• First AI laptops, now AI single-boarders [Budget, Budget, ..] (Re: NPUs

    From Mild Shock@3:633/10 to All on Wed Aug 26 00:08:45 2026
    Subject: First AI laptops, now AI single-boarders [Budget, Budget, ..] (Re: NPUs doing 2d chess comms (Manhattan Distance or L1 Norm))

    Hi,

    Ok, that was quick. While my AI Laptops were
    around > 1000 CHF. The Mac Neo was around
    500 CHF. So we went already form AI Laptop

    to AI Notebook in a few months. Now Aduino
    is playing pionier, having a CPU with a NPU
    on board, some Qualcomm thingy.

    New Arduino Ventuno Q: Better than Raspberry Pi? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQS_xWsU00I

    The specs:

    Octa-core ARM Cortex CPU
    Adreno GPU and Hexagon AI processor (up to 40 TOPS)
    16GB LPDDR5 RAM and 64GB eMMC storage
    M.2 slot for NVMe SSD expansion

    The cost is around 300 CHF.

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    Looking at the floor plan of a NPU:

    Getting peak TOPS on a Ryzen AI 7 350 NPU https://destevez.net/2026/05/getting-peak-tops-on-a-ryzen-ai-7-350-npu/

    It seems to me comms between tiles takes
    at least Manhattan Distance or L1 Norm time,
    if there is no comms congestion

    But how does a packet travel? This way:

    +----E
    |
    |
    S

    Or this way, from start S to end E:

    ˙˙ +-E
    ˙ +
    ˙+
    S

    And what does the chip do if there is
    traffic congestion? Some papers are
    here, possibly an old problem giving

    that processor "cubes" are nothing new.
    But a "cube" would be 3D and not 2D.
    This paper is old from 2007 or so:

    Routing Algorithms for 2D NoC Architectures http://cva.stanford.edu/classes/ee382c/research/2DRouting.pdf

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    Tablets and phone are more annoying to
    use with WebGPU. The usual browsers don't
    have a Chrome DevTools panel integrated,

    so that one could do JavaScript Debugging
    directly on the device. Instead one has to
    use a desktop machine, and connect the

    device via UBS-C , and start a Chrome
    Browser there . And then start a Chrome
    DevTools panel alone, that is pair with

    the device, via UBS-C cable. So this way
    I already see where it crashes on the
    tablets and phone:

    await output.mapAsync(GPUMapMode.READ)
    Unhandled Promise Rejection: OperationError

    The above is the error that one can re-produce
    already here with this test:

    11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
    https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget

    Not sure what exactly happens. Maybe
    a form of timeout or device lost, that the
    primitive HTML / JavaScript doesn't handle

    gracefully yet. Maybe redimensioning the
    test, so that it consumes less time would
    help. Who knows? Will see. For production

    use of a GPU integration I have to anyway
    provide work slicing it seems.

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    He uses FIFO, and DMA and Noc:

    Getting peak TOPS on a Ryzen AI 7 350 NPU
    https://destevez.net/2026/05/getting-peak-tops-on-a-ryzen-ai-7-350-npu/

    But lets say whether its FIFO or FILO
    isn't so important his used cases are,
    what is now found in my library(furryhaze)

    for GPU, namely the very basic:

    /**
    ˙˙* test_gpu_comp_start(W, K): internal only
    ˙˙* The predicate succeeds. As a side effect it
    ˙˙* starts the ă-WAM W with K warps.
    ˙˙*/
    function test_gpu_comp_start(args)

    /**
    ˙˙* test_gpu_comp_join(W, P): internal only
    ˙˙* The predicate succeeds in P with a new promise
    ˙˙* that waits for the ă-WAM W to finish.
    ˙˙*/
    function test_gpu_comp_join(args)

    A GPU interface, via the command processor
    for example of WebGPU, does the above
    synchronization for you.

    In the NPU example he does everything
    low level, with Python IRON an stuff:

    "Since the main way to achieve synchronization
    within the IRON framework is by doing data
    movement with object FIFOs, I?m sending a
    dummy uint32 value as some sort of
    synchronization token.

    Waiting for all the kernels to finish is
    trickier. The object FIFOs support a join
    pattern in which an object FIFO consumes an
    object from each of multiple object FIFOs,
    concatenates these objects and produces the
    concatenated object as a result.

    Etc.."

    Getting peak TOPS on a Ryzen AI 7 350 NPU
    https://destevez.net/2026/05/getting-peak-tops-on-a-ryzen-ai-7-350-npu/

    So Daniel Est‚vez Scientific & Technical
    Amateur Radio, gives a nice glimpse into an
    NPU, I have not yet publicitly released

    my library(furryhaze), since its still in
    testing. Maybe take another week or so,
    still I have ironed out all corners,

    for example the new gpu_comp_start and
    gpu_comp_join works fine on may desktop
    AI laptops, but I have still a bug on

    my iPad AI tablet, on the Redmi AI phone,
    also chokes on a test case.

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    This was archived on Jul 9, 2026:

    11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
    https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget

    Still, Jul 29, Rossy Boy halucinates accusations:

    Ross Finlayson schrieb:
    .. bla bla goto bla bla ..

    Stupid gangster:˙ teamsters are a union.

    In the trades, not the steals, ....

    Woa! Thats now 20 days of brain desease,
    and not understanding the meaning and implications.
    Even not understand pi-WAM has Hack VM backend.

    But its all opensource. Bravo Rossy Boy, you are
    champion in brainlessness and lazyness of
    a idiot usenet troll.

    Bye

    Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson schrieb:
    On 28/07/2026 2:43 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Hello, here I'll post some design notes and a panel discussion
    with some
    chat-bots about making some sense of the "vector-wide scalar word" >>>>>> and "character machines", on commodity hardware about ubiquitous
    operations.


    It's considered at least tangentially relevant to comp.lang.c and
    comp.lang.c++ because for example text is ubiquitous and the targets >>>>>> would be low-level, while the higher-level languages would have a
    same sort of patternry, and for example that libc and cstdlib are
    standard, and as with regards to POSIX and Unicode and so on.

    Please feel free to excuse or ignore, or comment as freely.

    Thanks for reading.


    Are you generating all of your code via LLMs?˙ Rest assured,
    the LLM generated code will have subtle and sometimes not so subtle
    bugs.


    Happy bughunting!






    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From Mild Shock@3:633/10 to All on Mon Aug 31 18:01:18 2026
    Subject: Food for thought: ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog (Was: First AI laptops, now AI single-boarders [Budget, Budget, ..])

    Hi,

    I miss an ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog, a profile
    that can run on small embedded devices, and only
    single threaded. Like Python can do for example.

    I deleted my previous post, since it drifted into
    high performance computing. It was a reaction of
    mine, to these results and how they were viewed.

    Web Prolog result:

    100,000 4.749 s

    I get this here:

    /* 100'000 iterations */
    ?- between(1,3,_), time(ping_pong), fail; true.
    % Zeit 97.020 ms, Benutzer 2 %, Lips 735 k
    % Zeit 95.040 ms, Benutzer 1 %, Lips 1057 k
    % Zeit 98.740 ms, Benutzer 1 %, Lips 974 k
    true.

    But the results have a few drawbacks. They use a highly
    specialized ă-WAM Prolog subset and a highly specialized
    Hack VM backend. Also the ping pong code was optimized.

    So I guess this high performance view is too specifiec
    for the actor model. So to get a more general comparison,
    I tried something else. I used a Python implemented Prolog

    and a Python asyncio.Future implemented one element
    channels, the later equals SWI-Prolog queues with max_size=1.
    Finally I used the classical ping pong. Now with PyPy as the Python

    runtime the results are, 6x times faster than the shared database
    on a SWI-Prolog server provided by Torbj”rn Lager. Difficult
    to judge maybe my machine is just 6x times faster? One could

    install PyPy, download Dogelog Player and run it on the server:

    ?- between(1,3,_), time(ping_pong(100000)), fail; true.
    % Time 812.000 ms, User 54 %, Lips 5977 k
    % Time 703.000 ms, User 53 %, Lips 6915 k
    % Time 766.000 ms, User 64 %, Lips 5339 k
    true.

    But this makes me ask, where would one see using for
    example SWI-Prolog Engines for the actor model, so that it
    becomes competitive to asyncio.Future? Any idea how to do it?

    I guess asyncio.Future only uses a micro queue or something.
    This would give the ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog, a profile
    that can run on small embedded devices single threaded.

    The opposite of high preformance computing (HPC).

    Bye

    See also:

    https://trinity.elfenbenstornet.se/

    P.S.: Here the source code, first what was used for validation:

    classic ping pong with channels and with logging
    And the validation output:

    log of running N=3
    And what was used for benchmarking:

    classic ping pong with channels and without logging

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    Ok, that was quick. While my AI Laptops were
    around > 1000 CHF. The Mac Neo was around
    500 CHF. So we went already form AI Laptop

    to AI Notebook in a few months. Now Aduino
    is playing pionier, having a CPU with a NPU
    on board, some Qualcomm thingy.

    New Arduino Ventuno Q: Better than Raspberry Pi? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQS_xWsU00I

    The specs:

    Octa-core ARM Cortex CPU
    Adreno GPU and Hexagon AI processor (up to 40 TOPS)
    16GB LPDDR5 RAM and 64GB eMMC storage
    M.2 slot for NVMe SSD expansion

    The cost is around 300 CHF.

    Bye

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From Mild Shock@3:633/10 to All on Wed Sep 2 21:53:23 2026
    Subject: Food for thought: Le Petit Bistro as a Trinity Use Case (Re: Food for thought: ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog)

    Hi,

    I really wonder what use cases Web Prolog trinity would
    have. Would Web Prolog trinity reach in its scope into
    the domain of AI chat bots inside a web page? Ok, google

    has hijacked the term ?declarative?, when an AI chatbot
    assistant helps fill out a HTML form. And it uses the term
    ?imperative? when the AI chatbot calls JavaScript routines.

    Could be related to the ACTOR model who knows. Although
    the hijacking is not optimal, I like the thinking in levels, that are
    related to states, just like Torbj”rn Lager exercises in his 400

    pages, although google does maybe a bender, when it calls
    a form submit, and hence a HTTP POST, declarative.

    Bye

    See also:

    WebMCP
    https://developer.chrome.com/docs/ai/webmcp

    Here the newly arrived browser integration:

    Le Petit Bistro https://googlechromelabs.github.io/webmcp-tools/demos/french-bistro

    image

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    I miss an ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog, a profile
    that can run on small embedded devices, and only
    single threaded. Like Python can do for example.

    I deleted my previous post, since it drifted into
    high performance computing. It was a reaction of
    mine, to these results and how they were viewed.

    Web Prolog result:

    100,000 4.749 s

    I get this here:

    /* 100'000 iterations */
    ?- between(1,3,_), time(ping_pong), fail; true.
    % Zeit 97.020 ms, Benutzer 2 %, Lips 735 k
    % Zeit 95.040 ms, Benutzer 1 %, Lips 1057 k
    % Zeit 98.740 ms, Benutzer 1 %, Lips 974 k
    true.

    But the results have a few drawbacks. They use a highly
    specialized ă-WAM Prolog subset and a highly specialized
    Hack VM backend. Also the ping pong code was optimized.

    So I guess this high performance view is too specifiec
    for the actor model. So to get a more general comparison,
    I tried something else. I used a Python implemented Prolog

    and a Python asyncio.Future implemented one element
    channels, the later equals SWI-Prolog queues with max_size=1.
    Finally I used the classical ping pong. Now with PyPy as the Python

    runtime the results are, 6x times faster than the shared database
    on a SWI-Prolog server provided by Torbj”rn Lager. Difficult
    to judge maybe my machine is just 6x times faster? One could

    install PyPy, download Dogelog Player and run it on the server:

    ?- between(1,3,_), time(ping_pong(100000)), fail; true.
    % Time 812.000 ms, User 54 %, Lips 5977 k
    % Time 703.000 ms, User 53 %, Lips 6915 k
    % Time 766.000 ms, User 64 %, Lips 5339 k
    true.

    But this makes me ask, where would one see using for
    example SWI-Prolog Engines for the actor model, so that it
    becomes competitive to asyncio.Future? Any idea how to do it?

    I guess asyncio.Future only uses a micro queue or something.
    This would give the ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog, a profile
    that can run on small embedded devices single threaded.

    The opposite of high preformance computing (HPC).

    Bye

    See also:

    https://trinity.elfenbenstornet.se/

    P.S.: Here the source code, first what was used for validation:

    ˙classic ping pong with channels and with logging
    And the validation output:

    ˙log of running N=3
    And what was used for benchmarking:

    ˙classic ping pong with channels and without logging

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    Ok, that was quick. While my AI Laptops were
    around > 1000 CHF. The Mac Neo was around
    500 CHF. So we went already form AI Laptop

    to AI Notebook in a few months. Now Aduino
    is playing pionier, having a CPU with a NPU
    on board, some Qualcomm thingy.

    New Arduino Ventuno Q: Better than Raspberry Pi?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQS_xWsU00I

    The specs:

    Octa-core ARM Cortex CPU
    Adreno GPU and Hexagon AI processor (up to 40 TOPS)
    16GB LPDDR5 RAM and 64GB eMMC storage
    M.2 slot for NVMe SSD expansion

    The cost is around 300 CHF.

    Bye


    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From Mild Shock@3:633/10 to All on Wed Sep 2 21:54:20 2026
    Subject: Giga Lips for Prolog based Chatting (Was: Food for thought: Le Petit Bistro as a Trinity Use Case)

    Hi,

    What if a Prolog system can draw enough processing power,
    by tapping into the GPU of budget laptop that shows the
    web page? And run locally in a ServiceWorker. The WebMCP

    use case Le Petit Bistro is already such that it also has a
    ServiceWorker for the Gemini stub. But the envisioned variant of a
    ISOMICRO model would neither need a Gemini API token,

    nor would it need WebSockets or HTTP for communication. It
    would all be WebMCP inside the conglomerate of website and
    workers. The small language model is loaded into the ServiceWorker

    and run on the GPU. Here my contribution to this idea:

    11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget

    Work in progress cannot demonstrate a Prolog assistant yet.

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    I really wonder what use cases Web Prolog trinity would
    have. Would Web Prolog trinity reach in its scope into
    the domain of AI chat bots inside a web page? Ok, google

    has hijacked the term ?declarative?, when an AI chatbot
    assistant helps fill out a HTML form. And it uses the term
    ?imperative? when the AI chatbot calls JavaScript routines.

    Could be related to the ACTOR model who knows. Although
    the hijacking is not optimal, I like the thinking in levels, that are
    related to states, just like Torbj”rn Lager exercises in his 400

    pages, although google does maybe a bender, when it calls
    a form submit, and hence a HTTP POST, declarative.

    Bye

    See also:

    WebMCP
    https://developer.chrome.com/docs/ai/webmcp

    Here the newly arrived browser integration:

    Le Petit Bistro https://googlechromelabs.github.io/webmcp-tools/demos/french-bistro

    image

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    I miss an ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog, a profile
    that can run on small embedded devices, and only
    single threaded. Like Python can do for example.

    I deleted my previous post, since it drifted into
    high performance computing. It was a reaction of
    mine, to these results and how they were viewed.

    Web Prolog result:

    100,000 4.749 s

    I get this here:

    /* 100'000 iterations */
    ?- between(1,3,_), time(ping_pong), fail; true.
    % Zeit 97.020 ms, Benutzer 2 %, Lips 735 k
    % Zeit 95.040 ms, Benutzer 1 %, Lips 1057 k
    % Zeit 98.740 ms, Benutzer 1 %, Lips 974 k
    true.

    But the results have a few drawbacks. They use a highly
    specialized ă-WAM Prolog subset and a highly specialized
    Hack VM backend. Also the ping pong code was optimized.

    So I guess this high performance view is too specifiec
    for the actor model. So to get a more general comparison,
    I tried something else. I used a Python implemented Prolog

    and a Python asyncio.Future implemented one element
    channels, the later equals SWI-Prolog queues with max_size=1.
    Finally I used the classical ping pong. Now with PyPy as the Python

    runtime the results are, 6x times faster than the shared database
    on a SWI-Prolog server provided by Torbj”rn Lager. Difficult
    to judge maybe my machine is just 6x times faster? One could

    install PyPy, download Dogelog Player and run it on the server:

    ?- between(1,3,_), time(ping_pong(100000)), fail; true.
    % Time 812.000 ms, User 54 %, Lips 5977 k
    % Time 703.000 ms, User 53 %, Lips 6915 k
    % Time 766.000 ms, User 64 %, Lips 5339 k
    true.

    But this makes me ask, where would one see using for
    example SWI-Prolog Engines for the actor model, so that it
    becomes competitive to asyncio.Future? Any idea how to do it?

    I guess asyncio.Future only uses a micro queue or something.
    This would give the ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog, a profile
    that can run on small embedded devices single threaded.

    The opposite of high preformance computing (HPC).

    Bye

    See also:

    https://trinity.elfenbenstornet.se/

    P.S.: Here the source code, first what was used for validation:

    ˙˙classic ping pong with channels and with logging
    And the validation output:

    ˙˙log of running N=3
    And what was used for benchmarking:

    ˙˙classic ping pong with channels and without logging

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    Ok, that was quick. While my AI Laptops were
    around > 1000 CHF. The Mac Neo was around
    500 CHF. So we went already form AI Laptop

    to AI Notebook in a few months. Now Aduino
    is playing pionier, having a CPU with a NPU
    on board, some Qualcomm thingy.

    New Arduino Ventuno Q: Better than Raspberry Pi?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQS_xWsU00I

    The specs:

    Octa-core ARM Cortex CPU
    Adreno GPU and Hexagon AI processor (up to 40 TOPS)
    16GB LPDDR5 RAM and 64GB eMMC storage
    M.2 slot for NVMe SSD expansion

    The cost is around 300 CHF.

    Bye



    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)
  • From Mild Shock@3:633/10 to All on Thu Sep 3 09:47:27 2026
    Subject: Google holds the keys to the AI kingdom [WebClaw Dominance] (Re: Giga Lips for Prolog based Chatting)

    Hi,

    You thought kubernets holds the keys to the
    enterprise kingdom. Then you were bombarded
    by OpenClaws, PrologAgents and WebPrologs,
    over the last months.

    Now from a market perspective and how devtools and
    google controls browsers, despite there exists
    the living standard for the non-devtools part.
    The devtools part becomes the trust part.

    The W3C specs can mandate all the clean, open
    standards they want on paper, but whoever controls
    the runtime inspector, the policy enforcement hooks,
    and the agentic debugging surface inside

    the browser holds the real keys to the kingdom.
    When an AI agent interacts with a page via something
    like navigator.modelContext, the trust doesn't come from
    the living standard text ? it comes from the browser

    vendor's DevTools inspecting the schema, auditing the
    tool execution payloads, and enforcing the security
    boundaries. Google now dictates the trust model
    precisely because they control how those tool
    contracts are verified, sandboxed, and

    certified in practice.

    Bye

    BTW: They have also a nice interaction inspector,
    to play around with your website and AI assitant
    combo. It looks not exactly like what the MCP

    foundation had and what was copied by WebProlog,
    with their log tiles. It combines the "declarative"/
    "interactive" interaction with the NLP Text interaction:

    WebMCP - Model Context Tool Inspector https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/webmcp-model-context-tool/gbpdfapgefenggkahomfgkhfehlcenpd

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    What if a Prolog system can draw enough processing power,
    by tapping into the GPU of budget laptop that shows the
    web page? And run locally in a ServiceWorker. The WebMCP

    use case Le Petit Bistro is already such that it also has a
    ServiceWorker for the Gemini stub. But the envisioned variant of a
    ISOMICRO model would neither need a Gemini API token,

    nor would it need WebSockets or HTTP for communication. It
    would all be WebMCP inside the conglomerate of website and
    workers. The small language model is loaded into the ServiceWorker

    and run on the GPU. Here my contribution to this idea:

    11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget

    Work in progress cannot demonstrate a Prolog assistant yet.

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    I really wonder what use cases Web Prolog trinity would
    have. Would Web Prolog trinity reach in its scope into
    the domain of AI chat bots inside a web page? Ok, google

    has hijacked the term ?declarative?, when an AI chatbot
    assistant helps fill out a HTML form. And it uses the term
    ?imperative? when the AI chatbot calls JavaScript routines.

    Could be related to the ACTOR model who knows. Although
    the hijacking is not optimal, I like the thinking in levels, that are
    related to states, just like Torbj”rn Lager exercises in his 400

    pages, although google does maybe a bender, when it calls
    a form submit, and hence a HTTP POST, declarative.

    Bye

    See also:

    WebMCP
    https://developer.chrome.com/docs/ai/webmcp

    Here the newly arrived browser integration:

    Le Petit Bistro
    https://googlechromelabs.github.io/webmcp-tools/demos/french-bistro

    image

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    I miss an ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog, a profile
    that can run on small embedded devices, and only
    single threaded. Like Python can do for example.

    I deleted my previous post, since it drifted into
    high performance computing. It was a reaction of
    mine, to these results and how they were viewed.

    Web Prolog result:

    100,000 4.749 s

    I get this here:

    /* 100'000 iterations */
    ?- between(1,3,_), time(ping_pong), fail; true.
    % Zeit 97.020 ms, Benutzer 2 %, Lips 735 k
    % Zeit 95.040 ms, Benutzer 1 %, Lips 1057 k
    % Zeit 98.740 ms, Benutzer 1 %, Lips 974 k
    true.

    But the results have a few drawbacks. They use a highly
    specialized ă-WAM Prolog subset and a highly specialized
    Hack VM backend. Also the ping pong code was optimized.

    So I guess this high performance view is too specifiec
    for the actor model. So to get a more general comparison,
    I tried something else. I used a Python implemented Prolog

    and a Python asyncio.Future implemented one element
    channels, the later equals SWI-Prolog queues with max_size=1.
    Finally I used the classical ping pong. Now with PyPy as the Python

    runtime the results are, 6x times faster than the shared database
    on a SWI-Prolog server provided by Torbj”rn Lager. Difficult
    to judge maybe my machine is just 6x times faster? One could

    install PyPy, download Dogelog Player and run it on the server:

    ?- between(1,3,_), time(ping_pong(100000)), fail; true.
    % Time 812.000 ms, User 54 %, Lips 5977 k
    % Time 703.000 ms, User 53 %, Lips 6915 k
    % Time 766.000 ms, User 64 %, Lips 5339 k
    true.

    But this makes me ask, where would one see using for
    example SWI-Prolog Engines for the actor model, so that it
    becomes competitive to asyncio.Future? Any idea how to do it?

    I guess asyncio.Future only uses a micro queue or something.
    This would give the ISOMICRO profile of Web Prolog, a profile
    that can run on small embedded devices single threaded.

    The opposite of high preformance computing (HPC).

    Bye

    See also:

    https://trinity.elfenbenstornet.se/

    P.S.: Here the source code, first what was used for validation:

    ˙˙classic ping pong with channels and with logging
    And the validation output:

    ˙˙log of running N=3
    And what was used for benchmarking:

    ˙˙classic ping pong with channels and without logging

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Hi,

    Ok, that was quick. While my AI Laptops were
    around > 1000 CHF. The Mac Neo was around
    500 CHF. So we went already form AI Laptop

    to AI Notebook in a few months. Now Aduino
    is playing pionier, having a CPU with a NPU
    on board, some Qualcomm thingy.

    New Arduino Ventuno Q: Better than Raspberry Pi?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQS_xWsU00I

    The specs:

    Octa-core ARM Cortex CPU
    Adreno GPU and Hexagon AI processor (up to 40 TOPS)
    16GB LPDDR5 RAM and 64GB eMMC storage
    M.2 slot for NVMe SSD expansion

    The cost is around 300 CHF.

    Bye




    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)