• 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.

Will Intel release faster C2D's?

caff

caff

caff

Soldato
Joined
8 Feb 2004
Posts
3,769
Location
London
As per the topic really - are they planning to release faster C2D's now they have the tech? If so, how soon?
 
Of course they will! What, did you suspect that the Conroe is the last desktop chip Intel will ever release? :p

Kentsfield should be out sometime next year. Kentsfield will be two Conroes on one die, making a quad-core processor the same way that Intel made their first dual core processors.

According to Wikipedia the roadmap looks something like this:
  • Allendale, dual-core, cut-down Conroe with 2 MiB L2
    • Millville, single-core, cut-down Allendale with 1 MiB L2
    • Wolfdale, dual-core, 45 nm shrink of Allendale, with 3 MiB L2
  • Kentsfield, quad-core MCM, consists of two Conroes, with 2 × 4 MiB L2 (8 MiB L2)
    • Yorkfield, eight-core MCM, 45 nm, 12 MiB L2, successor to Kentsfield
  • Ridgefield, dual-core, 45 nm shrink of Conroe, with 6 MiB L2
  • Perryville, single-core, 45 nm mobile and desktop processor, 2 MiB L2
 
Last edited:
When Intel release faster ones you can just OC to the same speed and be happy :) like up to 3.33ghz if they ever release one of those :p

I think my next upgrade will be that 8 core thing :D
 
Even with Conroe Intel clearly have a lot of headroom as people are getting the cheaper models to 3.5Ghz on air. They're just saving them for later - no point putting all your cards on the table when even your weaker ones are miles ahead of the competition!
 
Kiefer - 32 cores


I read an article ages ago about their roadplan for future development, its going to be more a case of outwards then upwards. More cores and better cache/memory management rather then ghz going ever higher
 
silversurfer said:
Kiefer - 32 cores


I read an article ages ago about their roadplan for future development, its going to be more a case of outwards then upwards. More cores and better cache/memory management rather then ghz going ever higher
Click to expand...
i believe the future 32 core processor is/was going to be called the Donnington?

edit: just spotted it on the Wiki article concerning Intel's future processors

Servers and workstations

* Clovertown, quad-core MCM, consists of two Woodcrests, with 2 × 4 MiB L2
* Tigerton, quad-core MCM. MP-capable version of Clovertown.
* Harpertown, either a dual-core, 45 nm shrink of Woodcrest, or an eight-core, 45 nm MCM with 12 MiB L2
* Dunnington, four to thirty-two cores, successor to Tigerton


dunnington, i was close :o
 
Iam not sure, its going to be something like 10 years in the future. I only mentioned it for the :cool: factor and as a general indicator of where future development is likely to be. Thanks for info anyhow :)


http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/10/intel-goes-multi-core-crazy-for-keifer-server-line/


On this link, dunnington is listed as 8 cores with 32 core chip name unknown. It also lists Drhystone mips showing conroe to be 5.5x more powerfull then a G5 Powerpc

http://www.bayarea.net/~kins/AboutMe/CPUs.html

Gulftown - Kiefer design
32 cores
(8 nodes x 4 cores ea.
ETA:2010
Click to expand...
Not 10 years time, 2010 so only 4 years :eek:
 
Last edited:
silversurfer said:
*snip*


Not 10 years time, 2010 so only 4 years :eek:
Click to expand...
must remember that these 32 core CPUs are going to be server spec CPUs... from a desktop point of view they will cost an arm and a leg no doubt.

and probably a fair few other limbs as well.

i imagine the heat generated from a 32 core CPU would be huge as well surely!? :confused:

would like to see how they can work around that.

off topic, with more and more cores being added to processors... it's quite ironic that we're seeing Intel actually drop the GHz on many of its processors now... when ironically - Intel at one point looked to simply focus on pumping more and more mhz into their chips.

from the link you gave
The good news is that while those chips will be fairly low on GHz -- about one third of the fastest Xeon CPU currently available -- but they'll manage 15x the performance
Click to expand...
 
hmm you never know processors may change in 10 years time to something completely different..wasnt that long ago the transistor processor was made..


we may even have bio tech or something else
 
Meh, 10 years ago processors were essentially what they are today. The only thing added has been speed, cache, and special instruction sets for 64-bit integers through AMD64/EM64T and 64 and 128 bit floats through SSE/2/3.
 
I think that 32 core will also be produced at 32nm. Otherwise it'd have to be physically bigger, but do they actually mean to keep with the same socket as now. No doubt chipsets will have to be updated along the way anyhow
 
I may be wrong but its my impression that Intel (and AMD) change sockets every three to four years anyway (on their premium lines at least)

In the forseeable future I cant see desktop chips going above quad core ( even though chipset designers etc may allow dual socket mobo's to reach the home market - well AMD have already confirmed it so Intel has to follow suit I guess)

Any more cores I personally think will become too expensive to manufacture (unless they discover a more reliable multi core process) and will be destined for servers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom