parallax-scroll said:
That website doesn't make it clear whether Intel's efforts will slow
down medical research by decreasing the percentage of all video
boards which are Nvidia boards now usable to support the few
BOINC projects which are able to use video boards to do some
types of computer work faster than CPUs can do it, or whether
Intel plans to eventually speed up medical research by offering
software that makes it easier to write programs that run on
video boards using Intel's video chips but are doing things unrelated
to producing graphics.
That website doesn't make it clear whether Intel's efforts will slow
down medical research by decreasing the percentage of all video
boards which are Nvidia boards now usable to support the few
BOINC projects which are able to use video boards to do some
types of computer work faster than CPUs can do it, or whether
Intel plans to eventually speed up medical research by offering
software that makes it easier to write programs that run on
video boards using Intel's video chips but are doing things unrelated
to producing graphics.
http://www.gpugrid.net/
Robert said:That website doesn't make it clear whether Intel's efforts will slow
down medical research by decreasing the percentage of all video
boards which are Nvidia boards now usable to support the few
BOINC projects which are able to use video boards to do some
types of computer work faster than CPUs can do it, or whether
Intel plans to eventually speed up medical research by offering
software that makes it easier to write programs that run on
video boards using Intel's video chips but are doing things unrelated
to producing graphics.
http://www.gpugrid.net/
Robert Miles
There's another development happening, based around the OpenCL
standards. AMD just recently showed gaming physics demo based around
both Havoc and OpenCL. Though this is based around gaming applications,
OpenCL is more general purpose than that.
Robert said:People who write to specific platforms will always have to count on
the continued availability and competitiveness of the platform. x86
is number one in both of those categories, and it's the only plausible
candidate to ride out the microprocessor revolution. I'd bet on it
again at this point.
What changed your mind? I thought Itanium was the only way to go,
according to you?
Robert said:I hope Itanium isn't the new Rambus--the thing you bring up when you
want to start a flame war.
Not at all, I've been convinced about x86 being here to stay for a long
time, while you have not. It's a legitimate question.
Regardless, OpenCL seems to promise a very flexible future, where you
split up workloads between all kinds of devices and not worry about what
they are.
Robert said:I"ve been around a long time. I've gotten some things right and some
things wrong.
I'm skeptical of most meta-software. The world is a blizzard of
languages and API's, and software just gets to be more and more of a
mess. There's always some new whiz-bang thing that's going to save
the planet, or at least the industry.
Well then, that's a very good answer.