Reply to post: Re: Nobody needs more than 640K of RAM.

Core-blimey! Intel's Core i9 18-core monster – the numbers

Mage Silver badge

Re: Nobody needs more than 640K of RAM.

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."

... Thomas Watson, IBM, 1943 and it isn't apocryphal.

"I think there is a world market for maybe five Clouds"

Which is worrying. 19th C. potato famine comes to mind.

By the late 1970s it was evident that there would be a clock speed limit and more performance would need a network of CPUs. Except the bottle neck is RAM and I/O. Not enough L1 Cache per core. Also the transputer was inherently a better architecture with local RAM per CPU. Serial interconnect needs to go 32 or 64 times faster than parallel, but at high speed the the interconnect is far easier to design (parallel traces need the same delay) and uses less chip area and pins than parallel. So I/O to slots, RAM, peripherals and additional CPU slots should all be serial except on chip. Even then if there are many cores with shared I/O using serial might be same speed per word and use less chip area.

Ivor Catt did some good articles in the 1980s on this.

Pity that Thatcher sold off Inmos.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019