Content deleted Content added
Scope creep (talk | contribs) Comment |
Scope creep (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
Line 18:
*'''Oppose''' - I'm not sure adding "Google" aids the article in any way. Right now there isn't a need for further specificity in the title (IMO). [[User:Dbsseven|Dbsseven]] ([[User talk:Dbsseven|talk]]) 17:25, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I added a [[WP:PAID]] disclosure request to the user, [[User talk:2.92.113.239]], because I think it is push to get some free advertising on the part of Google, re: this article. I'm not saying generalize it, I'm looking to add as much detail as possible. This is one processor of class of processors, that should be described by their architecture and api, not by name. I don't like the [[AI accelerator]] article, it is essentially a pamphlet offering free advertising. [[User:Dbsseven|Dbsseven]], Kudos to yourself, I see you have tried to smarten it up a bit, but the article is a first cut, and I think it is rank. Statement like this, (in this article) which are almost fancruft: ''Google stated the first generation TPU design was memory bandwidth limited'', instead of ''the first generation TPU design was memory bandwidth limited''.The first violates [[WP:NOTAVERTISING]]. The second doesn't. The point i'm trying is make is. It is new field, and lots of new disruptive designs are coming out, and everybody is trying to find what works, but processor design follows an ethos, a design language, they come of the uni's after decades of research, so I know for a fact there is other ultra high speed, low precision FPU processors out there. This article is about the TPU, but it should have been a architecture articles describing ultra high speed, high bandwidth, low precision FPU processors, with the TPU an example, amongst several others, including a good descritpion of the architecture. [[User:Scope creep|scope_creep]] ([[User talk:Scope creep|talk]]) 18:21, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
| |||