Message-Id: Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" Organization: INTI To: "Anthony.Appleyard" , djgpp AT delorie DOT com Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 15:48:24 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Interrupts (Hardware) > Anthony.Appleyard wrote: > > Sorry to be off-topic, but that looks like the sort of operation where > > genuine parallel processing would be useful. E.g. about 20 years ago I heard > > of a computer called the `Connection Machine', which acted somewhat like > > 0x10000 Commodore Pets serial-numbered from 0 to 0xffff all sharing one > > control unit; each was linked to the 16 others whose serial numbers had one > > bit different. So it could do the same thing to up to 0x10000 elements of an > > array at once. When will something like that be available in PC's? > > Chris Croughton replied:- > > That sounds like the Transputer idea. > > It is not. One Transputer is like one ordinary computer that does one thing > at a time like a PC, as far as I know. The Connection Machine ran at more or > less Commodore Pet cycle speed, but could operate on up to 0x10000 values at > once. It had one common RAM and controller. It was intended to be used with an > ordinary serial-type computer acting as its front-end. The transputer boards that I saw uses ARRAYs of trasputers (that's the use of these chips) so each chip can process a thing in parallel with the rest. The good part of the trasputers is the optimized communication, simple chips can use 20 Mb and can be communicated with 4 chips (to create the array). So the idea is parallel execution. SET ------------------------------------ 0 -------------------------------- Visit my home page: http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552 Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer) Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA TE: +(541) 759 0013