Linking 2 computers to make one

[rmx77]

i am looking to be able to link up 2 computers so both computers are one, like if the main computer to be used could also be able to use the processor and ram and hard drive and other hardware to be a faster computer. right now i am running a powermac g3 400mhz 1gb ram 2 30gb hd's dvd burner and other stuff and i have a pc i built i would like to use with the g3 to make one computer out of the 2. what can i do? how would i go bout doing it?

 

[cjl]

It's near impossible with normal computers, and linking a Powermac G3 to an x86 desktop is even harder. I wouldn't worry about it - a G3 @ 400MHz isn't very fast anyways, so it wouldn't add much to a modern computer.

 

[rmx77]

well i would like to try to do it so i have one good comp cause i have the 2 comps and really cant afford right now to buy one good one so linking the 2 would be the best i can do right now

 

[cjl]

As I said, linking the two is nearly impossible, due to the low bandwidth of connections and the incompatible architecture/OS.

 

[rmx77]

like not through networking but linking them to be able to use the other comp as the processing power for the g3 or like combine the 2 like how u have a dual core now taking 2 comps to make a dual processor computer is what i am meaning

 

[mouse29982]

Sorry to say but if your asking on a forum how to do this, YOU will not be able to make it work. You would have to have such a STRONG computer back ground and understand every bit and byte of how a computer works. Don't bother wasting you time

 

[waffle911]

This can be summed up in the following quote:

I own a computer store. One day, two policemen came into the store and told that they owned a 486 and a 286. They asked if a 486 and a 286 could be assembled together into a 686. I replied to the dumb request by asking them if two 200 horsepower police cars can be used to make up a 400 horsepower Ferrari. The policemen didn't get it and replied angrily that altering car engines is strictly forbidden by law.

(from Rinkworks.com/stupid)

In short, unless you have Virgina Tech's supercomputing budget that allows them to buy an entire room full of identical Mac Pro's linked together with proprietary, faster-than-enterprise-grade networking technology and a proprietary supercomputing operating system that magically bridges the gap between PowerPC and x86 processing architectures, then no, it cannot be done. The hardware was never designed to do that, the same way that two Boeing 777's were never meant to be combined into a Boeing 747, or how you couldn't hope to combine a Chevy small-block with a Mopar Hemi and expect to create some super-sweet V16 super engine capable of 1500HP. Possible in theory, but very messy/complicated/convoluted/impractical in practice.
On the other hand, if both systems were Macs, the easy solution would be to use Xsan, but bandwidth between the two systems would make the end result much slower than either of the systems by themselves.
A the opposite hand, if both computers were capable of running UNIX, and you had the capability and freedom to work with UNIX for whatever you needed, then something similar could be done, in the same way that Lopht in the 90's was able to gather up a bunch of junk computers into a supercomputing array running their own proprietary code to create the ultimate hacking machine of the time.

So, unless you have some innate understanding of the advanced circuitry and computer logic systems that would allow you to disassemble the components from their respective motherboards and combine them onto one motherboard in a layout of your own devising, which I find highly unlikely as if that were the case you would not be asking this question nor would you be in a position where you could not afford to simply buy new hardware, the answer in this situation is a flat out no (unless you intend to pay an ungodly obscene sum of money that could easily buy several newer computers that would individually outperform the resulting Frankenstein computer). And even if you had hardware that you could link together via COM ports or some other networking configuration such as Ethernet (READ: THE ONLY WAY IN WHICH TO PHYSICALLY LINK TWO COMPUTERS TOGETHER IS BY SOME FORM OF NETWORKING), there is absolutely zero consumer software that could possibly utilize this configuration.

 

[rmx77]

well i do know i have a g3 imac 333mhz and then i have the powermac g3 but idk if its posible to link those 2 macs together to make one

 

[mouse29982]

waffle911 your the best. loved the post.
rmx77 that last post was a joke right ?

 

[rmx77]

i am not joking around i want to be able to make 2 computers be one like dual boards or dual processors somehow either 2 macs or 2 pc's or a mac and a pc

 

[cragzman]

Or buy a compy with a quad core and 16GB of ram. Jobs a good 'un.

 

[rmx77]

i wish i could do that but i cant afford that cause to do what i want it would be just like buying a new car is how much it would cost so i want to do it as cheap and or as free as posible.

 

[JDocs]

rmx77 What you are asking for simply can not be done with most computers. The computers that can do that kind of thing are either experimental or cost millions.

The idea is something many of us would love to do but it simply can not be done.

 

[rtfm]

These people are just chocking your chain, it can be done, but it's tricky. Back in the 70s Apple and Toshiba merged their propriatory CPUs and formed the Macintosh brand. It was much easier with Apple as the chips just push into the fruit. To work with an x86 combo you will need:

1) Wood Glue
2) Sticky back plastic
3) Half a dozen toilet roll tubes
4) A pair of safety scissors (get mummy to help with these)

I'll post back with some pics later........






(maybe)

 

[mouse29982]

These people are just chocking your chain, it can be done, but it's tricky. Back in the 70s Apple and Toshiba merged their propriatory CPUs and formed the Macintosh brand. It was much easier with Apple as the chips just push into the fruit. To work with an x86 combo you will need:

1) Wood Glue
2) Sticky back plastic
3) Half a dozen toilet roll tubes
4) A pair of safety scissors (get mummy to help with these)

I'll post back with some pics later........






(maybe)

OMG PLEASE POST PICTURES!!!
it would be so epically awesome

 

[mi1ez]

...in the same way that Lopht in the 90's was able to gather up a bunch of junk computers into a supercomputing array running their own proprietary code to create the ultimate hacking machine of the time.

Isn't this how Google's first machine was built too? (and to a certain extent, how they still build?)

These people are just chocking your chain, it can be done, but it's tricky. Back in the 70s Apple and Toshiba merged their propriatory CPUs and formed the Macintosh brand. It was much easier with Apple as the chips just push into the fruit. To work with an x86 combo you will need:

1) Wood Glue
2) Sticky back plastic
3) Half a dozen toilet roll tubes
4) A pair of safety scissors (get mummy to help with these)

I'll post back with some pics later........

Reminds me of my mate who built his PC in a shoebox (many years ago of course)

 

[Belinda]

The only reply here that even closely gets it right is waffle911.
In short, no advanced circuitry is needed, no million dollar budget, no complex network structure, no advanced OS.
Windows will do just fine at this together with a Null modem cable or cat5 cable.
In fact you could do it with a serial or parallel cable too as connecting two PC's isn't the problem.
The problem is simply the software, as far as i know no game or app will make use of this type of setup.
But it's real easy to write your own to make use of this, course there isn't many situations where it would be useful.

 

[JDocs]

Right and the null cable's 56K is going to match a system bus at 10000K+. He is talking about making them operate as one. Not networked, not clusters but as a single unit. Current networking / cabling simply do not allow for the kind of speeds and latency required for this.

Linking 2 processors to behave as one over even a 10gb network cable would still low things down more than speed them up due to latency.

 

[Vokofpolisiekar]

None that I can think of. By the time the code is made to combine the two architectures, hell would've frozen again and for no gain.

Getting two different PC's to talk over a network so as to share processing loads is easy when you use isolated common tasks. But that's it.

As for physically getting the two PC's connected through a "bridge" of some sorts is also possible - but that's for MIT guys with ample time and resources. It will also then be a feat, not an objective.

If this was a pet project - I'd understand. But this just doesn't look like one.

 

[Siggy19]

You know, I was thinking of doing something similar to this... basically, I currently have an old crappy PC and am in the process of building a nice shiny new one.

However, I don't want the shiny new one to be sitting in the office, I want it in the basement where no thief would think to look for it.

Thus, I want to be using the old crappy one to basically remote desktop to the new one but I am not sure if that will be too laggy or not over a 805.11n wireless network.

Any thoughts ?

 

[nukemaster]

Siggy19

If you are just crunching numbers on the new one. Sure you can remote it, but if you are gaming, thats another story. Since remote desktop turns off all acceleration and such. With a good IP KVM you "May" be able to work something like this.

Back on topic.

There are too many variables to make it work. If they where the same(PC to PC or G3 to G3) then there may be some limited use for both. You CAN render 3d with more then one system working on it(each rendering a frame or partial frame), but that will not help you in day to day computing and is rather weak with only 2 systems.

You could also assign one to do all your downloading, music playback or what not and use the other for just surfing the net and stuff. This effectively allows you to have minimal software slowing one machine down.

 

[Jim_L9]

You're looking for something like this: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7378

 

[jive]

Did someone only answer... No it's not possible.

thanks

 

[waffle911]

You know what, I think this whole thing might have been rooted in this comic from 2003:

Needless to say, besides being entirely outdated 6 years on (except for the RAM), this would have been overkill even for HL2 and entirely impossible to get to run to begin with.

 

[Shadow703793]

^ :lol: Post of the day!