Breaking News
News & Analysis

Google Ramps Up Chip Design

2/12/2014 02:08 PM EST
35 comments
NO RATINGS
Page 1 / 2 Next >
More Related Links
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 3 / 4   >   >>
GSMD
User Rank
Manager
Re: I'm hungry for details
GSMD   2/13/2014 4:24:36 AM
NO RATINGS
I enjoy reading his blog too! reading about hard core engineering is always enjoyable in a very deep sense.

GSMD
User Rank
Manager
Re: I'm hungry for details
GSMD   2/13/2014 4:24:35 AM
NO RATINGS
I enjoy reading his blog too! reading about hard core engineering is always enjoyable in a very deep sense.

rick merritt
User Rank
Author
Re: I'm hungry for details
rick merritt   2/13/2014 1:41:41 AM
NO RATINGS
@GSMD Dan Luu's blog is making my head spin!

GSMD
User Rank
Manager
Re: I'm hungry for details
GSMD   2/12/2014 11:05:11 PM
NO RATINGS
It is there in my post, danluu.com

frosty_the_snowman
User Rank
Rookie
Re: I'm hungry for details
frosty_the_snowman   2/12/2014 9:50:34 PM
NO RATINGS
please send url of blogger. thanks, -richard

markhahn0
User Rank
Rookie
processor in memory in network
markhahn0   2/12/2014 9:36:29 PM
NO RATINGS
If I were with Google, I wouldn't be satisfied with shaking up SDN, or tweaking out some minor mod of a conventional CPU node.  I think that's what's so tedious about all the coverage of FB's boring form-factor changes.

Google is in a position where they can look at fundamental changes in programming mode, in ways that conventional suppliers can't.  For instance, GPUs have demonstrated that there's a LOT of parallelism out there, in spite of the horrible programming model.  Google could be putting dram in-package.  They could find a nice uniform way to address large numbers of these nodes (sort of a merged network/dram fabric).  If you really go SDN, it doesn't make a lot of sense to stick with the artifacts of traditional ethernet designs (subnets, vlans, ISO layers).

People usually think of this "custom or not to go custom" question as hinging on how much of the conventional architecture can be jettisoned.  (ie, if your nodes have nothing but cpu, dram, flash and fabric, you sure don't need 8 ports of SATA or a 6-port USB3 controller.  but you probably do want some kind of management coprocessor)  But Google should be thinking about more fundamental change, not just subtractions...

Devashish Paul
User Rank
Apprentice
Re: I'm hungry for details
Devashish Paul   2/12/2014 8:35:09 PM
Rick, whether you are Google or Baidu, I can't see any benefit in just doing Vanilla processors that you can get from any ARM or x86 vendor. I'd imagine that you want to integrate CPU, GPU and fabric into a single low latency, highly integrated SoC. I'd imagine that something highly optimized for compute along the lines of what you'd get if you integrate Xeon + nVidea + fabric would be where you want to go to cram in a lot of compute at data center scale with low latency without the overhead of a lot of NICs etc and keep system level power down.  Trying squeeze down power and latency around what Intel gives you is probably not going to cut it.

GSMD
User Rank
Manager
Re: I would guess custom search engine
GSMD   2/12/2014 8:28:43 PM
NO RATINGS
It would be interesting in Google actually started making mobile SoCs and peddled them as ref parts optimized for Android. We can finally get stable, performance optimzed devices with bug-free codecs and stable browsers. Of course never going to happen since it makes no business sense.

In a  larger sense, the problem is not android fragmentation but proliferation of ARM variants. They are all pretty much the same (I am talking about variants using ARM hard macros) and the dversity does not buy you much. Lesser number of variants may help SW stability.

betajet
User Rank
CEO
I would guess custom search engine
betajet   2/12/2014 8:15:03 PM
NO RATINGS
There's no point in Google making consumer chips.  Allwinner and MediaTek can make such chips cheaper than Google.  It would be like Google making its own phones -- they're much better off setting the software standard and letting their partners compete against each other to drive the price down.

Besides, why does Google have Android?  So that people can get access to mobile advertising, because that's how Google makes money -- selling advertising.  And they target their advertising based on what you've searched for.  Search is the crown jewels, and it takes a phenomenal amount on computing power and electricity.

So here you have a well-defined highly-parallel problem.  Sounds like a perfect application for custom silicon.  Instead of interpreting search software on a general-purpose CPU, do it directly in hardware so that data isn't being copied redundantly, which is what really consumes the energy.  If custom silicon cuts the Google electric bill in half and doubles the performance of each data center, the silicon pays for itself pretty quickly.  And I'm just being conservative with that factor of 2.

JMO/YMMV

GSMD
User Rank
Manager
Re: I'm hungry for details
GSMD   2/12/2014 7:59:30 PM
NO RATINGS
One of their IC guys has a blog and talks about design issues. Came across it when I was looking for Chisel users (the new scala based HDL brom UCB, we use it in our open processor project). Blog is danluu.com. Used to design x86 processors earlier. Yiu may want to talk to him.

 

 

<<   <   Page 3 / 4   >   >>
Most Recent Comments
Steve Manley
 
engineers
 
Weapon
 
rick merritt
 
rick merritt
 
Loser99
 
Aeroengineer
 
Aeroengineer
 
Aeroengineer
Flash Poll
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
Join our online Radio Show on Friday 11th July starting at 2:00pm Eastern, when EETimes editor of all things fun and interesting, Max Maxfield, and embedded systems expert, Jack Ganssle, will debate as to just what is, and is not, and embedded system.
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week