Intel pledges 80 cores in five years

[Alec§taar]

"WoW"... take a peek:

http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-6119618.html?part=rss&tag=6119618&subj=news

"Intel has built a prototype of a processor with 80 cores that can perform a trillion floating-point operations per second... The chips are capable of exchanging data at a terabyte a second... Ten years ago, the ASCI Red supercomputer at Sandia National Laboratories became the first supercomputer to deliver 1 teraflop using 4,510 computing nodes. "



* We'll be laughing @ our current crop of CPU's then, provided these will be affordable to the masses that is...

APK

 

[magibeg]

oh wow! That means i should be able to run 3dmark06 with my cpu and break 10K . That is a lot of cores!

 

[Alec§taar]

oh wow! That means i should be able to run 3dmark06 with my cpu and break 10K . That is a lot of cores!

It is... question is: Will/Can current OS schedule threads across THAT many CPU's... & I do NOT think so, @ least, not yet (maybe Linux can do this though, I am NOT sure).

IIRC, Windows highest amount is to be able to scale across 32-64 CPU's in Windows Server 2003...

APK

 

[magibeg]

Well perhaps theres a way to trick windows into how many cores there actually is. 'Reverse hyperthreading' has been mentioned numerous times but to my knowledge this technology doesn't exist. I really cant picture there being a practically application of that many cores for the average user within the next 5 years though anyway.

You wouldn't happen to know how many cores vista possibly supports would you?

 

[W2hCYK]

How many cores does vista support?

**lol same question..

***The only purpose I could see of this thing being is for say.. photoshop users, or video producers/renderers. imagine the F@H on that processor.. imagine how long it would take to set up.. *GASP!*

 

[Alec§taar]

Well perhaps theres a way to trick windows into how many cores there actually is. 'Reverse hyperthreading' has been mentioned numerous times but to my knowledge this technology doesn't exist.

Right... I heard a LOT of "mixed bag" type reviews on this... some say, YES, it is possible, others not.

I really cant picture there being a practically application of that many cores for the average user within the next 5 years though anyway.

Video editing? I don't know...

You wouldn't happen to know how many cores vista possibly supports would you?

No, but I can look it up... in the "Ultimate Edition", probably as many as Windows Server 2003 "DataCenter" runs (step up from the version I use here, in "Enterprise" type)...

APK

P.S.=> 64-way, as I suspected above, from right here (For Windows Server 2003 that is, & probably SAME for VISTA), see here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/features/comparefeatures.mspx

See the HARDWARE SPECIFICATIONS section... apk

 

[AshenSugar]

It is... question is: Will/Can current OS schedule threads across THAT many CPU's... & I do NOT think so, @ least, not yet (maybe Linux can do this though, I am NOT sure).

IIRC, Windows highest amount is to be able to scale across 32-64 CPU's in Windows Server 2003...

APK

check into windows 2003 data center server, it can deal with the most cores of any windows, im pretty sure it can deal with greater then 80cores/cpus at a time.

lost the specs page link from ms and dont wana deal with finding it again(lists how much ram and many cpu's each version of windows can deal with)

 

[Alec§taar]

check into windows 2003 data center server, it can deal with the most cores of any windows, im pretty sure it can deal with greater then 80cores/cpus at a time.

lost the specs page link from ms and dont wana deal with finding it again(lists how much ram and many cpu's each version of windows can deal with)

I did, see my last posting... "DataCenter" scales to 64-way SMP. The version I use, in Windows Server 2003 "Enterprise" goes 32-way.

Not absolutely SURE about VISTA though, since it's NOT "final" & still in "beta" release candidate forms & all that (I just hauled it in yesterday in fact, & STILL have to install/try it)...

VISTA's typical models will probably do 2-16 way, & I am guessing that VISTA "Ultimate Edition" will do 64-way SMP as does Windows Server 2003 "DataCenter" edition.

(Don't quote me on that... I know nearly NADA about VISTA, "hands-on"/First Hand @ least, so far, & only know what I read about it & all that!)

APK

P.S.=> You're new here, hello... apk

 

[AshenSugar]

soz, wasnt reading thruoly, and datacenter can acctualy do more then 64way, its just that nobody has a system on the open market thats got more cores, well other then companys like cray and they tend to use costom os's on there costom hardware(costom unix variants)

vista by the docs i have read will e 2 way for lower versions, 4-8way for middle and they didnt list untimet but im guessing 16way, tho with ms who knows, im set here i got server 2003, when i get my quadcore i wont need to reinstall windows

 

[PVTCaboose1337]

My ass, that would be cool, but it will hard to commit.

 

[Steevo]

The thread handling overhead to keep them busy would be more workload than most OS's can handle.

 

[-Thrilla-]

Someone at mini ITX used FreeBSD for his multi mobo parallel processing setup.
Very impressive.
http://www.mini-itx.com/projects/cluster/

 

[AshenSugar]

that chip is NOT x86/amd64 compatable so no windows would run on it, hellow linux

 

[Alec§taar]

that chip is NOT x86/amd64 compatable so no windows would run on it, hellow linux

Is this in reference to the chip I noted in this thread? My bad for skimming then... but, IF today's Windows isn't yet?

It will be imo!



* Microsoft can't afford NOT to look @ things like that & not develop their OS around them... Especially if it came from Intel (imo @ least - they are STILL the "King of the Mountain" out there, even though I like AMD very much too)...

APK

 

[AshenSugar]

ms can dictate to intel what intels gonna do if they want windows support period.

Intium didnt get full windows support(emulated only) intels 64bit x86 didnt get windows support, intel was FORCED by MS to use amd64(tho in reality intels em64t is only 58bit, thus the lack of perf compared to amd in 64bit apps) MS has started favoring amd from what i been seeing.
but it wont mater 80cores will likely be used for server stuff like intium where windows dosnt matter because you use a custom os to run the systems.(linux/unix based mostly)

 

[Alec§taar]

ms can dictate to intel what intels gonna do if they want windows support period.

Intium didnt get full windows support(emulated only) intels 64bit x86 didnt get windows support, intel was FORCED by MS to use amd64(tho in reality intels em64t is only 58bit, thus the lack of perf compared to amd in 64bit apps) MS has started favoring amd from what i been seeing.
but it wont mater 80cores will likely be used for server stuff like intium where windows dosnt matter because you use a custom os to run the systems.(linux/unix based mostly)

Interesting viewpoint, & true - "the ghost in the machine (software) is useless, without the machine (body)" & vice-a-versa.

Good example.

Yes, and your last point?

Makes good sense too, but I do & have seen Windows start displacing even those UNIX variant type systems (HP-UX where I am now, one of the MOST secure UNIX there is (B rating iirc, above Windows C2 status in the Orange Book last I looked)?

Being replaced by Windows Server DataCenter edition later this year, wholesale... the main application has been re-written for it by its OEM is why, & costs of UNIX stuff, vs. Windows editions of it? Usually, in favor of Windows. UNIX &/or Os/400 (zOS) software?? Largely more expensive typically.

See, I agree with you in some capacities though - not everyone NEEDS "enterprise" or "datacenter" type versions' of OS'... especially most end-users!

PLUS, & I think I brought this up in this thread??

The cost of this 80-core CPU... it's GOT to be expensive as heck! Probably beyond what most of us, if not ALL of us, are willing to spend, period.

(Heck, honestly? For example - I don't need a 64-bit OS, or that much memory addresseability for ANYTHING I do @ home... not really!)

APK

P.S.=> Corporate bodies will though, bank on that... data keeps getting bigger & growing, this IS its nature & yes, due to legislations & duration of required time to keep it for records & legal purposes, it just grows...

Fact is, I ran into some of the LARGEST datasets I have ever seen or worked with the past 2-3 years now (for a HUGE financial corporation, & later even larger data, with an insurance company)... staggering! apk

 

[AshenSugar]

give ms 8 years with windows and we will need 64bit memory addressing to deal with it, i can see windows taking up many gigs of ram at the rate ms is bloating things up.(vista needs a gig just to run windows smoothy for example)

and many companys are moving to windows but many are also sticking to unix/linux/solaris or variants of them because the hardware and/or software they use is more suited to them then windows.
for example my buddys company just for 36ultra sparc servers very diffrant from what most of you have seen, these WILL NOT RUN WINDOWS PERIOD they need an os built for them solaris or unix/linux is the only choice.

sparc cpus are acctualy a bunch of "dumb cores" insted of a few complex ones, this honestly is where the worlds headed since its cheaper then making very complex designs, a bunch of fairly simple"dumb" cores working togather makes it easyer to update the cpu then a complex one.

sorry for the link , i know somebody here will probbly see it as spam, i assure you its not, but hey i guess spam is in "the eye of the beholder"

 

[Alec§taar]

give ms 8 years with windows and we will need 64bit memory addressing to deal with it, i can see windows taking up many gigs of ram at the rate ms is bloating things up.(vista needs a gig just to run windows smoothy for example)

Possible, VERY possible... I think, one day? We will be doing REALTIME chats, but with photorealistic avatars/characters... & it will probably NEED that.

(Killer app on the way imo, will be THAT very thing - think today's "social networks" like MySpace are it? I think not... I think Ms' old Comic-Chat (fun as hell imo) was where it was @, but before it's time, & the idea lends itself to some serious FUN! Be anyone you like basically, photorealistic & realtime!)

and many companys are moving to windows but many are also sticking to unix/linux/solaris or variants of them because the hardware and/or software they use is more suited to them then windows.

Yes, some do... NASA being one, afaik & have heard/read. Having sourcecode is valuable imo @ least... not having to wait on patches could be EXTREMELY useful.

(BUT, I know that million line programs I have written, or maintenanced over time in the MIS//IS/IT sector? Confusing as hell, even IF you wrote or co-wrote them, not even a few months later... worse, if you didn't @ all & are going @ them from scratch (but, this is where I have learned the most, working on fixing others' work or adding to it, to be honest)).

for example my buddys company just for 36ultra sparc servers very diffrant from what most of you have seen, these WILL NOT RUN WINDOWS PERIOD they need an os built for them solaris or unix/linux is the only choice.

Yup, been there/done it... Solaris 2.6 was the last one of those I worked on in 1999 since you mention it specifically, coding "cross-platform" to it, & others before/after it, in IBM midrange OS (As/400's OS/400, now iirc, known as zOS series) & currently? HP-UX, using a LOT of RPC...

Thank GOD for middleware & tookits, is all I can say, lol!

sparc cpus are acctualy a bunch of "dumb cores" insted of a few complex ones, this honestly is where the worlds headed since its cheaper then making very complex designs, a bunch of fairly simple"dumb" cores working togather makes it easyer to update the cpu then a complex one.

CISC vs. RISC? Is this where you are leading?? Didn't check the link but I'd wager you are.

sorry for the link , i know somebody here will probbly see it as spam, i assure you its not, but hey i guess spam is in "the eye of the beholder"

Oh, no problem (I will check the link tomorrow most likely though)... I love talking this nerdy stuff (speak geek).

APK

P.S.=> I have a feeling you & I will get along JUST fine & have some good conversations here @ times... just a hunch! Nice meeting you... by all means! apk

 

[Frick]

CISC vs. RISC? Is this where you are leading?? Didn't check the link but I'd wager you are.

I think it was a sidenote.. And, IMO, it's kinda true. By the looks of things. But complex cores must exist, I think, at least in desktops.. Endusers tend to be problematic. We have to do so many different things.

EDIT: But then, maybe that's the idea with the 80-core-stuff? Waste those huge, complex cores in favor of smaller, simplier ones that maybe can work together to perform all those tasks everyone are doing.. But then I'm not that good at hard-hardware.