- Joined
- Sep 7, 2003
I had an idea, let me know if it's silly.
It's like wayy back when they had a special math processor in the computers.
We're always saying this core is better for this, and this other core is better for that.
Some things benefit from a long pipeline, while others benefit from a shorter one. Why not have one of each one a processor? I don't know processors enough to know if that's possible or not.
So is it possible to sort the work and be able to tell if it'd be better on this one or that one? Or do they just take what they get, and figure out what to do with it when it gets there?
Intel already has the best of both worlds with the P4 and the P-M. If they were able to put both together, you could have the best processor for the job and only invest in one processor. Not to mention an overall boost in available power.
I figure this is too advanced for a processor, and goes against the way that they work. It's a good idea at 4:30 AM though!
It's like wayy back when they had a special math processor in the computers.
We're always saying this core is better for this, and this other core is better for that.
Some things benefit from a long pipeline, while others benefit from a shorter one. Why not have one of each one a processor? I don't know processors enough to know if that's possible or not.
So is it possible to sort the work and be able to tell if it'd be better on this one or that one? Or do they just take what they get, and figure out what to do with it when it gets there?
Intel already has the best of both worlds with the P4 and the P-M. If they were able to put both together, you could have the best processor for the job and only invest in one processor. Not to mention an overall boost in available power.
I figure this is too advanced for a processor, and goes against the way that they work. It's a good idea at 4:30 AM though!