Intel Targets 32-Core Processors in 2010

[D_o_S]

The world’s main supplier of microprocessors, Intel Corp., plans to offer a central processing unit for servers which will be 15 times faster compared to today’s chips, and which will contain up to 32 processing engines, according to a media report.

The processor code-named Gulftown will have “eight processing nodes” with four cores on each one, according to TG Daily web-site, which may mean that the chip will consist of several physical dice. Every die will sport four processing engines, 3MB unified level-three cache, while every core will have 512KB L2 cache. The dice will be connected to each other using “a ring architecture” interconnect technology.

Intel already reportedly has project named Keifer, which is focused around many-core processors. Keifer is generally aimed at server market and will primarily compete against Sun’s Niagara processors, which micro-architecture is used in the company’s UltraSparc T1 chips. So far Intel competed against ultra high-end server processors from Sun and IBM using its Itanium lineup of microprocessors. Currently it is unclear whether the Gulftown is based on the IA64 architecture, or still is an x86 microprocessor, however, on the slide published by TG Daily Intel’s Xeon 5100 (Woodcrest) chips are compared with the Gulftown.

Intel expects Keifer to result in a 15x performance jump over today's Xeon 5100 processors at just 2GHz clock speed, it is reported.

Source: X-bit Labs and TG Daily

[zekrahminator]

Originally Posted by D_o_S

The world’s main supplier of microprocessors, Intel Corp.

Thanks for helping AMD in the anti-trust lawsuit coming in 2007 .

[AMDCam]

I assume speed is a thing of the past? Does that mean in 2010 we'll still have 3.2ghz processors? That's just wierd to me, I mean is 3ghz the most efficient speed, 5ghz and 10ghz wouldn't really show a huge improvement?

[Canuto]

Well i guess the future is uncertain but muti-core processors are definitly the way to go.

[Alec§taar]

See subject-line/title above: Having more than 1 arm to do more work CONCURRENTLY, in the same amount of cycles (in a nutshell)... how to accomplish this?

Build BETTER multitasking/multithreaded operations into the OS, & build process scheduler/dispatcher sections into the OS kernel/core that ARE multithread to multiprocessor capable & they ARE here... could they be better?

According to MS? They are working this angle, large, in their R&D dept.'s (stuff like the SINGULARITY OS)...



* It does work... & not just for OS, but also user-mode apps (witness the up to 87% increase in performance out of Quake 4 SMP patch for instance/example)...

I first saw this type of design in the midrange/mainframe world (UNIX, VMS, As/400 & its OS400/System34-36-38 ancestors (big calculators on the latter 3 imo)) in the late 80's- early 90's!

(& it's "trickling-down" to the mainstream PC OS world... just like various hardware technologies did (like ScSi) & even OS + processor virtualizations & partitioning you're starting to JUST see today in upcoming PC processors from Intel/AMD).

Speaking of "on-the-hardware-side" only though? I mention something in another thread here that you all should be made aware of:

Gallium Arsenide

If they could make the process less hazardous in dealing w/ it, it will BLOW AWAY silicon based chips... 250ghz possible, FAR FASTER 1-0 switching states, & more...

(Look it up online, be amazed @ what is @ least POTENTIALLY possible)

APK

P.S.=> I mean, hey, think about it: 52 pickup w/ cards, ever play it? lol... do you work faster picking up the cards w/ 1 arm, or two (or more)?? apk

[Canuto]

Great point.

[rpgbefore...]

when i buy a dual core processor is when there are 32 core processors... which will not be in a long time because i love my proccy right now

[Jimmy 2004]

Well as long as they manage to get the processors to work better (ie being able to handle a single thread using multiple processors) that will be great news. Otherwise, software will be designed to work on whatever is the maximum number of cores available at the time and will need to keep changing.

[ktr]

and 2030 we shall get a windows to use all 32 cores

[magibeg]

Alec i think you should write a "Book Of Vast Knowledge" so we can absorb everything you know and use it to our advantage. Just an idea

[Alec§taar]

Originally Posted by magibeg

Alec i think you should write a "Book Of Vast Knowledge" so we can absorb everything you know and use it to our advantage. Just an idea

LOL, thanks... but, it's NOT that impressive.

Stick around this field for nearly 2 decades as I have? You'll have more & blow by me...

E.G.-> I know guys I have worked w/ for instance/example, that BLOW ME AWAY coding (one area, they tend to "concentrate" on it, & you really have to today, just to stay competitive)... or, in specifics (e.g. SQL, I am a BASIC guy here & often have to research how to write MORE EFFICIENT queries & such, still to this day).

* However, that's ALL they do... they have little to no background on system optimization, networking principals, security, OS commandlines & batching/shell coding, etc. & more (specialists).

Why try learn it all, OR @ least get a feel/cursory knowledge of it all?

Well, if you like what ya do & find it interesting? Work isn't work as much as when you HATE what you do... that sux, been there/done that too.

(IMO, to be the "computer-guy" of today & tomorrow? You have to be as "balanced/optimized" as is possible... having a rounded background in this (and, more than just computers) only benefits you in the LONG HAUL!)

E.G.-> It's saved projects for me, & bailed my team out @ times too, having the "BIG PICTURE" - sometimes, the solutions were not "elegant or clean" (I laff @ some of them to this day in fact) but, they worked - the 'bottom-line' - I try for elegance now, sometimes succeeding, others not & time wasted I suppose (.NET's been like this for me, especially ASP.NET, NOT THE SAME AS Win32 coding @ all, different mindset & techniques, ALL server-side mostly like ISAPI/NSAPI was)

In fact? What I am describing IS THE COMPUTER GUY OF YESTERYEAR really!

I.E. -> You had to "Do it all"... & I'll give you a FAMOUS example too of this & where the guy took it:

Peter Norton (one of my DOS days "intellectual heroes" up there w/ John Carmack & Anders Heijelsberg of MS/Borland)!

The man was an accountant by trade initially... look where he took computing!

APK

P.S.=> I tried to "learn it all" (impossible), or get as much as I could in about 12 years SOLID on it in the last 2 decades in PC/Server world, & another 4-5 before it (largely concentrating on coding mostly, but putting in time as a networking engineer & admin also, maybe 2 yrs more) from the midrange-mainframe world in the 1980's, which I disliked & took a break for some years from...

BUT, still learning, everyday.

Why do it? My "end goal" I set for myself 14-15 years back really:

A transition to mgt. is soon for me (or rather, a return to it, it is my roots in other industries)... my "end goal" really.

See, I don't think you can EFFECTIVELY manage others, unless you've been them! Believe me guys, this industry? It's STILL an infant compared to others... many bosses you will have & analysts?

Can't do the details of the job themselves... & that is B.S. imo! I am of the "military mindset" I suppose...

(I.E. - Your subordinates can't snow you on delivery times, estimates, etc. & also you can actually "jump in the mud" with them if a deadline's looming - I've had 2 managers in my time in this field that could do that - best BOSSES I EVER HAD, & for the reasons I noted just now).

The kind of boss I aim to be... again, one day... but, in THIS field specifically! apk

[Alec§taar]

Originally Posted by ktr

and 2030 we shall get a windows to use all 32 cores

Already here, since Windows 2000 (in fact, iirc, there are 64-way CUSTOM versions, Enterprise Editions)... & Windows Server 2003 DataCenter can iirc as well!



APK

[Jimmy 2004]

Just Write The Damn Book Of Knowledge!!!

[Alec§taar]

Originally Posted by Jimmy 2004

Just Write The Damn Book Of Knowledge!!!

I'd have to be "Johnny Mnemnonic", complete w/ wet-wired + compressed internal storage!



* You guys'd laugh how big my bookmarks & stored documents folders are here...

They are my FIRST research & reference points, along w/ GOOGLE etc. of course!

(For when things get "hazy in my head" as to details (completely DTSearch indexed though, makes for FAST retrieval of specifics) &, they do - too much detail to immediately recall in this technical field!)

* Good app by the way, I recommend it (DTSearch)... the ORIGINAL afaik, in the Win32 world (& really what WinFS is supposed to be about & all that!)

APK

P.S.=> Besides - the "University of Life/School of Hard-Knocks + experience"? Best teacher there is, as the lessons stick w/ you, especially mistakes! lol... apk

[breakfromyou]

codename keifer...named after jack bauer?

sounds pretty cool. too bad thats 4 years away. lets wait and see if they actually go through with these plans.

[W2hCYK]

I cant wait for 32 cores! But I wont buy it until someone decides to program for all 32.. heck.. nobody currently is really programming for dual, and duals have flooded the market as of now.. go figure... lazy american coders.... haha

[Alec§taar]

Originally Posted by W2hCYK

I cant wait for 32 cores! But I wont buy it until someone decides to program for all 32.. heck.. nobody currently is really programming for dual, and duals have flooded the market as of now.. go figure... lazy american coders.... haha

I gotta disagree man... Microsoft is an American company, & one of their OS' is showing me a single process bearing 21 threads to itself (svchost.exe, which brokers many), winlogon.exe w/ 21 as well = 42 threads...

More than 32 for certain.



I mean, only 2 processes w/ that many threads, could be "spun" across 32 processors via their threadcount (which exceeds that number in fact as you see above), & there would be no reason not to.

Ontop of that here, I have another 16 processes bearing another 102 threads between them all as well.

(It's all there, probably more on your system, as I am posting this running F@H (which is when I run a severly trimmed set of apps &/or services (both BARE MINIMUM, for F@H's sake), only, not even explorer.exe GUI shell))

APK

P.S.=> You just have to know where to look -> taskmgr.exe, processtab, w/ threads column visible... fact is, right now? I am not running 1 single threaded app, they all bear 2-22...

Us Americans? Heh, we're anything but lazy coders when we code (we do the best stuff on the planet imo - Ms' stuff rocks imo @ least & it's "Made in America")... apk