256-bit CPU WHEN?
>256-bit fixed point values take the same range as floating 32-bit values
>256-bit programs are nearly 8 times faster than 32-bit
>256 bit sound cool
256-bit CPU WHEN?
Gavin Fisher
James Adams
When we need to be able to address more than 2^128b (281474977000000YiB) RAM on a single machine.
Connor Morris
>256-bit CPU WHEN?
Intel Sandy Bridge in 2011
AMD Bulldozer in 2011
en.wikipedia.org
Oliver Nelson
By that logic we've been using 128-bit CPUs since the 90s
Mason Sanders
you would need so many pins on the cpu
Dylan Fisher
Yes!
Muh DICK!!!
Jeremiah Barnes
I'd live with it if it meant 256-bits
Hunter Ward
stupid kid xx-bit means many things, but it s used commercially to mean the width of the bus (main memory in specific), so what we have here in PC is 64 bit, that makes the cpu able to access 2^64 bits of physical memory. Not even the most powerful supercomputer need that much. So even today only 48 out of 64 bits are only practically used.
Robert Cox
>8*32 = 256, so 256-bit programs are 8x faster than 32-bit
Found the liberal arts degree
Brandon Kelly
72-bit when?
Jaxon Rivera
By xx-bitness I mean not the width of the bus but register width
Anthony Peterson
this
the c64 was an 8-bit machine but had a 16-bit wide memory bus so It could address 64k of ram
Mason Powell
How many for quantum computers then?
Asher Cook
...
Alexander Rodriguez
36 bits is all we need
Chase Peterson
>when need to be able to
what a meme
Did we NEED any of the revolutionary techs when they came out? No.
Only those who have the Courage™ can make it happen, and those who say "we don't need it" only stall progress
Landon Anderson
I like how you see things, user but
There's no way something like this can happen. Not right now at least.
Maybe sometime in the future, but not now.
Nathan Nelson
You can buy desktop PCs with 1 TiB of RAM today
Colton Nguyen
i made one yesterday
Easton Brooks
>he fell for the 281474977000000YiB RAM meme
Ayden Fisher
it wouldn't fit in phones user, therefore nobody cares
Tyler Turner
are you a dumbass?
Matthew Parker
1 Byte is not necessarily 8 bits.
Easton Bailey
are you from the 70s
Kevin Ward
this.
bits on cpu are only required for memory addressing reasons. otherwise there are already instruction sets to efficiently do operations on 128-bit 256-bit data. see FMA, AVX, SSE4.1 etc.
Ian Cook
>256-bit programs are nearly 8 times faster than 32-bit
found the brainiac
Ayden Davis
That can be assumed as always the case even though not technically true
Bentley Morales
It would make 4 x 64 SIMD operations possible, which opens up a few very interesting avenues for linear algebra number crunching.
However, the amount of engineering required for a slight gain, nah.
Juan Jones
Apple would be the first one to craft it.
Matthew Myers
Yes, a byte is always 8 bits in modern computing.
Adam Rogers
...
Easton Rodriguez
When we have true 3d structures on silicon or whatever substrate. At the moment we cant fit a bus that wide in the dimensions we can do with microwave vapor deposition.
Trust me EE here.
Aiden Garcia
Literally will never need it. The universe will literally end before we can count something tangible with 64 bits.
>inb4 people said the same thing for 32 bit
No. Year 2038 was always a problem.
Colton Baker
what
Josiah Sullivan
Mason Perez
yeah, no, not that. the rest.
Samuel Jenkins
>The universe will literally end before we get (0.1 + 0.2 == 0.3) == True
Joseph Murphy
Work it out yourself you dunce. Do you need mommy to hold your dick while you pee?
Christian Lopez
You would just have a bigger hole to slowly push data through. It doesn't make sense when silicon is not fast enough and fabrication has already made silicon more costly in resources. Essentially you'd make giant die's without reason.
Nathan Nelson
what
Camden Hill
-bit programs are nearly 8 times faster than 32-bit
"no"
William Long
My mommy always holds my pee pee when I go pee pee.
I don't see the problem there.
Joshua Foster
Don't these work on 4x64bit or 8x32bit values? hence why they are SIMD.
I don't think you can actually work on 256bit values with this.
Sebastian Brooks
>What is SSE
Cooper Carter
Lmao
Angel Rogers
"""desktop"""
Adrian Smith
1 physical core = 3 logical cores when?
Anthony Stewart
As in SMT? IBM's already topped that.
>12 cores
>96 threads
Christopher Bennett
"The POWER8® processors are capable of SMT-8 which means up to 128 cores can be used in SMT-8 mode which yields 1024 logical processor"
ibm.com
wew lad
Guess I'm fine with 4 core = 32 threads at this moment. they must bring this down to mainstream desktop level. Not sure about the benefits that we can reap.
Connor Thompson
Non-silicon CPUs when?
Nathaniel Carter
afaiu, this exists already. some intel cpus are quad channel, i.e., 64b*4 wide bus
Cooper White
err... nevermind, I completely misread this
Eli Ward
Quantum computation probably isn't going to function with logical gateways, since the processor can't describe it's computation or be observed in any meaningful way. So, there probably won't be a "bus" to speak of. There's going to have to be something else.
Josiah Carter
SPARC is also 8 threads/core now for a total of 256 threads per 4.1 GHz/32-core chip
>tfw I won't get to own one until they're saturating eBay like US T1/T2s are now
Jackson Miller
Why does SPARC have so many threads?
Ryan Bailey
Why are dumb people allowed to make posts?
Nathaniel Reed
For heavily threaded workloads?
Jose Wright
Because it's meant for applications that require high levels of multithreading. Duh.
Christian Turner
What are those?
William Phillips
reminds me of how Atari's justification for falsely advertising the Jaguar was "it has two 32 bit coprocessors so it's 64 bit"
Ryan Price
What do you mean by 256-bit?
>256 bit address space
We're not even using the full 64 bit address space right now
>256 bit/cycle memory accesses
We already have that and more
>256 bit registers
We already have that with SIMD instructions
William Russell
No matter how efficient those IS may be, they can never match the speed of a native hardware implementation.