Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!apple!sun-barr!newstop!east!tjp!jpainter From: jpainter@tjp.East.Sun.COM (John Painter - Sun BOS Hardware) Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer Subject: Re: Very parallel systems. Message-ID: <686@east.East.Sun.COM> Date: 10 Aug 89 00:00:08 GMT References: <$TFBCFDTJCGNF.at.UMPA> Sender: news@east.East.Sun.COM Reply-To: jpainter@tjp.East.Sun.COM (John Painter - Sun BOS Hardware) Organization: Sun Microsystems, Billerica MA Lines: 25 In article <$TFBCFDTJCGNF.at.UMPA> XUUM32@prime-a.central-services.umist.ac.uk ("Mr. Andy Packham") writes: >I've got some applications I would'nt mind trying out on a >transputer system. However, by their nature they are massively >parellel. Does anybody know of any boards for the PC or like that >could handle perhaps 100's of tasks, each task in its selt is >probably very simple so the processing power of each individual unit >can be low; ie something like a Z80 (retrograde development !) rather >than a T-whatever which would be overkill and too expensive ! >Thanks for your help, Why not run several (8-16) transputers each running several tasks. The channel communication is the same as 1 task on each processor (with minor, hopefully hidden by your development system, differences that are easy to overcome if they aren't) /Tjp -disclaimers ... we don't need no stinking disclaimers -Enough whitespace mr. mailer ????