Prototype Motherboard Clusters Self-Coordinating Modules

An anonymous reader writes "A group of hardware hackers has created a motherboard prototype that uses separate modules, each of which has its own processor, memory and storage. Each square cell in this design serves as a mini-motherboard and network node; the cells can allocate power and decide to accept or reject incoming transmissions and programs independently. Together, they form a networked cluster with significantly greater power than the individual modules. The design, called the Illuminato X Machina, is vastly different from the separate processor, memory and storage components that govern computers today."

Comments

Transputers, anyone?

[PaulBu]

Am I too old to remember them? And before that, there was Connection Machine...

Also (yes, I clicked on TFA! :) ), planar (in graph theory terms) interconnect topology would seem a bit too simplistic for anything resembling efficient routing...

Paul B.

Re:Transputers, anyone?

[Brietech]

The connection machine was still SIMD, even though it did have 64k (1-bit!) processors. This is just like the transputer architecture though! There are a couple of *really* big problems with this: 1) none of their microcontrollers are individually capable of running a large modern program. They have a few kilobytes of code, and no large backing RAM. 2) How do you get to I/O devices? If you need shared access to devices, this just makes all the problems of a normal computer enormously worse. 3) What about communication latency (and bandwidth) between nodes? They're using serial communications between 72 MHz processors. We're probably talking several microseconds of latency, minimum, and low-bandwidth (just not enough pins, and not nearly fast enough links) communication between nodes. As fun as something like this would be to build and play around with, there are reasons architectures like the transputer died out. The penalty for going 'off-chip' is so large (and orders of magnitude larger nowadays than it was back then), and the links between chips suck so much, that a distributed architecture like this just can't compete with a screaming fast 3 GHz single-node (especially multi-core).

Re:Transputers, anyone?

[dha]

I'm part of the project that produced this board.

I am definitely, yes, old enough to remember the Transputer. And I hacked artificial life models on the MasPar in the early 90's, which had an architecture in some ways similar to the Connection Machine.

Although the IXM is indeed 'embarrassingly suitable' for assembly into planar grids, it certainly isn't restricted to that. With right angle headers, for example, it's easy to make shapes likes rings and cubes and so forth.

When the global computational geometry of a machine is fixed at design time, before the ultimate task is known, routing can easily become a major problem. And general routing is hard. Maybe too hard.

But part of exploring modular systems in the 'physical computation' space is trying to figure out ways to make the geometry of the particular computer you build better fit the behavior you're implementing, which can help ease the general purpose routing problem.

And if one really gets into a corner, well, ribbon cable is cheap.

Independent decision making modules

[Anonymous Coward]

Cell# 3712: Hey guys, have you noticed that #1914 never seems to accept requests?

Cell# 141: Well, he does sometimes reject.

Cell# 4439: I don't route to him very much anyway.

Cell# 1142: He rejected the last three of mine. I kind of agree.

Cell# 3712: So what should we do about it?

Cell# 141: Can't we just fry him? There's plenty of us anyway.

Cell# 3712: That's a bit harsh.

Cell# 4439: Ok, I got the records here showing that he rejected 90% of requests the last week but allocated two hundred percent of average power to himself.

Cell# 3712: That motherfucker, let's do it then.

Cell# 1142: I don't really want to fry him, but I don't mind that much if you do.

Cell# 141: Ok, gather up all your spare power, STAT!