A GPU is rather like a CPU (Graphics Processing Unit, vs Central Processing Unit), but while your basic processor can only perform 1 task at a time, a GPU can perform 24 or more at a time. This is to do with Pipelines, and how the graphics cards handle information.
GPU's are far advanced than a CPU though, with many more tranistors under the hood than even the latest CPU can provide.
CPU's are still needed for gaming, and quite a lot at that.
Physics being one of the general areas where a CPU is usually needed (for example with FEAR)
Though, with the GPU getting more and more pipelines under its belt, new 8000 series cards for example, running Direct X 10, have the capability to run Physics, etc within themselves, since the pipelines have been unlocked to perform other tasks, usually given to the CPU alone.
Folding @ Home
For example, have you heard of Folding @ Home?
Well, that used to be just open to CPU's, but the latest graphics processors are capable of also using this software, and folding at a faster amount than any CPU could.
One could not run without the other though, but the GPU is theoretically more powerful than a CPU.
A reason why in 3D Mark, when running under CPU mode, it falls rapidly behind a dedicated GPU at the tests.
We are just entering the age of the Quad processor now.
Yet, new GPU's have 128 stream processors and more... thats how fast things have changed.
Why haven't CPU's caught up you ask? Well, Windows and other operating systems wouldn't be ready to use all that processing power given to them, and where there is waste, there is heat buildup.
but theoreticly some one could make a cpu that fast and also design software to run on this (like maby a new type of linux) then the computer would be really amazing (not to mention very pricey and very hot at times)
thanks for the info man that helped me alot
I think it'd be impossible to create a CPU that could be used at 100% all the time, and so not wasted, if it for example had 20 cores or more.
Its out of reach at the moment, and programmers would have a very hard time
Well I am saying that it would take a lot of honing on the design of the processor and other advancements to run at that capacity, due to the heat it will generate. You would need one hell of a cooling system to run like that.
i guess the processor could only have like say 5 of its cores on at once, and simply switch off ones it doesn't need to save energy, and when the power is needed, the liquid nitrogen pores into the cooler, and your back to minus degrees in temperature while running all 200 cores