>> How many Xeon transistors per clock tick? Any idea? I recall >> estimating .001 of neurons were firing at any given time (although >> I no longer recall how I reached that rough guesstimate.) And >> remember, the Xeon has a big speed factor.
Mark> The Xeon speed factor is just less than 1E7. Mark> Using your numbers, .001 of neurons is 1E7 to 1E10 if you meant Mark> percent and 1E9 to 1E12 otherwise. Mark> Also, you are treating synapses as binary bits with no memory Mark> (which many experiments have proved is not correct). All this I knew. But you didn't answer the interesting question, how many Xeon transistors are active per clock tick? Anybody out there know? >> Well, on this we differ. I can appreciate how you might think >> memory bandwidth was important for some tasks, although I don't, >> but I'm curious why you think its important for planning problems >> like Sokoban or Go, or a new planning game I present your AI on the >> fly, or whether you think whatever your big memory intensive >> approach is will solve those. Mark> All of those "planning" tasks require recognizing salient Mark> features from previous experiences. In the case of Sokoban or Mark> Go, this process may well be compiled enough that the memory Mark> bandwidth is unimportant at game time but, in those cases, the Mark> memory bandwidth is still required at compile time. Yes, but is this more than we have in machines? Its devising the compilation algorithms that's the bottleneck. We can build machines with adequate memory bandwidth-- if Moore's law holds for long, we will surpass humans-- but we will never get near the amount of processing power evolution put in to algorithm design. We may sidestep it and succeed anyway, or we may fail. ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
