What's stopping us?
What's stopping us?
There used to be big and heavy parts... (such as hard disks and other elements). Now, many are packed into a small space. But only a few processors fit in this new design. Why not thousands? What prevents us from doing more?
Your creativity or funds. In a world where anyone can purchase a card with 16,384 cores and install it on their desktop PC, what's holding you back?
Of course, more cores only assist with tasks that can be done in parallel. That's why most choose fewer CPU cores that run faster.
Yes, generally you can use many CPU cores in one processor if you have sufficient funds, though it won't improve gaming performance. You still require a certain number of high clock cores, which Intel's hybrid method provides. This setup combines a standard high-end fast CPU with additional small cores to handle tasks needing multiple cores. Similar to Ryzen, you may need to disable one CCX or limit games to a single core for optimal results. View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBxtS9BpVWs
Physics, studies, understanding, resources. This explains why we skipped straight from the Sopwith Camel to the F-22 Raptor.
Based on how you define a "processor," GPUs are already present. For instance, the RTX 4090 contains 16,384 processing units. The issue remains, GPUs excel only with well-structured programs, which most regular users don’t have the ability to create or run. This applies even when considering our desire for more advanced features in general-purpose processors. We might be able to cram thousands of such processors into one device if we used older 8-bit or early 16-bit CPU cores from the past.