Intel pledges 80 cores in five years

Thought this was interesting. No real details, obviously, but I want one.

Quote:
Intel has built a prototype of a processor with 80 cores that can perform a trillion floating point operations per second.


Quote:
The chips are capable of exchanging data at a terabyte a second, Otellini said during a keynote speech. The company hopes to have these chips ready for commercial production within a five-year window.


http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6119618.html
41 answers Last reply
More about intel pledges cores years
  1. Quote:
    Thought this was interesting. No real details, obviously, but I want one.

    Intel has built a prototype of a processor with 80 cores that can perform a trillion floating point operations per second.


    Quote:
    The chips are capable of exchanging data at a terabyte a second, Otellini said during a keynote speech. The company hopes to have these chips ready for commercial production within a five-year window.


    http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6119618.html

    Hmm...wonder what the die would like on the wafer.

    5 years, huh? Well, hopefully, I will still be employed to see this thing run through the fab.
  2. If you happen to see any lying around...... :twisted:


    For those interested - Intel has the presentations they're using at IDF here.

    They're protected, but Intel gives you the name & password to use.
  3. This would RULE!

    ...until AMD pledges 81 cores in five years.
  4. I give up on life. :-)
  5. Quote:
    Thought this was interesting. No real details, obviously, but I want one.

    Intel has built a prototype of a processor with 80 cores that can perform a trillion floating point operations per second.



    Woohoo!!!!!!!!

    Finally, something powerful enough for me to run an emulation program so that I can play PONG!!!

    It can't come soon enough!!!
  6. Is that the processor that runs WinXP @ 2Mhz speed?? Megahertz??

    That was a major U-turn, huh Intel? :twisted:
  7. Quote:
    This would RULE!

    ...until AMD pledges 81 cores in five years.


    I think AMD will annouce a platform with 20 quadcore sockets to compete with it. 8O
  8. Here is a bit of Justin Rattner's presentation concerning this topic. I guess project keifer wasn't too ambitious as I previously thought.

    Anyway, its a pretty good read.

    Intel develops tera-scale chips


    couldn't get it to properly link to the page with the actual news release. So I linked to the headline page from there just select the article about tera-scale chips.
  9. Waiting for affordable, build-it-yourself VR - 10 yrs
    Waiting 5+ yrs for DIY VR tech - perhaps between $3k or $5k
    Having AMD/Other Proc. manuftrs. lowering Intel's prices for DIY VR - Priceless!

    lol

    Great news...that means I will have to learn C++ and ASM really well in order to exploit the benefit of 80 CPUs!
  10. Quote:
    Thought this was interesting. No real details, obviously, but I want one.

    Intel has built a prototype of a processor with 80 cores that can perform a trillion floating point operations per second.


    Quote:
    The chips are capable of exchanging data at a terabyte a second, Otellini said during a keynote speech. The company hopes to have these chips ready for commercial production within a five-year window.


    http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6119618.html
    Still not enough cores for BM's megatasking/dev work. :wink:
  11. Quote:
    Thought this was interesting. No real details, obviously, but I want one.

    Intel has built a prototype of a processor with 80 cores that can perform a trillion floating point operations per second.


    Quote:
    The chips are capable of exchanging data at a terabyte a second, Otellini said during a keynote speech. The company hopes to have these chips ready for commercial production within a five-year window.


    http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6119618.html
    Still not enough cores for BM's megatasking/dev work. :wink:

    Yup. The FSB and swapping would be the bottleneck. :lol:
  12. Quote:
    Thought this was interesting. No real details, obviously, but I want one.

    Intel has built a prototype of a processor with 80 cores that can perform a trillion floating point operations per second.


    Quote:
    The chips are capable of exchanging data at a terabyte a second, Otellini said during a keynote speech. The company hopes to have these chips ready for commercial production within a five-year window.


    http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6119618.html

    Hmm...wonder what the die would like on the wafer.

    5 years, huh? Well, hopefully, I will still be employed to see this thing run through the fab.

    Well, by the time it's ready, they will be 22 nm, three times smaller than they are now, but you do raise a good point, which brings up another: how much would one of those cost? Wafer real estate isn't cheap.
  13. Quote:
    Great news...that means I will have to learn C++ and ASM really well in order to exploit the benefit of 80 CPUs!


    No, I tend to think that that sort of hardware change will require a huge redesign of all compilers and ways to do stuff. It's too much of a change! I mean, a machine with 80 cores right now is simply stupid, unless you write very, very specific code.

    This would have to be implemented very carefully, and it should be much more trouble for the compilers than for the end users or higher-level programmers. Well, that's my initial guess anyway.
  14. I think you guys are missing the main point here.

    The main point is that we are soon going to have Nuclear Power Supplies included with every case purchase! They will no doubt consume 1.21GW of power. The cores will raise the temperature within your house to about 2 degrees below that of the sun, or in other words, like living in Arizona.

    Trust me, I live there.
  15. Quote:
    Here is a bit of Justin Rattner's presentation concerning this topic. I guess project keifer wasn't too ambitious as I previously thought.

    Anyway, its a pretty good read.

    Intel develops tera-scale chips


    couldn't get it to properly link to the page with the actual news release. So I linked to the headline page from there just select the article about tera-scale chips.


    Thanks, it is a good read. I was looking over the presentation slides on Intel's site. Kinda wondering if Intel wants to go with full cores in the future (with smaller process tech, obviously), or if they're going to go with more RISC cores like the prototype (like the Cell). Hopefully, somebody puts some video of the IDF presentations up.
  16. ROFL :D

    Actually, if you had 80 microcores with advanced on-the-fly on/off switches, I think you might as well end up with a much more efficient system!

    Like, each microcore consumes, say, 1W. If you could implement a deep sleep state, you'd only keep needed cores active!

    Just thinking... 80 microcores is a very strange proposition...
  17. Quote:
    I think you guys are missing the main point here.

    The main point is that we are soon going to have Nuclear Power Supplies included with every case purchase! They will no doubt consume 1.21GW of power. The cores will raise the temperature within your house to about 2 degrees below that of the sun, or in other words, like living in Arizona.

    Trust me, I live there.


    Well if we can get it hot enough, we can start our own fusion reactor, and it will be self-powered. :P

    On the other hand, this chip will be more power efficient in the server/supercomputer world. If you can replace 20-40 systems with one, it is bound to be more efficient.
  18. I agree with you on that if you write machine-specific code already, doing so for 80 wouldn't be a sweat! My only concern is that point you raised -writing efficient code for 80 MICROprocs- I really don't know, yet, how CPU arch entirely works but better compilers and libraries definitely will be necessary.
  19. Quote:
    Thought this was interesting. No real details, obviously, but I want one.

    Intel has built a prototype of a processor with 80 cores that can perform a trillion floating point operations per second.


    Quote:
    The chips are capable of exchanging data at a terabyte a second, Otellini said during a keynote speech. The company hopes to have these chips ready for commercial production within a five-year window.


    http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6119618.htmlIt's known as a "GPU". ;)
  20. Wow. Imagine running all 80 cores at max load... I can imagine myself playing Half-Life 4 for 5 minutes then realizing the side of my case has vaporized...

    Wonder how they'll OC.
  21. Quote:
    Just thinking... 80 microcores is a very strange proposition...


    If by strange you mean retarded.
  22. i doubt they will have 80 cores, but maybe they will. i think it would be more logical to carry on doubling the cores EG 1, 2, 4, 8 ...
  23. lol....OCling wide, I think it is out of the question right now...Just imagine the following thought, if just the 80 procs would evaporate the entire case -w/o OC, what can we expect OCling it? It's a scary thought, at least right now lol.
  24. Yeah, how big is the cpu is going to be? What architecture are they using? If it's 90nm then it would be a dinner plate cpu or a very thick chip. :lol:
  25. 80 cores that might be enough.... but the real question is how much can i overclock it... lol j/k
  26. Quote:
    They pledged a 10GHz Netburst also....


    Yeah, I wonder what type of thermo-mechanical architecture would've taken to cool down such a sun-sized, comparable, heating beast in case Intel made the 10Ghz heatburst come true!
  27. What are they going to name it? Core 2 .......
  28. oooo I cant wait for the " I'm planning a core 40 duo upgrade what should i get" threads or the "quadfather vs core 80" threads. or the ever popular "will the core 80 be fsb limited"


    Someone already mentiond the 10ghz netburst. at least intel is ambitious i give them that.
  29. LOL...I think you're going ahead of yourself! :lol:
  30. Quote:
    Wow. Imagine running all 80 cores at max load... I can imagine myself playing Half-Life 4 for 5 minutes then realizing the side of my case has vaporized...

    Wonder how they'll OC.


    funny to think about overclocking a stack of processors 100,000 times faster than my first comp
  31. Hmmmm.... with that many cores I'm assuming that they're probably going to have various ways of enabling/disabling cores to have options like a 60,70, 80 core chip. Do you think we'll see 70 cores cpu's that can be oc'd to 75 cores via BIOS settings or something. Seems to me you wouldn't want to throw the entire CPU away if you find a fault with just one of the core's. Haven't read the article, but they must be thinking about this. Very interesting times ahead!
  32. w00t. perhaps by then I'll be looking into a new computer. perhaps.
  33. Quote:
    Yeah, how big is the cpu is going to be? What architecture are they using? If it's 90nm then it would be a dinner plate cpu or a very thick chip. :lol:


    Intel is expected to start on 22nm in 2011, provided there are no unexpected problems. If so, they should start at 32nm - probably with a 450-mm wafer.
    http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=174403071

    I admit that everything is all speculation at this point, but it will be fascinating watching this technology arrive from Intel - and seeing what AMD will innovate while countering it.
  34. Quote:
    oooo I cant wait for the " I'm planning a core 40 duo upgrade what should i get" threads or the "quadfather vs core 80" threads. or the ever popular "will the core 80 be fsb limited"


    Someone already mentiond the 10ghz netburst. at least intel is ambitious i give them that.


    I think you might be psychic.
    Don't forget "Is it true 80-core, or just 40 dualcores glued together?"
    and "What's the best Core 80 for playing TES V and WoW 2?" :D
  35. I think Intel's use of the term "CORE" is different then they way people are interpreting it.

    These are not seperate full x86 cores here.

    They are just floating point processors. ie a single execution unit for floating point instructions. So all 80 "cores" equal one vector unit that can be passed a buffer of data from ram, or maybe each core gets passed its own buffer of seperate data.

    How is this all that different from the current SIMD vector methods built into Intels and AMDs cpus other than number of execution units?

    So the 80 core unit can work on (up to?) 80 FLOPS at the same time, ie per cycle.

    Can't the C2D do 4 ops at the same time now?

    Seems like you would need 20x the memory bandwidth to push the data to these units, maybe by 20x the size of the data bus, or by forcing all the data to be in cache ram and having 20 sperate data paths to the cache to the cores. (useful for many passes over the same block of pixels)

    Basically it sounds like the GPU replacement for 5-10 years down the road.
  36. Very well written and simply put, statement! I would like to hear others' opinion about this same point.
  37. Quote:
    I think Intel's use of the term "CORE" is different then they way people are interpreting it.

    These are not seperate full x86 cores here.

    They are just floating point processors. ie a single execution unit for floating point instructions. So all 80 "cores" equal one vector unit that can be passed a buffer of data from ram, or maybe each core gets passed its own buffer of seperate data.

    How is this all that different from the current SIMD vector methods built into Intels and AMDs cpus other than number of execution units?

    So the 80 core unit can work on (up to?) 80 FLOPS at the same time, ie per cycle.

    Can't the C2D do 4 ops at the same time now?

    Seems like you would need 20x the memory bandwidth to push the data to these units, maybe by 20x the size of the data bus, or by forcing all the data to be in cache ram and having 20 sperate data paths to the cache to the cores. (useful for many passes over the same block of pixels)

    Basically it sounds like the GPU replacement for 5-10 years down the road.
    Can you imagine what a resource-hog Windows will have to be, to have to deal with these chips? Fresh Windows install......50GB. :o
  38. Quote:
    Can you imagine what a resource-hog Windows will have to be, to have to deal with these chips? Fresh Windows install......50GB. :o


    Just be glad Microsoft licesnses by the socket, not the core - otherwise 8O 8O 8O

    I'm wondering if Intel will move to a structure similar to IBM's Cell processor. To put it simply - the cell is a PowerPC CPU "feeding" 8 RISC chips. An eighty core chip could be 10 x86 cores each "feeding" 7 RISC cores.
    Developers will need retrained - look at how many are having difficulties developing for the Cell in the PS3, and I would hate to be on the team that develops the compiler.
  39. Quote:

    Well, by the time it's ready, they will be 22 nm, three times smaller


    If you compare area, 9 times.
  40. Quote:

    Seems like you would need 20x the memory bandwidth to push the data to these units, maybe by 20x the size of the data bus, or by forcing all the data to be in cache ram and having 20 sperate data paths to the cache to the cores. (useful for many passes over the same block of pixels)


    Actually, the interesting part of annoucment is that this experiment is using stacked dies and combines them with 20MB of fast SRAM stacked over them , whith huge interconnection (thing thousands of bits) - this is what should give this weird monster all the bandwidth it needs.

    Realistically, I think that stacking fast and big (64MB minimum) DRAM (or maybe SRAM around 32MB) L3 cache over CPU die with massive connection is something likely to happen quite soon.

    BTW, I bet that Intel is already testing Clowertown core with big separate die L3 cache now....
  41. Quote:
    They pledged a 10GHz Netburst also....


    hahahahaha, thats great! I just don't see the point in 80 cores presently. Of cores, it was also said that TV wouldn't catch on, and that a 5MB Hard drive would be more then enough.....
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Prototypes Processors Intel