• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Quad core? Pfft... Intel is SO beyond that

S

Sovereign

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
3,098
According to PC World, Intel has designed an 80-core chip. Screaming at 3.16GHz and a teraflop-plus per second, this chip is a monster.
 
I was just about to post that link in the old thread. It's interesting to see more details on it:

First described by Intel executives at a September trade show, the chip fits 80 cores onto a 275-square millimeter, fingernail-size chip and draws only 62 watts of power--less than many modern desktop chips.
...
Running at 3.16 GHz, the new chip achieves 1.01 teraflops of computation--an efficiency of 16 gigaflops per watt. It can run even faster, but loses efficiency at higher speeds, performing at 1.63 teraflops at 5.1 GHz and 1.81 teraflops at 5.7 GHz.

The processor saves power by shunting idle cores into sleep mode, then instantly turning them on as they're needed. Each modular tile has its own router built alongside the core, creating a "network on a chip."
Click to expand...
:eek: @ 16gflops/watt
 
Can you imagine the day when someone might actually use such processors on a day-to-day basis? Hell, opening Task Manager to look at the core activity would require a 30" LCD panel just to see all of 'em... :D

Let's see some benchmarks, Intel!!!
 
Knowing Microsoft, at that point they'd just replace it with one giant thing called "General Processor Load"
 
In the mean time we're still waiting for K8L pics/benches..... Sigh...:rolleyes:
At least from posts over at Xtreme's the BS "40% faster then Core 2" statement has been reduced to 10%. This is coming from a guys that suposedly has ES version of K8L...
Will see....
 
bbz_Ghost said:
Can you imagine the day when someone might actually use such processors on a day-to-day basis? Hell, opening Task Manager to look at the core activity would require a 30" LCD panel just to see all of 'em... :D

Let's see some benchmarks, Intel!!!
Click to expand...

You would think that if hardware could evolve into something so complex and amazing that by then we could finally replace Windows with a better OS.
 
SuperPi?

.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 sec for a 32m
 
Anandtech now has a pretty comprehensive article on this topic. The chip is clearly a research project, but the fact that they actually built it and can run tests with it is a good sign. Although it will never be a product itself, much of the technology that makes it up is undoubtedly coming soon to a desktop near you ;)

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2925
 
mzs_biteme said:
In the mean time we're still waiting for K8L pics/benches..... Sigh...:rolleyes:
At least from posts over at Xtreme's the BS "40% faster then Core 2" statement has been reduced to 10%. This is coming from a guys that suposedly has ES version of K8L...
Will see....
Click to expand...

got a link? My search is weak.
 
just seen them mention it on cnn, said wont be out for 5-10 years. Its kind of mind boggling why something they have now wont be released till so long down the road maybe they would loose too much money on products like the dual core, quad, etc
 
Forget these weak suckers, let's get some protein molecule powered chips going!!
I'd risk my organic computer taking over the world for 99999999fps in Unreal 3.
 
D!Z said:
just seen them mention it on cnn, said wont be out for 5-10 years. Its kind of mind boggling why something they have now wont be released till so long down the road maybe they would loose too much money on products like the dual core, quad, etc
Click to expand...

2 reasons:
1.) Cost - can you imagine how much an 80-core CPU would cost using today's fabs? :eek:
2.) Heat (cooling) - this chip runs at 90 deg. C without the riced up refrigeration used in the show.
 
beowulf7 said:
2 reasons:
1.) Cost - can you imagine how much an 80-core CPU would cost using today's fabs? :eek:
2.) Heat (cooling) - this chip runs at 90 deg. C without the riced up refrigeration used in the show.
Click to expand...

2x as much as a Conroe...
 
If i remember correctly, this chip doesn't have full 80 cores like how we have 4 full cores on a quad core chip. I think it's more like IBM's cell cpu in the PS3, with multiple cores that are not "full" cores, but are specialized. I think we will see this more in the future.
 
Sovereign said:
Knowing Microsoft, at that point they'd just replace it with one giant thing called "General Processor Load"
Click to expand...

They already did something similar with thier storage methods on Windows Home server... they just call it a Storage Pool... instead of showing each drives storage capacity, it just adds all of the drives up.
 
What would be neat is if these multicores, when they come to market, are independent, like what AMD is working on. That way, if you're using a single-core app., then you can run the other cores at the lowest speed (thereby saving lots of power and $) and only run that single core at full speed.
 
Ockie said:
They already did something similar with thier storage methods on Windows Home server... they just call it a Storage Pool... instead of showing each drives storage capacity, it just adds all of the drives up.
Click to expand...

This is by design to cater to the target audience and has been very well received/reviewed. if you're a power user, or have need for a real server, use the regular server OS. This is designed for a totally different use case. Seems easy to understand.

As for the crack about "general CPU pool", so far MS has basically given away multi CPU support for free. They license by the socket, so you can drop a quad into XP home and pull up task mgr and sure enough see 4 CPUs running.

No sense giving MS any credit for anything though. Its much more teh l337 seeming to just bash away :rolleyes:
 
As for the crack about "general CPU pool", so far MS has basically given away multi CPU support for free. They license by the socket, so you can drop a quad into XP home and pull up task mgr and sure enough see 4 CPUs running.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm so upset that Apple and the varios Linux OS's charge for multi CPU setups...

But, I agree on their "storage pool" idea. It's a nice figure to have offhand, but there should be a way to show EACH drive's stats without too much fooling around...
 
Arcygenical said:
Yeah, I'm so upset that Apple and the varios Linux OS's charge for multi CPU setups...

But, I agree on their "storage pool" idea. It's a nice figure to have offhand, but there should be a way to show EACH drive's stats without too much fooling around...
Click to expand...

But I think he meant that every time Intel or AMD comes up with Extra Horse Power, MS finds some way for their OS to eat most of it up. I saw another Vista Machine using 389MB of memory and 2 to 11% CPU just at idle. That's with some features disabled.
 
Arcygenical said:
the various Linux OS's charge for multi CPU setups...
Click to expand...
Be a little more specific. My debian distro did not cost me a dime and is running an SMP kernel quite nicely. Or did I completely and utterly miss the sarcasm?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top