[EAR] > You've got a point... Well, really, they do -- but they had a much more compelling point when the Cold War came with an unlimited budget. > but I don't think it's really economical to build that kind of > hardware into general-purpose processors. Economical? The marginal cost of adding even nutso new features in silicon now for mass-market chips is pretty close to zero. Indeed, if you're in the speech recog or 3D imaging games (i.e., things that still tax a PC), Intel comes around *begging* for new ideas to use up all their chip real estate. The only one I recall them turning down was a request from Dragon's founder to add an instruction that, given x and y, returned log(exp(x)+exp(y)). They were skeptical, and turned out even *we* didn't need it <wink>. > You end up with a camel. You know, a horse designed by committee? Yup! But that's the camel Intel rides to the bank, so it will probably grow more humps, on which to hang more bags of gold.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4