform is the way to go to prevent Intel SpecEx shenanigans that allow hackers to dump manure trucks behind windtunnel fans. Do we really want that much shit to hit the fan again?Test signature
- Likes 8
Comment
-
Originally posted by ALRBP View Post
The computer industry is apart when it comes to the "bio-physical constraints we're now hitting". Quarantine does not prevent from consuming virtual things (it's the opposite) and growth in the computer power is driven by size reduction, not energy consumption increase. That said, silicon computer will definitely, and I believe quickly, hit their own physical limitation. Due to their size getting closer to atomic scale, integrated circuit components will stop to be more compact every other generation. At this point, there will still be room for optimization, but without transition to another base material than silicon, which will also have limits, a transition that could lead to serious changes in the market, the growth of computing power will slow down and stop.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by s_j_newbury View Post
It's interesting that you interpreted that by way of social and technological material constraints, ie pandemic lockdown and the end of Moore's Law, which are definitely real issues, and potentially significant and which do very much tie into what I was meaning. My point was the subject of Biophysical Economics, "Limits to Growth" and ecological collapse. The computer industry will have to adapt or die, as we all will, this is only drawn into tighter focus with the COVID-19 pandemic and particularly its effect on the energy industry. As you correctly state, quarantine doesn't directly prevent consumer spending, and has been a boon for online commerce, but that's not sustainable and isn't a model we can adopt to solve our many predicaments.
Now, I am absolutely not confident in any prediction on that subject, including mine. I think that the range of possible futures for humanity, even only a few decades ahead, goes from nuclear fusion removing energy constraint and education eliminating authoritarian regimes to general resources' drought and a deadly nuclear war caused by some populist dictator.
Comment
Comment