AMD Wants to Know What You'd Do With 48 Cores

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]danielmastia[/nom]I always wonder why someone doesnt develop a single core but with all the cache and transistors of a quadcore (Not really sure a 30Ghz cpu is feasible, but a 3ghz with a looooot of power is).Sure, it would be a single computational thread but 4 times faster than any other... Not too bad if you ask me.[/citation]The problems come when you're swapping cache and ram data. You're idea would be great for a single threaded behemoth compiled to be the only thing running on that processor. Once you start adding an OS and other programs, the number of times your cache and ram needs to be swapped increases (more cache means higher latency in this process.) Also, processor technology has hit a physical barrier for the speed at which transistors can react because of the their material properties. This is one of the reasons why 4GHz is about the fastest anyone seems to be able to go (+/- a few 100 MHz) on air cooling systems. IBM recently released a press release about research in using a different material which is very promising in increasing clock speeds once again (expect it in a CPU near you in the next 5-10 years). So, with these problems CPU manufacturers only have 2 options to increase performance. First, improve the efficiency of the processes. What this means is, instead of taking 5 clock cycles to multiple 2 numbers, take only 3 clock cycles and maintain the same frequency (most people do not realize things are calculated over many clock cycles as this can sometimes improve efficiency as a whole). The second thing they can do is add a more cores. The efficiency increase of this is obvious when you have multiple threads fighting for calculation time.
 
I'd use it to help figure out how to win the contest for 96 cores. 96 AMD cores on the wall, 96 AMD cores, if one of those cores should happen to crash, 95 AMD cores on the wall...
 
simply they can't..already tried with the Pentium 4. it is awesome at first but just can't stand the noise and heat that emanate from it. it is just old fashioned to me like the old high displacement cars.

for a 48 core computer, I would use it to serve computing for people here at home. just don't know how to do it yet.

[citation][nom]danielmastia[/nom]I always wonder why someone doesnt develop a single core but with all the cache and transistors of a quadcore (Not really sure a 30Ghz cpu is feasible, but a 3ghz with a looooot of power is).Sure, it would be a single computational thread but 4 times faster than any other... Not too bad if you ask me.[/citation]
 
[citation][nom]WheelsOfConfusion[/nom]"That's it? If you had 48 cores, you'd do two chicks at the same time?"[/citation]
According to human biology § 313-32 "It takes approximately 24 cores in the human brain to have intercourse with a woman.*"

Therefore 48 cores means you can do two at the same time.

*This only applies to normal people. Sex addicts and porn stars are extremely skilled do not need cores to perform this.
 
[citation][nom]dman157[/nom]According to human biology § 313-32 "It takes approximately 24 cores in the human brain to have intercourse with a woman.*" Therefore 48 cores means you can do two at the same time.*This only applies to normal people. Sex addicts and porn stars are extremely skilled do not need cores to perform this.[/citation]
Giggty goo...
 
Problem 1: Paying for electricity.
Problem 2: Paying for 8slots X 4CPU X 8GB = 32 X 8GB = Yikes, that's more than the CPUs and Motherboard. It seems they should toss in the memory too. Just sayin'
 
I would run a server that archives as much history as possible and is easily accessible to the public , along with a history of much older games that can be played if your a premium member. =)
 
I'd use 48 cores to hack into jaguar "the worlds fastest supercomputer" and play a game of global thermal nuclear war. But just before I was about to lose, I'd trick it into an un-winnable game of tic-tac-toe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.