<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Channel 9 Just Posted an Interview with Me on the Drive to Many-Core Processors</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/pathelland/archive/2008/11/11/channel-9-just-posted-an-interview-with-me-on-the-drive-to-many-core-processors.aspx</link><description>This was filmed at TechEd NA in Orlando last June. I received the link to the video today. It was a nice chat with Patrick Weikle about the inevitability of Many-Core Processors and how this will inevitably drive us to parallel computation. The link is</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>Channel 9 Just Posted an Interview with Me on the Drive to Many-Core Processors | Tmao Coders</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/pathelland/archive/2008/11/11/channel-9-just-posted-an-interview-with-me-on-the-drive-to-many-core-processors.aspx#9059992</link><pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:48:11 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9059992</guid><dc:creator>Channel 9 Just Posted an Interview with Me on the Drive to Many-Core Processors | Tmao Coders</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;PingBack from &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.tmao.info/channel-9-just-posted-an-interview-with-me-on-the-drive-to-many-core-processors/"&gt;http://www.tmao.info/channel-9-just-posted-an-interview-with-me-on-the-drive-to-many-core-processors/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: Channel 9 Just Posted an Interview with Me on the Drive to Many-Core Processors</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/pathelland/archive/2008/11/11/channel-9-just-posted-an-interview-with-me-on-the-drive-to-many-core-processors.aspx#9132658</link><pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 11:08:14 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9132658</guid><dc:creator>technogeist</dc:creator><description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The renowned physicist Richard Feynman, covered reversible computation in his book The Physics of Computation, whereby power is preserved rather than dumped as heat. Whatever happened to that line of research?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As for the failure rate problem, I can forsee a time when there will have to be some form of transaction-bound hardware support, so that if a core should fail, then the failed transaction it was given can be routed to another core.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Wouldn't it be worth looking at abstracting away the current x86 architecture into a sort of abstraction layer/hypervisor, that sits atop much simpler computing elements, much like massiivly parallel supercomputers?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The memory could then be tightly-coupled, maybe reducing the need for switching networks and all the overheads.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;If you based it on a very familiar 'REAL MACHINE', then you have less to do worry about proving that the hardware works and get on with creating and testing the translators instead.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Just thought I should put my thoughts 'out there' to see if any of this is feasible. :)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Technogeist.&lt;/P&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>