Re:Tenstorrent unveils Grayskull, its RISC-V answer to GPUs
by loeg on Sunday March 10, 2024 @01:18PM
(#39660788)
I think the NOC approach is fundamentally similar to Intel's rings that they used for core interconnect back in the mid-2010s. It works.
https://www.realworldtech.com/includes/images/articles/snbep...
https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/microarchitectures/sandy_...
Re:Tenstorrent unveils Grayskull, its RISC-V answer to GPUs
by paulmd on Sunday March 10, 2024 @05:07PM
(#39662536)
They still use this today, and the ring interconnect is also the topology inside zen3/zen4 CCXs (with 8 cores). Ring is one of the simplest and best systems for >4 cores, until you get to about 8-10 cores (at which point you generally split it into multiple “tiers” like multiple CCXs etc).
Re:Tenstorrent unveils Grayskull, its RISC-V answer to GPUs
by loeg on Sunday March 10, 2024 @07:51PM
(#39663450)
Intel switched to a mesh model: https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/mesh_interconnect_archite...
Re:Tenstorrent unveils Grayskull, its RISC-V answer to GPUs
by paulmd on Sunday March 10, 2024 @08:15PM
(#39663578)
not for consumer chips, which still use the same ringbus design.
e-cores do have a CCX/core cluster, but the clusters themselves go on the ringbus lol
Re:Tenstorrent unveils Grayskull, its RISC-V answer to GPUs
by adgjlsfhk1 on Sunday March 10, 2024 @04:54PM
(#39662439)
I think the distinction with ML inference workloads is that you often have very little control flow, so this type of architecture lets you match layers to adjacent cores so that each operation gets it's data directly from the step before rather than from RAM.
Are you saying proximity here more than offsets this vs. e.g. each core having its own cache as I think they do in a "normal" CPU? And if so, is this more true of ML inference workloads than other workloads, for some reason?