Patrick Chase (patrickjchase.delete@this.gmail.com) on July 2, 2013 10:03 am wrote:
> anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on July 2, 2013 7:13 am wrote in reference to GPUs:
> > Not due to this high level stuff, because the hardware itself is more efficient.
>
> No, it is not. It's simply optimized to do different things.

I'm talking about raw ability to do floating point operations.

> A CPU is much
> more efficient than a GPU on many "irregular" and/or iterative workloads.
>
> > In terms of hardware, I don't know exactly.
>
> Wow, that doesn't seem to prevent you from having strong opinions on the topic.

The numbers I use a data from the green 500 list. I have the opinion that GPUs and vector oriented architectures are more efficient than short-SIMD GP CPUs, for this workload.

>
> You and Etienne are both off base, but Etienne is at least on the right path. If you're
> actually interested in learning then take a look through this presentation:
>
> http://s08.idav.ucdavis.edu/fatahalian-gpu-architecture.pdf‎
>
> It's fairly dated (i.e. the number are hilariously outdated
> some cases) but the concepts are presented correctly.

This says nothing about whether GPU design will be more efficient than CPU design.