OMG... Intel is Unstoppable.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/11/intel_80_core/

Poor AMD. They're sucking up the dust.
-cm

Register or log in to remove.

Quote :

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/11/intel_80_core/

Poor AMD. They're sucking up the dust.
-cm

Its just a tech demonstrator, and no threat to AMD. The scrap yards are full of non funtional prototypes that never made it to production statis.

Reply to turpit

You really think they are going to make a huge powerful processor and then SCRAP it??!?!!??! WTF. Of course not. This is the future, friend, right up there with the quantum computing.
-cm

Reply to celewign

Quote :

You really think they are going to make a huge powerful processor and then SCRAP it??!?!!??! WTF. Of course not. This is the future, friend, right up there with the quantum computing.
-cm

You really think they are going to spend thousands/millions/billions developing a hugely powerfull motorcycle/car/aircraft and then SCRAP IT????

Well, They did.

Its just a tech demonstrator. It doesnt mean we will ever see it. We may see its offspring, we may not. We certainly wont see that CPU though.

Reply to turpit

I am sure that Intel will be glad to sell you an 80-core CPU for your rig in a few years. That is, if you can fork over the $50k that Universities who need such power will gladly pay to have. Then you can see an increase of 2 frames per second in your games, which are still designed for single core CPU's and are being held back by your video card or RAM.

Reply to joelkamper

80 cores will probably be the norm in X amount of years, considering the possibility's, for instance... what if each appliance in your house was connected via USB or wireless, etc to your new 80 core cpu, each appliance given its own CPU... makes sense??

Reply to nevesis

Quote :

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/11/intel_80_core/

Poor AMD. They're sucking up the dust.
-cm

mega multi-core CPU's are old news already, i believe there was a 96 core RISC processor made within the last 6 months, (have to look it up i forget who made it). And then theres the CELL by IBM, multi-core, mega FP performance.

But software doesn't even take full use of a dual-core CPU now, and they've been out for a bout a year now. so in 2 more years i don't foresee software engineers writing software to utilize 80 cores.

Hardware is only as good as the software wrote for it.

Reply to crazypyro

Quote :

However, during a presentation, Intel dampened our hopes that such a processor would be in PCs or servers anytime soon. The company said that the 80-core chip is just a research chip that will not become a product for the commercial market...the company conceded that there may be a limit to how many processing cores on one die make sense...Intel indicated that...processor will increasingly gain from the simple addition of cores until 16 cores are reached. After that, the baseline performance of processor will benefit less from the addition of cores and other enhancements will become more important...cache improvements will take the center stage, followed by thread scheduling and new instructions.

We will not be seeing anything remotely like an 80 core proc for the desktop market. Also interesting in this article was the mention that Intel's roadmap looks very similiar ot AMD's with multicore processors and systems.

Quote :

what if each appliance in your house was connected via USB or wireless, etc to your new 80 core cpu, each appliance given its own CPU

Connecting appliances to a home wide network was one of the visions of the Cell processor built into "smart" appliances.

Interesting article tho.

Reply to chunkymonster

It was said in the article that these processors would most likely not be on consumer production level, so in short. No!

Best,

3Ball

Reply to 3Ball

Quote :

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/11/intel_80_core/

Poor AMD. They're sucking up the dust.
-cm

This was a tech demo focusing on optical core-to-core communication. Its not designed for general purpose use.

Reply to Wombat2

Yeah, I know. THIS one isn't. Intel is going to use this though. This isn't one of those fancy cars or airplanes. People make those all the time as X models. Intel probably will not do this though. Can you imagine the implications of have +1 TF performance in a low wattage chip? You must be out of your mind to think that Intel won't sell this someday.

To Joelkamper: Stop approaching things from the view of a gamer. This won't impact games for a long long time. This is still big though, huge. I think this may be one of the most important articles CPU related that I've heard this year or last. This is waaay bigger than Core2 announcement, in terms of future impact.
-cm

Reply to celewign

Quote :

Yeah, I know. THIS one isn't. Intel is going to use this though. This isn't one of those fancy cars or airplanes. People make those all the time as X models. Intel probably will not do this though. Can you imagine the implications of have +1 TF performance in a low wattage chip? You must be out of your mind to think that Intel won't sell something like this someday.
-cm

I fixed your quote, your welcome. This chip won't see the light of day in any real world use. What Intel will take from this is the knowledge of how to get many cores to talk to each other efficently. From there, they will design chips that have many cores per wafer. I don't know when they will start using this, seeing as they have V8 that doesn't need this technology.

Reply to 4745454b

Sigh... yes, I'm sorry. I clearly wasn't clear. I sortov thought that people would realize that I didn't mean that Intel would start selling THIS EXACT CHIP. I'm speaking of the future man, and this is it in some form.
-cm

Reply to celewign

This looks very much like a GPU core modified for FPU work, to tell the truth. The stripped-down tiles, the routing interface, interconnect speeds- it smacks of it. And GPUs are good at FPU work, too- a 90nm Radeon x1900 XT can do something like 300 double-precision GFlops while drawing about 100 W. The Intel unit is 65nm and does 1000 single-precision GFlops while burning about 100 W. It's powerful for sure, but it's NOT an x86 CPU and it is NOT a general-purpose unit by any stretch. The best I see this doing is being a preview of Intel's GPU that they're rumored to be building or a stream processor/math coprocessor.

And for the "Intel is unstoppable" bit...you forget that AMD owns ATi and they also make GPU cores and stream processors that are competitive with this unit. It's a feat, sure, but it's not that unusual or unique. 80 general-purpose x86 cores would have been, but this isn't.

Reply to MU_Engineer

Quote :

And for the "Intel is unstoppable" bit...you forget that AMD owns ATi and they also make GPU cores and stream processors that are competitive with this unit.

But they aren't. At least, they aren't making things that people will percieve as "forward looking". Good point about the GPU thing, though. Intel making GPUs? Intel buying NVidia? Who knows.
-cm

Reply to celewign

Quote :

At least, they aren't making things that people will percieve as "forward looking".

Let's give them some time to integrate.
http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articlehybrid.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20070212:MTFH29369_2007-02-12_20-59-40_L12645870&type=comktNews&rpc=44

Quote :

the newly merged companies would work out this year exactly how they could combine their graphics and computer-processing know-how.

After that, it would take about two years to bring a product to market, he told Reuters in an interview at the 3GSM wireless trade fair in Barcelona.

"That could easily be 2009,"

Reply to exit2dos

Crazy,

Please do not make comments like the one above.

People are making applications (Games and Professional) NOW that take advantage of multiple cores.

And by the way, if you read around you would also understand that most devs that are working on multi core architectures do not limit their work to two cores. They use the available resources. This is a standard coding practice for anyone in multi core/multi thread environment.

Also, The concept of a thread per processor is flawed as well. Typically in a multi threaded application you may have many many threads assigned per proc.

Please have a read of these two threads for a better understanding of these two concepts:

First

Second

There are a lot of misconceptions which need to be addressed.

Please do not believe me "Do the research yourself".

Reply to Ches111

Quote :

However, during a presentation, Intel dampened our hopes that such a processor would be in PCs or servers anytime soon. The company said that the 80-core chip is just a research chip that will not become a product for the commercial market...the company conceded that there may be a limit to how many processing cores on one die make sense...Intel indicated that...processor will increasingly gain from the simple addition of cores until 16 cores are reached. After that, the baseline performance of processor will benefit less from the addition of cores and other enhancements will become more important...cache improvements will take the center stage, followed by thread scheduling and new instructions.

We will not be seeing anything remotely like an 80 core proc for the desktop market. Also interesting in this article was the mention that Intel's roadmap looks very similiar ot AMD's with multicore processors and systems.

Quote :

what if each appliance in your house was connected via USB or wireless, etc to your new 80 core cpu, each appliance given its own CPU

Connecting appliances to a home wide network was one of the visions of the Cell processor built into "smart" appliances.

Interesting article tho.

I would have to say that yes some day we will be using 80 or more cores. Do I think that would be usefull now ? No.... (Still if I could buy one I would in a heart beat the geek factor is too strong to ignore !)

I would have to say that statement is like the "640K should be enough for ever" statement. I guess no one actualy said it but its quoted enough

I remember my first large hard drive 6.4GB's OMG !!! so huge I could never fill such a monster....

Reply to JonathanDeane

Quote :

You really think they are going to make a huge powerful processor and then SCRAP it??!?!!??! WTF. Of course not. This is the future, friend, right up there with the quantum computing.
-cm

You really think they are going to spend thousands/millions/billions developing a hugely powerfull motorcycle/car/aircraft and then SCRAP IT????

Some Chrysler engineers were having fun and it was never serious.

Quote :

You do realize that, like the B-57, the Soviets were threatening war if the B-70 was every realized as a production bomber. At the time both the B-57 and B-70 were made, there was nothing the Soviets could do the counter them (the flew too high and too fast for the Soviet missile defenses). The official reasoning behind scraping the B-70 was because of difficulty in flying and one of the prototypes crashing during tests, but the Soviets were afraid of the capabilities of this bomber (it could cruise at Mach 3 with its engines mostly idling due to the advanced design of the wing tips to trap the supersonic shockwave and push the bomber forward). The only reason they didn't go to war over the B-1 was the techinical problems it had and they had the radar to actually see it even with it's stealth technologies.

Quote :

Well, They did.

Its just a tech demonstrator. It doesnt mean we will ever see it. We may see its offspring, we may not. We certainly wont see that CPU though.

What, you mean like Intel's V8? I see Intel very much going forward with this 80 core processor for the Supercomputer market which is what this monster is being designed for. You will not see an 80 Core processor sitting on the general users desktop, this is for people like Pixar, ILM, NSA, the US Research labs, and anyone else that needs to do a huge number of computations in a reasonable amount of time.

This isn't a tech demonstrator, this is something that Intel wants to build for a very niche, but very lucrative, market.

Reply to balister

Quote :

This isn't a tech demonstrator, this is something that Intel wants to build for a very niche, but very lucrative, market.

I can assure you that in that "very niche market" sit I. Damn, I don't care if I have to heist every shop on Rodeo Drive to get the money, I'd be one of the first customers for that 80 corer!!! 8)

Reply to CaptRobertApril

Boy were those ever beautiful birds!

Reply to akahuddy

Quote :

You really think they are going to make a huge powerful processor and then SCRAP it??!?!!??! WTF. Of course not. This is the future, friend, right up there with the quantum computing.
-cm

Why not? Companies like GM, etc. do...with cars. :wink:

Ooops...didn't see Turpits post.... My bad. :oops:

Reply to 1Tanker

[quote="crazypyro"]

Quote :

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/11/intel_80_core/

But software doesn't even take full use of a dual-core CPU now, and they've been out for a bout a year now. so in 2 more years i don't foresee software engineers writing software to utilize 80 cores.

I think there is more to it than that, changing single core software to support 2 cores is in many ways more difficult than changing 2 core software to support n cores (I say n as 80 would be a pretty high number of simultaneous multi-threaded paths for most software although I could see games being one of the pieces of software that could easily spawn that many paths).

The big problem for developers is the re-engineering required to spawn, track and combine multiple paths (changing from 1 to more than 1) tracking 5, or 20 or 80 instead of 1 is reasonably easy once you have the functionality setup to spawn, track and combine. (P.S, one of the reasons why you haven't seen that much multi-core software is it actually adds quite a bit of over-head to most apps doing all this, not to mention you often have to wait for the last path to complete before presenting results.)

Answering the original question though there is no chance in hell that you will be able to buy an 80 core processor for your PC in 24 months / 2 years.

To build 80 core processors at reasonable yields they would need to fit about 40 cores in the same area of silicon that they currently are fitting 2/4, that's in effect going from 65nm to about 10/14nm and I don't think current road-maps have that happening inside 2 years.

5-10 years definitely and the software may even be ready by then.

Reply to KlamathBFG

Quote :

And for the "Intel is unstoppable" bit...you forget that AMD owns ATi and they also make GPU cores and stream processors that are competitive with this unit.

But they aren't. At least, they aren't making things that people will percieve as "forward looking". Good point about the GPU thing, though. Intel making GPUs? Intel buying NVidia? Who knows.
-cm
Those cores are very simple, you can see them as a single shader in one of these new unified shader architectures.
So, if they told you that G80 has "128 cores", would you say that nVidia is "unstoppable"?
While the 80 cores architecture is very interesting, is not something new, and it's clear that the whole industry is going in that direction (however, we have to give credit to STI for being first to implement such an approach into a product, Cell), with streaming processors and "Fusion".
But i'm still curious to see what kind of consumer applications will emerge to make use of all that parallel FP power, apart from image processing.

Reply to Pippero

what man, whats the point in quad core cpus, they dont utilise the full power because there are hardly any software that does, why would u need a 80 core cpu?? firstly it would proberly cost u a shite load of money, and with no use to it if it only uses 1 core well maybe 1 and a half if ure lucky....

Reply to fullmetal001

1. Will not fit in a Kandalf
2. 17kw psu real expensive
3. PITA to overclock - architecture looks like would have to oc each core independently.
4. Have to replace Tuniq Tower with Tuniq Subdivision
5. Cooling fans reach 214 dba at 42cubic yards per minute and causes sandstorms in cat's litter box. Could use water cooling if can get external pump from swimming pool and a fire hose. For TEC solution - Amana 16cuft freezer.
6. MB going to need one pisser of a chipset and about 256 megs of ram for the bios and 64 dimm slots but will finally lose legacy ports.

Nah...doesn't look like a gamer processor.

Reply to Oldguy

Quote :

1. Will not fit in a Kandalf
2. 17kw psu real expensive
3. PITA to overclock - architecture looks like would have to oc each core independently.
4. Have to replace Tuniq Tower with Tuniq Subdivision
5. Cooling fans reach 214 dba at 42cubic yards per minute and causes sandstorms in cat's litter box. Could use water cooling if can get external pump from swimming pool and a fire hose. For TEC solution - Amana 16cuft freezer.
6. MB going to need one pisser of a chipset and about 256 megs of ram for the bios and 64 dimm slots but will finally lose legacy ports.

Nah...doesn't look like a gamer processor.

I give this the Funniest Post of the Day award!

Reply to MU_Engineer

Yes,
as I said, a technology demonstrator or prototype. Not a product for marketing anytime soon

Reply to turpit

Thank you for the kindness, but you might want to wait for Baron to finally reveal the Top Ultra Hush Hush AMD 6nm 160 core code named Beirut that uses super duper ultra deluxe warp hyperthreading, draws 3 watts at load and is capable of simultaneously operating 3 holodecks from the on board gpu which runs 8tbs organic ddr6. Then my whole analysis will be in the crapper - and I still won't be able to play Oblivion maxed out.

Reply to Oldguy

I hope you mean the B-58 Hustler, not the B-57 Canberra which was subsonic and based on a british design. The B-58 was the Mach 2.5 4 engine bomber with the pod slung underneath built by Convair which is now General Dynamics.

R Collins

Reply to kg4icg

Quote :

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/11/intel_80_core/

Poor AMD. They're sucking up the dust.
-cm

False. The majority of system buyers (I mean ALL system buyers, not limiting this to Joe Elite Gamer) dont want to spend what a Core2Duo costs, Intel wins on the performance front but if it wasn't for their name recognition, they'd be losing on the sales front right now.

Reply to I

I,

Which Core 2 Duo are you referencing?

The E4300 which retails at the egg for $174.00?

or

The E6300 which retails at the egg for $187.00?

Just curious cause I am sure that not many could afford that much for a proc :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Especially non-Joe-gamer!!

Reply to Ches111

What you say is completely 100% absolutely true. Unfortunately, these pages are designed for and used by enthusiasts, gamers and other power users. As such, the relative merits of any technology, either in place or proposed, is subject to examination based on the needs, wants and mental meanderings of the enthusiast.

Unfortunately, the big dog of software has determined that what was exclusively the realm of Joe Elite G(Oldguy to my friends) just a few months ago will now be in the lower middle to upper middle range by summer. To keep pace, we look forward, not back. You don't see much here today about Celeron or Pressler which are fairly irrelevant to us and a year and a half ago Intel sucked big green ones and the only thing we would talk about was AMD dominance and the best 939 solutions.

Reply to Oldguy

Meh, this is merely a tech demo... a research chip. AMD has more chance of bringing "Fusion" out than this. Besides, imagine trying to get decent yields out of this chip. I mean, I don't think it can go mainstream with current tech. Eventually, yes maybe, but not within two years time. However, with that said, this chip is very impressive stuff. I mean, its not every day one can leverage 1.8 Teraflops out of a single processor, 80 cores or not.

Reply to Bluefinger

Bluefinger,

Is that something you get after visiting with Smurfette?

Man that was bad, but I could not stop myself

Reply to Ches111

Quote :

Bluefinger,

Is that something you get after visiting with Smurfette?

Man that was bad, but I could not stop myself

Dude.... that was uncalled for :lol:

Quote :

In the future teraflop will be the mainstream.I will bet money on it.The web will go 3d all os functions will be 3d,computing will like playing video games and watching movies,and the power of the pc will be like a mini rendering farm.

The deal is we need an incredibly powerful chip to open the envelope of future programming.We have cell,80 core,and quantum computing;to name a few.Having 5 or six more options wouldnt hurt,and 10 or 12 in each other category for the home pc.we have htt,and laser interconnects.

We need more products like this to emerge,fatten up the pool of tomorrows standards.

In the future yes, but not within the next two years. I mean, sure, Intel has an 80 core chip which can do upto 1.8 Teraflops, but everything else has to catch up in order to support such a beefy chip. Not only that, Intel has to find a way to get decent yields off such a complex chip with so many cores. I have no doubt it will be mainstream eventually, but I can bet on 5 pounds that two years is way too short of a time for it to come around by. Though when it does come around, I wonder what AMD would have by then to compete with this chip, most likely a beasty version of a Fusion chip? Who knows...

Reply to Bluefinger

Quote :

Hes an AMD fan dating a smurf fan :wink: The classic romeo and juliet thing :lol: Poppa AMD will talk him to death and The smurf village will attack in force ,using any and all means to succeed at seperate them.Like paying people to only sell him bad coffee. :wink:

Dude... if I had enough money I would easily get myself a C2D system (or C2Q if barcelona turns out not to be as good as it seems). And bad coffee just will not do! Bring me my mocha!! :evil: :lol:

Reply to Bluefinger

First one comment the cpu described was the first round loser in DARPA's Petascale competion. IBM's P7, Sun's Rock, and Cray /AMD Cascade went through to the second round. Then IBM and AMD/Cray split the $550 million jackpot. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/ [...] petascale/ so its design is of no interest to any one in the power user market. .
The users here are enthusiasts and gamers . The power users are at HPCwire, Linux Electron, Physorg.com, supercomputingonline, and know why Intel's design is incompatible with the DARPA designed SeaStar chipset used by Cray, IBM, and Sun.

Reply to casewhite

Reply to Everett

Quote :

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/11/intel_80_core/

Poor AMD. They're sucking up the dust.
-cm

Oh my gosh... Oh my gosh... Oh my gosh... 8O 8O

The world must be coming to an end! :lol: :lol:

Reply to Ranman68k

Quote :

I agree ,but the more the merrier in this pool of terra pc ideas'it tells us how close to it we are,the saturation point will produce a clear victor in the primordial ooze,as far as a standard goes.

I should hope that saturation of these terra chips will become insanely populated in the next 3-5 years.And then at its zenith a terra pc will crawl out of the primordial pool and teleport to retail outlets.

I'd give it 4 years before we see these sorts of multi-core, teraflop processors really take off, though only 3 years for them to get established in the server/workstation market where it would see the best use. That is what I'd give it under an educated guess. Personally, I think assymetrical cores would work better in the end of the day, especially if you can tailor processors for specific uses (one may be a general purpose processor for desktops, one could be a mean floating-point monster for servers, etc). So, imagine an 80 assymetrical core processor, I think that is worth waiting for.

Reply to Bluefinger

I found you over at aandtech, but no answer. now I see you have been on the lamb. :lol:

Reply to Everett

True, a lot can happen within two years in the tech industry, let alone 3 or 4, but considering these multi-core teraflop processors are pretty much in their infancy, a lot of work has to be done before they can be made commercially viable. Its one thing for Intel to come out with Conroe, but its gonna be a whole other thing trying to make these beasts ready for the market, which is why I gave a 3-4 year estimate, rather than go with the two year cycle.

Reply to Bluefinger

Sorry bro, just had to give a warm welcome home 8)

Reply to Everett

Quote :

Is that the best you could do?

I may need to brush up on my skills a bit. :wink:

I'll give you 3 guesses at what I voted for... and the first 2 don't count. :lol: :lol:

Reply to Ranman68k

Don't forget about optical circuitry and quantum manipulation of light to form processors that will have stellar performance ratios compared to today's silicon based processors. Or for the more near future scenario, organic processors built with carbon nanotubes. The future is definitely bright.

Reply to Bluefinger

Quote :

Makes me mad that i decided to be an artist,This is by far the coolest time to be involved in tech.

Ahh the irony of it all... I regret not taking A-level Art in Sixth form... considering I got an A in Art for GCSEs... and yet A's in all sciences... meh, I'm happy with my Computer Science (Computer Games Tech.) course, though I'm trying to push for the more creative aspect of things since I have a great imagination (3D modelling and design). Even my dreams are ****ed up....

Reply to Bluefinger

Quote :

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/11/intel_80_core/

Poor AMD. They're sucking up the dust.
-cm

False. The majority of system buyers (I mean ALL system buyers, not limiting this to Joe Elite Gamer) dont want to spend what a Core2Duo costs, Intel wins on the performance front but if it wasn't for their name recognition, they'd be losing on the sales front right now.

(I) does not mean you are intelligent :roll:

Reply to sirheck

Quote :

I found you over there. but no answer, now I see you have been on the lamb. :lol:

can we not talk about my days of isolation in new zealand and include the phrase on ther lamb?

we all do things were ashamed of. :wink: :lol: :lol: actually xbit is my new first residence.They let me know when theres a response to a topic.Its not so overpopulated either.and the crap flippers are nonexistant.
The mods are actually involved enough to be able to respond fairly and without bias to complaint.

long time no see. YOU OUTCAST :lol:

Reply to sirheck

Quote :

develope your artistry.just do it.get a pencil set and some dry pastels and do a rough sketch every time you feel like it,just dont sweat it.as a response to pressure treat it as an abstract persuit and allow the looseness of that to create itself the artist you should be.

Already one step ahead. I have a Wacom tablet, and I'm messing around with 3D Studio Max and Terragen 2 (a procedural landscape generator/renderer, produces some fantasically realistic scenes). Of course, that is if I get time to mess around, considering how university seems to suck up all freetime. All I need now is Photoshop/Painter (I have GIMP, but it serves me well).

Reply to Bluefinger

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - OMG... Intel is Unstoppable.

Please mind

Focus On

OMG... Intel is Unstoppable.

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - OMG... Intel is Unstoppable.

Please mind