6502.org Forum  Projects  Code  Documents  Tools  Forum
It is currently Sun Nov 10, 2024 9:02 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 8:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:28 pm
Posts: 10975
Location: England
Hackaday posted about this remarkable study: a 256-processor supercomputer using hundreds of thousands of TTL devices.

There's a 300-page pdf which goes into great detail about the design.

It uses many small ROMs as well as 74S381 ALU devices, 74283 adders and 74S182 look-ahead carry generators. It directly supports single-cycle add, subtract and multiply of single-precision floats, and supports multi-step sequences for double-precision operations. So that's a 24x24 multiply in 400 nanoseconds, if I have it right.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 1:09 am
Posts: 8538
Location: Southern California
Quote:
So that's a 24x24 multiply in 400 nanoseconds, if I have it right.

So with all the multiplications and divisions it takes to calculate a trig or log function, a single 20MHz 6502 would still be quite a bit faster (although for 16-bit, not 24-bit) with the look-up tables! :D :D :D :D

_________________
http://WilsonMinesCo.com/ lots of 6502 resources
The "second front page" is http://wilsonminesco.com/links.html .
What's an additional VIA among friends, anyhow?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 5:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8479
Location: Midwestern USA
GARTHWILSON wrote:
Quote:
So that's a 24x24 multiply in 400 nanoseconds, if I have it right.

So with all the multiplications and divisions it takes to calculate a trig or log function, a single 20MHz 6502 would still be quite a bit faster (although for 16-bit, not 24-bit) with the look-up tables! :D :D :D :D

And use far less power to boot! :lol: :lol: :lol: I won't even mention the huge number of person-hours it would have taken to build the monster, fix all the construction errors, determine that it will actually compute, etc.

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2012 6:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:28 pm
Posts: 10975
Location: England
Edit: there's an interesting graph and analysis towards the end of reliability of the machine. At 70 degrees the mean time to failure is about a day. At some lower but reasonable temperature it gets up to four days. That's reasonable for a very early experimental machine but seems limiting.

Don't forget you still need to build 256 processors and a routing network.

I think the flaw in the plan is that 24-bit lookup tables would be much larger. But it's a fair point that starting with a 20MHz cycle time is going to help... of course those lookup table memories also need to be fast.

As a practical point, building higher precision arithmetic out of smaller building blocks is the necessary missing step for Garth's approach. (On FPGA a 32x32 multiply is trivial to synthesise, although it might not be single-cycle.) The paper goes into some detail about producing double-precision results given a single-precision primitive.

(Reading further into the paper, the cycle time is a bit shorter than I said, but the full multiply operation including normalisation seems to take 3 cycles)

Edit: overall, it's a good read for a feasibility study and an insight into machine organisation and implementation choices.

Cheers
Ed


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: