Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Pictures From Intel's Presentation on Future CPUs

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 22 comments

Check out pictures from IDF 2009.

For the computing enthusiast, the Intel Developer Forum is pretty exciting. With sneak peeks and details given on what's coming down the pipe, there's a lot for the chip fan at IDF.

Sadly, not everyone can attend IDF (not even some of us due to time constraints), but thanks to the German side of Tom's Hardware, we've snapped some photos from the presentations for your enjoyment.

Stay tuned for more!

Display 22 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 0 Hide
    njkid3 , September 23, 2009 5:52 PM
    what no octo core
  • 5 Hide
    Montezuma , September 23, 2009 6:04 PM
    njkid3what no octo core


    At some point, more cores on a die will become too much of a cliche. In 50 years, it would be horrible to think that the advertisements would read, "OMG, 1337 h4ckr0z, we have 502,405 cores on a single die!. Beat that, bitches!". Of course, in 50 years, I expect us to be on to quantum-based computing, DNA computing, and other methods that are not even close to being dreamed up.

    Then I was to be able to travel back in time and and eliminate John Con...err, I want the Earth to be a peace.
  • -1 Hide
    skykaptain , September 23, 2009 6:27 PM
    Quote:
    Then I was to be able to travel back in time and and eliminate John Con...err, I want the Earth to be a peace.


    Do you have your gargoyle sunglasses?
  • 0 Hide
    jn77 , September 23, 2009 6:37 PM
    skykaptainDo you have your gargoyle sunglasses?


    That is funny, I don't think I will see a 502,405 core processor in my life time.

    So speaking in reality, I would like to see an octo core or a 16 and 32 processor on the road map, with mother boards that support 48 and 96gb of ram, that only makes sense.

    Maybe my grandkids, kids will see an 100,000 core cpu.
  • 1 Hide
    ElectroGoofy , September 23, 2009 6:52 PM
    JN77Maybe my grandkids, kids will see an 100,000 core cpu.


    Well, you never know, in the last 10 or so years computers have taken some quantum leaps.
  • 0 Hide
    nforce4max , September 23, 2009 7:11 PM
    Its nice to see SGI is still in the game.
  • -1 Hide
    Anonymous , September 23, 2009 7:22 PM
    Sooner or later, computers will start designing themselves.

    Engineers will just input the desired specifications nd the computers will come up with the design.

    But the scary part of that is how much control will humanity retain over the actions of future computers, especially those designed for the military.
  • -1 Hide
    charlesxuma , September 23, 2009 8:01 PM
    i'm dreaming of the day that all manufacturing companies bind together , like intel, AMD/ATI, Nvidia, IBM, and so on , to create ONE MEGA ARCHITECTURE that will defy all laws of physics and chemistry !!!

    BEHOLD THE BRINGER OF LIGHT !!!!!!
  • 0 Hide
    Intel_ARK_Dude , September 23, 2009 8:41 PM
    Here's a Stats Chart for all the products launched today:
    http://bit.ly/IDF09products

    Also, all of the http://bit.ly/Clarksfield processors:
    http://bit.ly/i7-920XM
    http://bit.ly/i7-820QM
    http://bit.ly/i7-720QM

    And the mobile version of http://bit.ly/IbexPeak:
    http://bit.ly/PM55chipset

    Hope it helps!
  • 0 Hide
    Shadow703793 , September 23, 2009 8:46 PM
    nforce4maxIts nice to see SGI is still in the game.

    Alive and well: http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/22/sgi-announces-octane-iii-personal-supercomputer/
  • 1 Hide
    Shadow703793 , September 23, 2009 8:52 PM
    charlesxumai'm dreaming of the day that all manufacturing companies bind together , like intel, AMD/ATI, Nvidia, IBM, and so on , to create ONE MEGA ARCHITECTURE that will defy all laws of physics and chemistry !!!BEHOLD THE BRINGER OF LIGHT !!!!!!

    Yeah, and a monopoly. You DO NOT want that to happen.
  • 2 Hide
    pochacco007 , September 23, 2009 9:14 PM
    8 cores, 16 cores, etc.... aren't going to do anything for anyone. having 8+ cores and surfing the net isn't going to make it any different then using a single or dual core. in some way, the processor has somewhat reached a saturation point. but of course that changes due to the program requirements. for instance, running vista instead of xp will require more processor power as well as other essentials to run the operating system. but i see majority of the population will be in dual core as it is sufficient on the basis of the general need of the general consumer.

    the geneneral needs of the consumers are typically simple stuff, such as surfing the internet, webchat, online games [yahoo games for instance], youtube, etc.... these are things that don't require so much processing power.

    on the other hand, there are consumers that do demand a higher level of tech, typically gamers and tech industries [servers, super computers, etc....]. but in terms of consumers, it's gamers. but i wouldn't consider gamers needing more then 4 cores. for gamers, what often helps most isn't so much of the processing power but rather the graphical card. even with quad cores, we can still maintain greater performance by introducing new changes, like the i7, which has hyperthreading which helps push the processing power even further.

    i don't believe there is merit to continue further with 8 or 16 cores as it won't do much for the typical and gamer consumer.

    intel and amd should focus on improving other things on the motherboard.
  • 0 Hide
    jn77 , September 23, 2009 10:06 PM
    Shadow703793Yeah, and a monopoly. You DO NOT want that to happen.


    I remember looking at SGI 15 years ago, and looking at them now, wow, but... 1 of those fully decked out Octane III Full Towers is a little more money than I can spend for photo and HD Video editing, but 80 cores, 1TB ram and Windows 7 64 would make for an intresting pc
  • 0 Hide
    kingssman , September 23, 2009 10:07 PM
    well at first it was more GHZ was all that mattered in a CPU until they hit the GHz limit now its cores, until they reach the core limit, next i believe its the nm reduction until they hit the nm limit so they got the routs of 32 68 128 bit limits which imo could last for a very long time into the megabits. Quantum computing would be with trinary encoding, DNA computing I heard was more of a storage medium than computing power.

    I personally would like to see more energy friendly cpus for laptops, perhaps a method to reduce power consumption by underclock all the way down into the mhz range where the cpu could run idle or simple tasks on almost the minimum power that is used to run a calculator. This could extend notebook battery times past the 24 hour mark.
  • 0 Hide
    tipoo , September 23, 2009 10:07 PM
    The whole presentation was pretty solid, save one thing: Larrabee. Still no gaming footage? Come on!
  • 0 Hide
    sacre , September 23, 2009 10:39 PM
    Naw a "multicore race" will die just like the "GHZ" race

    How do you move further? not by improving an old idea, but by making a new one that is better.

    Instead of more cores, it'll be a new form of CPU that does its calculations a lot differently then current thus increasing speed ten fold, then they'll stack cores, then they'll make a single new one, stack, single, stack. Etc
  • 0 Hide
    knight9413 , September 23, 2009 11:28 PM
    Right on... different design and approach are what we need. I am also getting tired of controlling the computer with keyboard and mouse... we've been doing that for ages. I am willing to learn something new and ready to move on.
  • 0 Hide
    knight9413 , September 23, 2009 11:33 PM
    keyboard, mouse, and monitor... I mean.
  • -2 Hide
    Anonymous , September 24, 2009 12:34 AM
    "pochacco007 09/23/2009 11:14 PM

    8 cores, 16 cores, etc.... aren't going to do anything for anyone. having 8+ cores and surfing the net isn't going to make it any different then using a single or dual core. in some way, the processor has somewhat reached a saturation point. but of course that changes due to the program requirements. for instance, running vista instead of xp will require more processor power as well as other essentials to run the operating system. but i see majority of the population will be in dual core as it is sufficient on the basis of the general need of the general consumer.

    the geneneral needs of the consumers are typically simple stuff, such as surfing the internet, webchat, online games [yahoo games for instance], youtube, etc.... these are things that don't require so much processing power.

    on the other hand, there are consumers that do demand a higher level of tech, typically gamers and tech industries [servers, super computers, etc....]. but in terms of consumers, it's gamers. but i wouldn't consider gamers needing more then 4 cores. for gamers, what often helps most isn't so much of the processing power but rather the graphical card. even with quad cores, we can still maintain greater performance by introducing new changes, like the i7, which has hyperthreading which helps push the processing power even further.

    i don't believe there is merit to continue further with 8 or 16 cores as it won't do much for the typical and gamer consumer.

    intel and amd should focus on improving other things on the motherboard."

    pochacco007, you are one of the biggest tards I've come across yet. Maybe your pimply fat ass who lives with his parents does not need the computing power since you only play games all day long and wank off to porn, but the rest of the Scientific community needs quad cores, 8+cores, 32+cores... In fact, if I'd be given 1000+ core machine right now, I already have the software to use it, since I develop highly scalable parallel ML systems. If Intel stops "trying to develop 8+..." core systems, who will? it certainly won't be you, you're too stupid. Why don't you stop worrying about what Companies and Individuals infinitely smarter and wealthier than you are doing, and just worry about your mommy paying your rent, and where you're going to get the cash to buy your next puter game...
  • 0 Hide
    JohnnyLucky , September 24, 2009 1:08 PM
    Nice photo story. Very Informative.
Display more comments