Talk:Manycore processing unit

article name

Actually, nobody I know uses the term "manycore processing unit". The class of device that is described in this article is a type of network processor. Dyl 14:27, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this article should be moved to a better name. It seems odd to define the phrase "many core processing unit" in a way that excludes the Kilocore. Surely there is a better name or phrase for the more specific things this article talks about. --75.19.73.101 16:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

scale reference

Where does the statement "Current software architectures can scale on current multicore architectures to about eight processors but have poor ability to scale beyond that number" come from? Is there something to back this up? 192.91.147.34 10:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page is almost 100% original "research" and not correct

The fact that Intel, AMD and Microsoft are conducting Manycore research proves that Manycore is not relegated to embedded markets only. That also means network accelerators aren't part and parcel of Manycore.
The claims about current programming paradigms don't work for more than 8 cores is false. There is no cliff at 8 just as there's no cliff at 4 cores nor at 2 cores.
Whoever wrote this article is only looking at the last 10 years or so of computing history. The articles is ignoring the long history of multiprocessing that has existed since the almost the dawn of computing.
What this article is trying to describe is a sub-class of network processor. But the term "Manycore" is a larger area of research than that.

In a few weeks, I'm going to cut this article to just a few sentences - saying Manycore is a class of systems where there are more than a handful of processor cores within a single piece of silicon. Dyl (talk) 19:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Many core'

It's a word used by amongst others Nvidia marketing teams, and Intel for their Larrabee chip. It does the same job as 'multi core' as a term, I don't see why it needs its own article. --Joffeloff (talk) 16:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. --Joffeloff (talk) 23:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Too liquid'

I honestly do not think this article is worth keeping as it is too liquid, the computing processors will change next year, we will see 8 cores as a standard in desktops and laptops, then soon 16 and what happens this article and its definition changes. Thus it is not a solidly defined thing and thus does not fit high quality. Nor is it verifiable that "manycore" is a valid word. I do not mean to hurt the posters feeling, thank you for your contribution, we hope you will get this article up to quality requirements. Alin0Steglinski (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 07:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Wikiproject Computing

I have removed the WikiProject tag, as this article is either a redirect or deleted. If you oppose, please restore the tag. Thank you, fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 15:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]