Author: Robert Henry Durrett
Date: 07:39:40 06/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2002 at 02:51:30, Dann Corbit wrote: >On June 18, 2002 at 21:38:49, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: > >>On June 18, 2002 at 21:08:00, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On June 18, 2002 at 20:35:00, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: >>> >>>>Well, if people only resort to AMP when they absolutely have no choice, then >>>>they are unlikely to discover any of AMPs merits. It is only when they are >>>>willing to explore the unknown that they will see what is possible. >>> >>>The thing is, SMP is kind of a superset of AMP. You can do message passing on an >>>SMP computer if you want, but it's kind of a waste. (Extra work involved.) >> >>The big question in my mind is "Yes, but what ELSE can you do with AMP?" In a >>single processor, the interaction between parallel paths is fixed. The >>programmer can do little or nothing about it. But with separate processors, the >>programmer has more options, or more flexibility. [Or, at least, that's my >>perception of the situation.] > >In the words of Willy Wonka: >"Strike that, reverse it." > >AMP is more flexible than a single CPU, but give me SMP over AMP any day. Well Dann, I will defer to your experience and judgement in this matter . . . for now . . . but you may hear me say "I told you so!" sometime in the future. Bob D.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.