They are exactly as open as they seem to be - they're up front about this, and it's there because it is the exception (literally everything else they've been asked for they are opening up). The source this particular question is talking about is that of the processor itself, i.e. like the OR1200 or openMSP430 on OpenCores. That is only useful to hardware developers (like me), who could use it to more easily (i.e. simply copy) make their own compatible processor chips. For board designers it's the datasheets and board design files that matter (which they will publish), and for software developers the architecture documents (already published) and software development tools (already free, will be published in the SDK). They are at least as open as any chip producer I've heard of.
Originally Posted by TAXI
As for the "much smaller" quote, that's simply a missing word. It should read "much smaller than high end CPUs and GPUs", as is clear if you include the context of the sentence. They also misspelled envelope in the same paragraph, suggesting a bit of a rush job.
Thanks for clarification, I'm not a native english speaker. :)
Originally Posted by YannV
But I still think they used the term GPU for a reason. As far as I see the primary CPU is the Zynq-7010 Dual-core ARM A9 so the epiphany chip could be used for (small) GPU tasks. I mean the parallelism of it speaks for itself.
SGI Onyx was sold as a "supercomputer"
Originally Posted by chuckula
The promotional materials still exist
Does that mean it's not a "supercomputer" today? When did the promotional materials pass from truth to non-truth?
Today any android device will blow its doors off
YOU are the one who thinks "Supercomputer" has some magical mysterious meaning that you apparently refuse to share with the rest of us.
Or perhaps you are the ultimate arbitrator of the english language and you are here to correct all our speling errors and grammar misteaks.