• pragmaOnce@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago
    1. GPUs predate 1995
    2. They solve a set of problems different from those handled by cpu’s
    3. The existence of GPUs wouldnt ‘curb the growth’ of the other processors
    4. The government would be best positioned to benefit from that rapid growth, since it is a state level actor that can regulate the use and acquisition of technologies
    5. GPUs have also developed very quickly since their advent.

    So like the previous comment mentions - No.

    • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      . 6. GPUs were created because they do more math than a CPU can, if the workload fits into their constraints. They’re basically just a bunch of smaller cores (with less instructions) bunched into groups that are managed by one control unit for several cores to allow you to do more shit in less space with less power.

      • pragmaOnce@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I work on networking for distributed rendering for a major cloud provider- very familiar with gpu architecture and use-cases :)

        Saying they do more math is a bit tricky. The CPU does crazy types of very complicated math and accomplishes tasks we still have a hard time offloading to GPUs.

        I agree with the rest of your statement as a good explanation for why GPUs can do faster and more efficient batch processing of the workloads that can be fit to the SIMD set up we use for most modern GPUs (ignoring general purpose gpu and fancier compute options)

        • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          CPUs can definitely do more variety.

          My point was just that the whole purpose of them is that they do a better job at the embarrassingly parallel operations they’re made for. Obviously architectures evolve over time, and the exact details change, but if you were attempting to stifle growth, something that adds significant capability to user’s machines (and also without actually compromising the capability of the actual CPU, for the most part) doesn’t seem like it would help you.

          • pragmaOnce@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Ah, yes - exactly! The article is also fully unrelated from OPs title - really weird post all around.