• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Intel Demos 48-Core Microprocessor (PICS)

I wonder if they will do a hyper-threaded version...

One of those would make an interesting Folding or SETI rig! :p
 
mad

but yes as above its biggest application will likely be cloud computing, or seemingly now, the condensing of the "cloud" back into a handful of machines lol


i believe this is vmwares equivilant of a wet dream though, the tech heads there must be salivating at the thought of this
 
Aedus said:
Holy ****?

Anyone want to hazard a guess at how much some monster like this would cost?
Click to expand...

It has 1.3-billion transistors... compared to a quad-core Nehalem with 731-million transistors, down from 820 million in Yorkfield.

So a hazardous first guess, about twice the price of i7 CPU.

paulh said:
keeping it cool must be fun....!!
Click to expand...

Up to 125W so not totally crazy to cool. How much power does a i7 CPU overclocked past 4 GHz draw?
 
You would need shed loads of RAM for a beast like that running a dozen VMs, but still it is phenomenal how much they have packed into one chip.

Imagine overclocking it.... 24 hours of SuperPI to have just ONE core bomb out on you! :p
 
clv101 said:
Up to 125W so not totally crazy to cool. How much power does a i7 CPU overclocked past 4 GHz draw?
Click to expand...



Just looked at the link above and it shows it on a board, it looks so plain, with what looks like a cooler from 1985!!
 
cavemanoc said:
Don't GPUs already have over 100 cores - the only difference is that they are specialized or 'optimized' to give better performance in the very specific area in which they are needed - surely we would need both more cores, and a whole new programming language to even make these relevant in a gaming context - never mind competitive?
Click to expand...

Current GPUs aren't "independently" programmable. So you have multiple cores (blocks of them) doing them same thing, and you launch thousands of threads. This is different.
 
One of these theoretically doing rendering and CPU tasks would be around the rendering performance of a upper midrange nvidia 7 series card i.e. 7800GT.
 
cavemanoc said:
Don't GPUs already have over 100 cores - the only difference is that they are specialized or 'optimized' to give better performance in the very specific area in which they are needed - surely we would need both more cores, and a whole new programming language to even make these relevant in a gaming context - never mind competitive?
Click to expand...

Yeah, they'd be no good for a GPU. GPU's carry a lot of power because they have a lot less functions than a CPU (i.e. not programmable). They only need a few functions because the perform a much more specialized task than a CPU. Having a smaller function set means it takes less time to perform each one, so you get more performance in what it does do.

This is why we have CUDA/OpenGL. It allows us to perform CPU functions on a GPU by converting the CPU functions into something that can be processed by the GPU.

At least, I think that's right. I've got it into my head somehow.
 
Might sound like a stupid question but does anyone know what type of task manager is in one of the picture with the wattage display? rough guess but i think it could be from one of the server editions of windows.

Thanks in advance :)
 
bit shocking to believe that im the only one wondering about how this thing will handle single threaded performance. i seriously doubt it will be even as good as a core2duo's single core.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom