Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!uccba!uceng!rsexton From: rsexton@uceng.UC.EDU (robert sexton) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Transputer based systems. Keywords: transputer, inmos, unix Message-ID: <253@uceng.UC.EDU> Date: 20 Sep 88 15:37:32 GMT Distribution: na Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati, College of Engg. Lines: 22 being a fan of parallel system and their advantages, I was wondering why the transputer has not gotten off the ground as a viable system. It seems pretty feasable, as well as very cost-effective. I imagine a machine with several transputers, each running unix. When the machine is lightly loaded, every user gets a processor, maybe more, when its heavily loaded, the users have to share processors. Admittedly, there are obstacles in the areas of shared memory, shared storage, and general parallelization. The first two are pretty simple to defeat, but the third seems to show no signs of going away. It seems however, that by mapping tasks onto processors, we could get a pretty flexible system right now. When you run out of power, you can just add more processors. A system with 64 transputers could could theoretically provide 16 times the floating point performance of a VAX 8650, for approximately $64000. Admittedly these ponderings are largely wishful thinking, but the price/performance could be incredible. natural applications would be ray tracing, fluid flow, etc. Thanks in advance for your input. Robert Sexton, University of Cincinnati rsexton@uceng.uc.edu tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!uccba!uceng!rsexton Box Full O' Transputers... The Breakfast with MIPS I do not speak for UC, They don't speak for me.