Why can't we add additional CPU's to PC's or laptops through USB 3.0 or PCI-E?

Why can't we add additional CPU's to PC's or laptops through USB 3.0 or PCI-E?

Surely those are fast enough now?

Attached: USB types.png (1920x1080, 634.61K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=tOeketsa96I
twitter.com/AnonBabble

high latency
reliance on a host CPU to poll the USB chip (which wouldn't make the add-on processor much of a "central" processing unit)

install termux on your phone, everytime you want to use ffmpeg, transfer the video to your phone, use termux there, then transfer the file back to your PC

USB has worse latency than the 40+ year old parallel port.

Your image is missing Firewire. 1394? I have a couple cards we used for scuba videos back in the day.

firewire is not USB

USB 1.0 is all you need

High end RAM for current mainstream systems is 10x faster than the fastest plug and play bus.
Also parallel access is a necessary thing that something like a 4-pipe USB just can't do adequately. CPUs work with data payloads in the kilobit size and require internal caches 5-10x faster than RAM.
Same reason AMD got a huge boost from merging two CCXs into one CCD instead of needing crosstalk via the IF.

Daisy Chaining is a thing, but mostly for bitcoining gpus and servers.

But you can't daisy chain a usb.
Any device with additional input ports basically has a usb hub inside.

Thunderbolt is though?
>hurr durr if it fits I shits

you can
It's possible to design a device that pretends to be anything you want, linking to a remote device "somewhere else"
latency is your problem, but if you're considering it, you probably don't care
youtube.com/watch?v=tOeketsa96I

There's also IBM's POWER 10, which features OpenCAPI and OMI, which allows motherboards to share resources with each other directly.
Imagine having a rack that has like 1PB of RAM right next to a bunch of racks that have practically no RAM but a shitload of CPUs, and RAM from the big pool can be dynamically allocated to each CPU
That's the level of flexibility we're going to see in the datacenter

>why isn't it in my motherboard
stop being poor

there's even now usb4 in the way

You will need local ram, local interrupts, local this, local that at a point the "CPU box" is a computer, and you're better off just having it in a network at this point.

We have already done this for literally decades. It's called a distributed system.

For the very same reason people don't make multhreaded apps.

Thunderbolt 2 is a subset of 3 which is an optional subset of USB 4v1 so yes, thunderbolt is a part of USB

where is USB4?

doa

>Thunderbolt 2 is a subset of 3
lol

They do though. It's hell to debug but it doesn't hang when it's doing shit in the background.