Intel's upcoming Teraflop CPU to use less than 70W power

[Jess Stingray]

Intel's experimental 1TFlop CPU is currently using 62W of power, and uses less than 1V on a 65nm process. It currently has 3.16GHz on each core, with 80 cores, totalling up to 1.01TFlops. Intel also has 2 more in development. Here is a chart showing what is currently in development:

Frequency Voltage Power Aggregate Bandwidth Performance
3.16 GHz 0.95 V 62W 1.62 Terabits/s 1.01 Teraflops
5.1 GHz 1.2 V 175W 2.61 Terabits/s 1.63 Teraflops
5.7 GHz 1.35 V 265W 2.92 Terabits/s 1.81 Teraflops

Source: Intel

 

[tkpenalty]

Ben = Pretentious

Joking, but, Teraflops = squat.

 

[Jess Stingray]

How can you say that 1TFlop = Nothing?

Blasphemer!

 

[ex_reven]

Blue Gene does 360 tera-f.l.o.p.s.

The question is....what do you do with all of them

 

[Jess Stingray]

Yeah, but Blue Gene is like 7000 computers in a high-speed LAN, I believe.

 

[ex_reven]

I dont think they would LAN supercomputers.
That would probably be a bottleneck.

More like a single massive system with a heap of integrated processors, each with their own ram etc.

 

[Deleted member 3]

I dont think they would LAN supercomputers.
That would probably be a bottleneck.

More like a single massive system with a heap of integrated processors, each with their own ram etc.

It's called a cluster. Many supercomputers are in fact clusters.

 

[ex_reven]

It's called a cluster. Many supercomputers are in fact clusters.

So the LAN thing was right or wrong ?

 

[Deleted member 3]

So the LAN thing was right or wrong ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_cluster

 

[ex_reven]

so i was only half right!?
Whats the LAN medium/controlling hardware?
Fibre optic?

 

[zekrahminator]

If you want to be a newsposter, Clarke, you should talk to W1zzard .

 

[Jess Stingray]

nah, not newspaposter. I don't find that much stuff

 

[ex_reven]

Yay, everyone can therefore spam and increase post count.

 

[Jess Stingray]

Wait, how does me saying I don't want to be a newsposter account for everyone spamming?

 

[Ketxxx]

Somehow, it just does it would seem

 

[Jess Stingray]

Hmm... in that case, I must be some sort of a demi-god. Wierd.

 

[Sasqui]

Personally, I thought it was a worthy post... you should include the source.

Demi-God if you think so. My post count just went up by one, but just because I said that some mod will deduct 100

 

[Jess Stingray]

OK, source coming up if I can figure out how to make it a word and not the URL.

EDIT: It's there.

 

[Sasqui]

Cool - look at this photo: http://download.intel.com/research/platform/images/teraflops/teraflop_chip.jpg

Imagine the IHS on that puppy,

 

[Jess Stingray]

May I just say, the chip is roughly 1 foot x 1/2 foot. Big chip.

 

[kwchang007]

So...1.01 teraflops over 80 cores? So each core carries out ~.0126 teraflops. Let's see my computer peaked at 7655 megaflops on scienecmark. Since the SGEMM isn't multi-threaded, that's 7655 megaflops per core. So, 7.655 gigaflops, .007655 teraflops. Now let's take a core 2 at 3ghz, just going on my score and scaling it up by 5/3's. That's ~ .0128 teraflops. Wow, this is a very efficient architecture, I was expecting core 2 to be much more efficient but that's not true. But somewhere they had to get rid of something that makes it work worse, and I bet that's cache. It probably has very little cache per core.

 

[Deleted member 3]

So...1.01 teraflops over 80 cores? So each core carries out ~.0126 teraflops. Let's see my computer peaked at 7655 megaflops on scienecmark. Since the SGEMM isn't multi-threaded, that's 7655 megaflops per core. So, 7.655 gigaflops, .007655 teraflops. Now let's take a core 2 at 3ghz, just going on my score and scaling it up by 5/3's. That's ~ .0128 teraflops. Wow, this is a very efficient architecture, I was expecting core 2 to be much more efficient but that's not true. But somewhere they had to get rid of something that makes it work worse, and I bet that's cache. It probably has very little cache per core.

How much power is required to let several Core2's do the same amount of work? Ah yes that must be the key here.

 

[kwchang007]

How much power is required to let several Core2's do the same amount of work? Ah yes that must be the key here.

Yeah, I was saying somewhere they must've cut something in order to save energy and lower heat dissipation. Either that or Intel has made a similarly efficient architecture with less transistors (since it is 65 nm). My bet is they took out chunks of conroe and which is why it can clock so high. I wonder if this will use CSI so they can really cut down on the cache.