Intel Pledges 80 Cores In The Next Five Years

[Twister]

I just now ran across this article trying to find information about the future of processors, so I can know whether to wait a few years or upgrade now. Well, any ways, I found this article and I saw that is was published in September of 2006. Well, it is almost August, almost 5 years later, and I haven't heard any news about any processors with more than 6 cores. I am wondering if they are still following through with the plan, since they already have a modelled prototype in 2006.

Article: http://news.cnet.com/2100-1006_3-6119618.html

I was just wondering what opinions you have on this. I read through the comments and one person said that 80 cores "sounds like total overkill". :bdg

[FORTRANS]

Hi,

   A.  It does not sound like an X86 compatible.

   B.  They said that the cores were FPU's.

   C.  They are comparing to a "super computer" with many
   thousand "nodes".

   If they have a suitable problem, it might work.  You would
have to load the FPU, do a fair number of operations, and
then store the results.  If what you are going to do is, load two
values, find the average, and store the result, you probably
have 64 of the 80 cores waiting to access memory.  The
interconnect geometry sounds as if it will be horrible.

Cheers,

Steve N.

[dedndave]

it's all about spinning a profit where there would not otherwise be a market - lol
of course, not all these cores are for PC's
handhelds - cell phones - laptops - gps - as well as a variety of other gadgets and gizmos
i can see where they may make 80 new cores
this brings to mind the 64-bit "wave", too
the public really didn't need 64-bits, but they managed to make a market appear anyways

[sinsi]

this brings to mind the 64-bit "wave", too
the public really didn't need 64-bits, but they managed to make a market appear anyways

It is nice to be able to keep a large file (database, movie etc.) in memory and a second working copy too.
Try working on an 8GB file in 32-bit vs 64-bit.

I think that 1) it's a natural progression, 2) the market was there and 3) the 'public' were not the target.
Most people (in my experience) want email, browsing and youtube. That's why phones/tablets/netbooks are the go now.

[drizz]

I'd wait and upgrade to a Roswell ® micro architecture processor.

[vanjast]

http://www.xmos.com/ are years ahead of intels thinking.
They might have a problem getting around Xmos patents, making their cores cumbersome an impracticle.
We'll see what they come up with.

[Twister]

The XMOS devices look like they will go far. I like how they can easily parallel. It's just the low clock rate. 500 MHz was a while back. It does seem this processor is more for electronic devices and not quite for personal computers.

[dedndave]

i have to say, i like the prices   :8)
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=880-1010-ND
XS1-G04B-FB512-C4 @ $31 - and that's their good chip
you can afford to buy one of those to stick it in board just to "play"
i seem to recall doing some work with xmos asic's or fpga's some years ago - very competitive

[hutch--]

Higher core counts are inevitable but it will eventually require a different logic to effectively connect them in an efficient manner. The Itanium was designed with parallel processing in mind and if it has the correct supporting hardware can handle very high counts but this technology has yet to be built into x86 chips.

you get a percentage loss under current technology by the increase in core count, 2 core give you about 1.8 increase on a single core and this appears to be consistent with current high core count hardware but there is another option which may see the light of day, clustered sub cores that increase the throughput of a given single core which can then be multicored for higher throughput. Another interesting idea that the Itanium can already handle is synchronised cores for parallel operation as this opens up the possibility of multiple synchronous parallel processing.

We will see what the market will bear over time, some of it may even be interesting.

[Twister]

Yep. I am waiting on the market and seeing what will be coming around.

I also have my eye on AMD's Bulldozer series. They are coming out with an octa-core microprocessor.  :P

[vanjast]

It's just the low clock rate. 500 MHz was a while back. It does seem this processor is more for electronic devices and not quite for personal computers.

Currently at the moment it's 'very slow', but has lots of potential if they get hold of /make new highspeed technology - then it'll whip some as.s.
their target market is Audio at the moment - maybe it's 'small steps' to get established in the market.

In about 1990, there was a flight sim based on the transputer (Xmos predecessor - same people, different company) producing graphic results comparable to technology of about 2000 (10 years is a lifetime technology wise  :green2 ). All based on a couple of processors in parallel. It was impressive, but expensive and only the military had it  :'(

[mineiro]

They are reaching the physical/chemical limit of components, so the evolution say to duplicate the thing.
I like to live when quantum processor become acessible to all.

[Twister]

One thing I am also wondering is how to get a board of Xeom processors to fit inside a computer case.

I am thinking that a Xeom computer would be an interesting build. You would be able to link in another processing unit after pay-day. Wouldn't that be something? :green2

[hutch--]

If you mean an Intel Xeon, you may find its geared more to servers and similar than a very fast personal computer. From memory they are usually fitted into rack mount cases and ganged together but from memory there are some dual processor versions last I looked.

Currently if you have money to waste building fantasy x86 you look for boards that handle multiple high end i7 processors with 6 cores. (They may have upped that recently.

[ixuta]

80 cores would be fun to use on some SIMD processing.
Computers really blow me away how far they have come. The puter on my desk is the same price as the first puter on my desk, but has 1.5 million times the RAM.
For real fun, here is a Peta Scale computer  , yep  , Peta
http://www.ncsa.illinois.edu/BlueWaters/