Ah, yes - exactly! The article is also fully unrelated from OPs title - really weird post all around.

I work on networking for distributed rendering for a major cloud provider- very familiar with gpu architecture and use-cases :)

Saying they do more math is a bit tricky. The CPU does crazy types of very complicated math and accomplishes tasks we still have a hard time offloading to GPUs.

I agree with the rest of your statement as a good explanation for why GPUs can do faster and more efficient batch processing of the workloads that can be fit to the SIMD set up we use for most modern GPUs (ignoring general purpose gpu and fancier compute options)

1. GPUs predate 1995
2. They solve a set of problems different from those handled by cpu’s
3. The existence of GPUs wouldnt ‘curb the growth’ of the other processors
4. The government would be best positioned to benefit from that rapid growth, since it is a state level actor that can regulate the use and acquisition of technologies
5. GPUs have also developed very quickly since their advent.

So like the previous comment mentions - No.

Yeah thats a pretty good summary of what I was trying to convey. If this didn’t levitate, no one would’ve blinked twice. But since it did, its being investigated more thoroughly to check if its one of those other things that levitate (or actually a superconductor)

What I’ve gathered from many of the discussions around this topic is that the levitation is a notable feature of superconductors due to th Meissner(?) Effect. So if it couldnt levitate, there would be no reason to suspect that it is a superconductor. Because it does levitate, superconductivity is one of a few possibilities.

There have been indicators it may be a semiconductor instead, but apparently the conditions to accurately produce the material are vague/not fully understood - so attempts at reproduction have failed to rule it in or out 100%