Advantages of Parallel Hz

On May 3, 10:39 am, Radium <gluceg... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 2, 3:12 pm, Rich Grise <r... DeleteThis @example.net> wrote:
>
> > Maybe you should google for "pipelining"
>
> Okay. According to my research [on google] pipelining doesn't have
> much to do with "parallel Hz".
>
> In addition, pipelining uses buffers and has significant latency. Not
> something I am found of.
>
> My dream PC does not have any buffers or latency.
>
> My dream PC uses RAM chips -- instead of magnetic discs -- in to store
> information. It is entirely chip-based.
>
> This PC is built in such a way that it freshly generates the correct
> electric signals ["on the fly"] instead of playing them back from its
> ROM chips.
>
> There are sets of instructions stored in ROMs. In the case of most PC,
> these instructions load before the CPU "knows" it has a hard drive or
> other peripheral devices. However, in my dream PC, those instructions
> be generated in real-time instead of storing them.
>
> I am aware that EEPROM is reliable, low power, customizable, reprogram-
> able, cheap and proven. But just out of personal preference, my dream
> PC is hard-wired in such a way that it does not need any ROM.
>
> Other specs are below. The stuff below also do not need any ROM memory
> because they are physically-built to generate the signals which
> correspond to the following.
>
> OS: Windows 98SE
> Browser: Mozilla Suite 1.8b
>
> No fans, no discs, no moving parts, no ROM [except for the CD/DVD
> recording/playing and re-writing].
>
> IOW, my dream PC would work perfectly but would not need any moving
> parts, discs, or fans. The "HDD" would consist of silicon RAM chips in
> place of disc-platters and electric parts in place of magnetic parts.
> No moving parts, no noise, no fans, no magnets, no hazardous heat.

You can buy and/or build a PC like that right now.
Solid state IDE hard drives are available, and there are plenty of low
power industrial embedded PC's around that don't need fans and can run
on couple of watts. You could run 98SE on almost any low power
embedded hardware platform.
If you don't want the IDE drive you could even use DiskOnChip.

Dave.
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

On May 2, 7:43 pm, MooseFET <kensm....RemoveThis@rahul.net> wrote:

> If you want
> real processing speed at low power, you should look at using 3 phase
> clocks.

The issue is not processor speed, but clock rate.
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

On May 2, 10:40 pm, "David L. Jones" <altz... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:

> You can buy and/or build a PC like that right now.
> Solid state IDE hard drives are available, and there are plenty of low
> power industrial embedded PC's around that don't need fans and can run
> on couple of watts. You could run 98SE on almost any low power
> embedded hardware platform.
> If you don't want the IDE drive you could even use DiskOnChip.

Could I plug in my SB16 ISA card into this PC? I really like my old
SB16 card because of its FM synth.
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

On May 2, 6:04 pm, j... DeleteThis @iecc.com (John L) wrote:

> I hear that if you have nine women working in parallel, you can get a
> baby in one month, too.

You are confusing *clock-rate* and *processor speed*. Although
related, they are two different things.
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

On May 3, 3:53 pm, Radium <gluceg....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 2, 10:40 pm, "David L. Jones" <altz....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You can buy and/or build a PC like that right now.
> > Solid state IDE hard drives are available, and there are plenty of low
> > power industrial embedded PC's around that don't need fans and can run
> > on couple of watts. You could run 98SE on almost any low power
> > embedded hardware platform.
> > If you don't want the IDE drive you could even use DiskOnChip.
>
> Could I plug in my SB16 ISA card into this PC? I really like my old
> SB16 card because of its FM synth.

If it has an ISA bus slot, then yes.
PC-104 format is popular with low power embedded PC's, but ISA and
other connector and form factors are available.
You can get PC-104 format SB compatible sound cards.

You can plug a solid state IDE hard drive into ANY PC. If that PC is
low enough power not to need a fan, then you have your "dream" machine
with no moving parts or noise.

Dave.
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

>If each clock signal is 1 Hz, and you have a billion of them,
>staggered such that every 1ns part of the CPU can start, and finish,
>an instruction - making the effective 'clock rate' 1 GHz.

I hear that if you have nine women working in parallel, you can get a
baby in one month, too.

R's,
John
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

John L wrote:
>
> >If each clock signal is 1 Hz, and you have a billion of them,
> >staggered such that every 1ns part of the CPU can start, and finish,
> >an instruction - making the effective 'clock rate' 1 GHz.
>
> I hear that if you have nine women working in parallel, you can get a
> baby in one month, too.
>
> R's,
> John


On Radium's world they don't even have to all be women.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

On May 2, 10:52 pm, Radium <gluceg... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 2, 7:43 pm, MooseFET <kensm... RemoveThis @rahul.net> wrote:
>
> > If you want
> > real processing speed at low power, you should look at using 3 phase
> > clocks.
>
> The issue is not processor speed, but clock rate.


Noboby gives a darn about clock rate. It is work done per Watt-second
that is the real issue. The 3 phase clock is the lowest number that
has an unambiguous order and thus is the lowest power one with the
property of a reversible order. With a single clock or a two phase
one, the forwards order is always assumed. This greatly limits what
the processor is able to do.

Consider a simple case like this:

You have a list of values that you need to fit a curve to. You know
that a program like this:

for I=1 to 10
print F(I)
next I

would print:

1 17 33 105 117 119 67 52 37 23

Given this you can burn a lot of CPU time figuring out exactly what
F(I) is. With a 3 phase clock, you only need the list, the program to
call the F(I) and a copy of the compiler. You simply invert the C and
B clock lines and then look at source code for F(I) to find out what
the function is. A great deal of energy is saved by doing this.
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

"Radium" <glucegen1.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178171548.325656.55270@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On May 2, 7:43 pm, MooseFET <kensm....RemoveThis@rahul.net> wrote:
>
>> If you want
>> real processing speed at low power, you should look at using 3 phase
>> clocks.
>
> The issue is not processor speed, but clock rate.

Right...like you know the difference.

Don't you EVER get tired of trolling?

Bob M.
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

On May 3, 11:20 am, a?n?g?...@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com (The little
lost angel) wrote:

> On 2 May 2007 17:39:20 -0700, Radium <gluceg....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:

> >This PC is built in such a way that it freshly generates the correct
> >electric signals ["on the fly"] instead of playing them back from its
> >ROM chips.
>
> And how does it know how to generate the correct signals?

It's built that way.

How does SB16's FM synth "know" how to generate its FM signals? Much
in the same way.

> >There are sets of instructions stored in ROMs. In the case of most PC,
> >these instructions load before the CPU "knows" it has a hard drive or
> >other peripheral devices. However, in my dream PC, those instructions
> >be generated in real-time instead of storing them.

> Isn't it more efficient to calculate static results beforehand and
> store them for use, than to waste time generating the same
> instructions all the time?

Yes. However, due to my personal opinions, I prefer to use the least
amount of non-RAM storage/memory necessary.

> >Other specs are below. The stuff below also do not need any ROM memory
> >because they are physically-built to generate the signals which
> >correspond to the following.
>
> >OS: Windows 98SE
> >Browser: Mozilla Suite 1.8b

> In other words, your system is not upgradable and has to live with
> whatever bugs there are for the entire "useful" life of the system
> since everything's hardwired?

Well, the system could be made without bugs. Right?

Moreover, upgrades are possible and stored in the RAM chips I
described above.

Now, if those chips had their info erased [like formatting an HDD],
then the upgrades would have to be performed again -- which is an easy
task.

> >To put it simply, what I am describing is a PC that does not need to
> >store any information because all of the signal codings for the info
> >is generated in real-time.

> A PC that does not store any information... what good is it for?

It does store info in the RAM chips.

> >Most importantly, though, my dream PC uses parallel-Hz and is
> >massively-serial!!

> And so ?

My point is, parallel-Hz and "parallel bits" are not to be confused
with each other.
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

On 1 May 2007 23:46:36 -0700, Radium <glucegen1.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hi:
>
>Below is an example of "parallel Hz"
>
>http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/2427/clocksignalexample8is.gif

erm, didn't you go through this last year too?

>The benefit of using a billion 1 Hz clock signals to make a clock rate
>of 1Ghz is that such a system would not get as hot as system running
>one 1 GHz clock signal . While the overall amount of heat generated by
>both systems maybe around the same, the system running a billion 1 Hz
>clock signals will have less heat per area than the system running one
>1 billion Hz clock signal. Hence, the former system is far less
>vulnerable to thermal damage than the latter.

Erm, wouldn't this simply be achievable by making a physically bigger
1Ghz chip? A single fast chip is also much more likely to perform
better for the same amount of heat since most general computing
problems are not readily parallelized, at least as far as I understand
it.

>Let's say two CPUs of different frequencies have been running at the
>same voltages and amperages and for the same amount of time. The CPU
>with a higher-frequency will be hotter than the CPU with a lower-
>frequency.

erm, DUH. Quite obviously something like a P4 running at 3Ghz will be
hotter than a P4 running at 2Ghz if both used the same voltage. The P4
3Ghz will also do more work than the P4 2Ghz, so what's your point
here?

>This design would go great for any application that cannot be
>efficiently parallelized [in terms of bits]. Examples of such are
>arithmetics and Boolean logic.

How so? Perhas you can illustrate with an example of 1 single 40x
speed chip versus a 10 1x speed "parallel hz" chip?

As far as I can see it, if my next instruction was waiting for the
result of the preceding boolean logic result, my single 40x chip will
get me to the next result 10x faster than your 4x //Hz chip.

Since you mention the application cannot be efficiently parallelized,
I take it to mean the instructions are highly dependable on each
other's results. Thus the faster each instruction gets finished, the
faster the next can go.

Not much point having 3,999,999 //Hz units waiting 1sec for the result
of one instruction compared to a 4Ghz chip that could spit out the
next 1million instructions within the same time.

But of course I hardly qualify as a chip architect so feel free to
point out where I'm mistaken

--
A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven
Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations,
Lost to the world, Lost to myself
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

On Thu, 03 May 2007 18:16:22 GMT,
a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com (The little lost
angel) wrote:

>On 1 May 2007 23:46:36 -0700, Radium <glucegen1 RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi:
>>
>>Below is an example of "parallel Hz"
>>
>>http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/2427/clocksignalexample8is.gif
>
>erm, didn't you go through this last year too?
>


Yes this thread is doubly silly.
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz 

On 2 May 2007 17:39:20 -0700, Radium <glucegen1 RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:

>This PC is built in such a way that it freshly generates the correct
>electric signals ["on the fly"] instead of playing them back from its
>ROM chips.

And how does it know how to generate the correct signals?

>There are sets of instructions stored in ROMs. In the case of most PC,
>these instructions load before the CPU "knows" it has a hard drive or
>other peripheral devices. However, in my dream PC, those instructions
>be generated in real-time instead of storing them.

Isn't it more efficient to calculate static results beforehand and
store them for use, than to waste time generating the same
instructions all the time?


>Other specs are below. The stuff below also do not need any ROM memory
>because they are physically-built to generate the signals which
>correspond to the following.
>
>OS: Windows 98SE
>Browser: Mozilla Suite 1.8b

In other words, your system is not upgradable and has to live with
whatever bugs there are for the entire "useful" life of the system
since everything's hardwired?

>To put it simply, what I am describing is a PC that does not need to
>store any information because all of the signal codings for the info
>is generated in real-time.

A PC that does not store any information... what good is it for?

>Most importantly, though, my dream PC uses parallel-Hz and is
>massively-serial!!

And so ?


--
A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven
Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations,
Lost to the world, Lost to myself
 >> Stay informed about: Advantages of Parallel Hz