|
|
|
|
|
|
by gwern
5782 days ago
|
|
|
Domain-specific chips is a cyclical trend. They come and go; at some times they have advantages, and at others they don't. (Remember Lisp machines? Good initially but vastly outperformed by the end of their lifespan.) See for example the classic 'wheel of reincarnation' paper on graphics: http://cva.stanford.edu/classes/cs99s/papers/myer-sutherland... The fundamental problem as I see it is that any domain-specific chip will receive a tiny fraction of R&D and economies of scale and amortization that a general purpose one will, and so its advantage is only temporary. As long as Moore's law is operating, this will be true. |
|
|
> In practice replacing digital computers with an alternative computing paradigm is a risky proposition. Alternative computing architectures, such as parallel digital computers have not tended to be commercially viable, because Moore’s Law has consistently enabled conventional von Neumann architectures to render alternatives unnecessary. Besides Moore’s Law, digital computing also benefits from mature tools and expertise for optimizing performance at all levels of the system: process technology, fundamental circuits, layout and algorithms. Many engineers are simultaneously working to improve every aspect of digital technology, while alternative technologies like analog computing do not have the same kind of industry juggernaut pushing them forward.