engr_student

Thoughts: - Diminishing returns in performance per core because some tasks are truly serial, not parallel. - It costs money - putting stuff on silicon costs money. The only justification for spending more money is that you will make it in revenue. - The PC market imploded. Lenovo has killed the laptop and PC market, and soon will be entering the server market. Expect the end of the server market in the next 5 years or so. There is a lot less money to go around. - Moores 1st law (there are several) is hitting a wall, that is what drove the multi-core approach. They couldn't double the clock speed, so they effectively added to the clock-count. - There is on-die architecture including routers and memory busses. They have capacity limits and tend to be the performance limiters for max temperature. They might be the limiting technology. - Low power is important, as is low heat. More cores (aka more ALU's means more heat and higher power use. - The more components, the easier for something to go wrong. - Gartner says the next big money is in IoT, not massively parallel on the PC. (It seems google beat Intel to a machine-learning ASIC, and deep learning seems to be a decent market right now - but because Gartner didn't say it the Intel leadership can't hear about it).