On 07/15/2010 11:23 AM, Michael Miles wrote: > On 07/15/2010 12:18 AM, JD wrote: >> On 07/14/2010 11:41 PM, mike cloaked wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 5:27 AM, john wendel<jwendel10@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Agreed that an OS kernel hasn't much use for a GPU. But it should be >>>> easy to add a small general purpose CPU (ARM or Intel Atom) and a couple >>>> of usb ports to the card and move X completely to the video card. Just >>>> like a remote X server only in the same box. >>>> >>>> I really think the OP was referring to having user mode code take >>>> advantage of the high processing power of modern GPUs. It works now, but >>>> could be improved if the OS contained specialized scheduling support for >>>> these kinds of jobs. >>>> >>> I understand that the GPU has no page faults, and is missing many of >>> what we regard as the essential functions of a normal processor? Also >>> getting large amounts of data in or out of the GPU is slow - it is >>> fast partly because there is a lot less overhead compared to a single >>> processor and partly from the advantage of multiple cores. I was >>> speaking to someone who has been working with GPU processing for >>> several years and was skeptical about getting code to run reliably >>> across different GPUs... and of course CUDA is vendor specific as fa >>> as I know? So speed gain is dependent on the kind of processing needed >>> but if anything goes wrong then it can easily crash the system. >>> >>> Anyone had any experience with using the GPU could perhaps comment? >>> >> Sorry to barge in this late into this thread.... >> Was the originator of the thread interested in the kernel >> to use the gpu for floating point operations or integer >> operations? >> If floating point, the x86 (among others) already has an >> integrated fpu, and the integer logic is already in the cpu (or alu). >> So I do not understand what sort of computations the originator >> of the thread would like to see done on the gpu. >> >> jd >> > The other OS's Mac and Windows are using the GPU in its video > conversion programs. > The newer programs will have selections to activate the GPU for computation. > > I have been using the GPU for scientific computation for quite a while now. > Seti@home is very much a hobby and it takes samples from the areciebo > telescope and analyse data looking for "You guessed it, ET" > It will crunch numbers very fast compared to a normal CPU. > > I bench my Phenom 2 965 at 3 gflops/cpu while the GPU will be doing 54 > Gflops . > > I have a slow video card Nvidia 9400GT. The bigger ones will go right up > to a full teraflop. > That kind of speed would be well accepted if an OS would use it > generally or software that is written for Video conversion to use it > greatly reducing time. > > > That's what I would like to see, more focus on speeding up video > conversion especially with HD video and it seems that the GPU is a very > inexpensive way to add a lot of power to your machines A teraflop?? WHoa! Can the PCI bus really feed the gpu with an instruction stream that will yield that performance? I mean most pc's out there are in people's homes still pci (33 or 66 MHz bus). Relatively, fewer are on pci x16 which is a much faster bus. Thanks for your feedback. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
