> Or that the DSP vendors prices reflect their costs, in which case the
> obvious solution is to ditch the DSP and move the DSP functions onto
> the main CPU.
Right now Intel has put extra instructions that were previously found
mostly in DSPs in their PIII.
This makes for a standard which is good, but I'm pretty sure it's covered
in copyrights and trademarks, which is bad for competition in CPU vendor
land.
Also, using one CPU with a lot of voodoo built in will make it
more expensive to manufacture then a more simple CPU with dedictated other
logic to do specialized things.
It's like an MPV, you can't make a car that can ship 12 kids, drive up a
sandy road with a 40 degree slope and drives 200 MPh with a fuel
consumption that will make the entire middle east bankrupt.
There wil always be a compromise for what is handy, affordable and easy to
implemen etc.
Things being what they are, I personally prefer to have some form of
variety, I don't need something that can calculate 32 lightsources and do
bumpmapping to write email, it's a waste of money.
Then again, this is my opinion, the market will decide in the end what
will be manufactured.
--
Homme R. Bitter
There are three ways to get something done: (1) Do it yourself.
(2) Hire someone to do it for you. (3) Forbid your kids to do it.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/