Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Serial computer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by DavidCary in topic Are massively parallel computers serial?

Category

[edit]

Hsould there be a category for Serial Computers? Several of the mentioned system do not state they a serial machines.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 20:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Sounds like a good idea to me. I created Category:Serial computers. --Jhertel (talk) 23:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Are massively parallel computers serial?

[edit]

Serial computers were typically implemented as a cost or complexity-saving measure. In contrast, Massively parallel computers are high-cost machines with performance as their main goal. Serial computers are characterized by running a large data word serially, bit-by-bit, through a single-bit ALU element. The cited Goodyear MPP is not a bit-serial computer even though it used single bit computing elements. It is really a SIMD computer as 16,384 single bit elements are working on different parts of the data simultaneously. Likewise the Connection Machine CM-1 and CM-2 are described in their articles as SIMD, not bit-serial. I suggest removing all the cited examples of massively parallel computers from the serial computer article. They are two unrelated technologies.

-- (unsigned) 021-04-09T15:46:43‎ RastaKins

Yes, I completely agree that bit-serial computers are characterized by running each bit of a number one at a time through a single-bit ALU element, typically as a cost-saving or complexity-saving measure. I also agree that the Goodyear MPP and the Thinking Machines CM-1 and CM-2 are SIMD computers with thousands of single-bit ALUs each working on *different* numbers simultaneously ("in parallel").
Those don't seem contradictory to me.
A SIMD may operate on thousands of *different* numbers simultaneously, but if it (or in general any of the other options in Flynn's taxonomy) processes all the bits of any one N-bit number all at the same time, then I call it a parallel SIMD (or in general a parallel CPU) and so doesn't belong in this article. Today a parallel SIMD typically has a bunch of monolithic N-bit ALUs. Some early parallel SIMDs used a bunch of single-bit ALUs -- N separate single-bit ALUs for each number, wired up to process all the bits of a number at once (in parallel) as a bit-slice design -- I agree that even those SIMD machines don't belong in this article.
If a SIMD (or in general any of the other options in Flynn's taxonomy) processes each number with only one single single-bit ALU (one bit at a time), then I call it a bit-serial SIMD (or in general a bit-serial CPU), which is one kind of bit-serial computer.
Yes, *some* massively parallel computers -- such as the MPP and CM-1 and CM-2 -- are bit-serial.
The MPP and other bit-serial machines belong in this article -- even though it has thousands of single-bit ALUs and so can processes thousands of separate numbers "in parallel". --DavidCary (talk) 22:35, 21 May 2025 (UTC)Reply