Hacker News Reader

Comment by wyldfire | Hacker News Reader

Well, maybe. It would certainly improve. But you probaly still won't get anywhere near the GDDR5(etc) speeds from those memory accesses. Depending on the memory access pattern it might end up dropping down significantly. But you might still end up considering it "dead slow."

View on HN

I think the main advantage is the GPU doesn't have to go through the CPU to get data.

i.e. the transaction goes from this: GPU -> CPU -> HDD -> GPU

to this: GPU -> HDD -> GPU

Sure, that part was clear. But the difference between "quite fast" for this application and "dead slow" might be that hundreds of GB/s with GDDRx/HBM is so much faster than anything else. Even the M.2 SSD onboard is probably only ~5GB/s. So if the walk pattern is something that is predictable enough by the GPU (usually pretty linear, but some memory features have 2d/3d locality), then you could crunch those numbers as fast as the SSD could deliver them. Now it becomes a question of how much computation/kernel time can you spend on a chunk of data?

Not with an NGFF SSD. You can have direct memory access to one. That said, internal GPU bus might or might not be faster than PCIe.

Oh and the fact that nobody write a specialised enough driver for a GPU to use this.

On a CPU you'd have the same bottlenecks unless you fit the entire dataset in memory (which, admittedly is a possibility). Assuming you can't get the full dataset in memory, apples-to-apples you should be able to see a significant speedup on the GPU over the CPU. Previously this was not the case for large datasets.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com