IBM 8 Core 32 threads!

[one-shot]

I came across this article on Tech Report's Daily Short Bread. IBM's new Power 7 CPU has 8 cores and 4 threads per core. I think I have read somewhere that AMD may be doing something similar with SMT on Bulldozer. SMT works great on my CPU, and 4 threads per core would be even better for some applications. Anyone else know more about this?

 

[amnotanoobie]

I'd take a real core over SMT anyday, but I won't complain if AMD is able to implement it.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

SMT (basically hyperthreading) is coming to the next AMD cpu's. AMD released hexa-cores months ago so expect octo-cores very soon.

Are you saying Magny-Cours will have SMT, or are you referring to Bulldozer as the "next AMD cpu's"? IIRC Magny-Cours is just 2 Istanbul's sandwiched together a la MCM - no change to the internal cores as would be necessary to add SMT capability.

Besides - an AMD cpu with both MCM and SMT would be just too much of an Intel copy - AMD would never live it down ...

 

[Wisecracker]

I think AMD calls it CMT and a lite version may debut with the the new enterprise chipset. Or not . AMD has been good about backing up and delivering on what they say the last year and a half (except on the &^$! sb800).

The Power7 is a RISC chip and won't run x86 instructions (I think --- unless they have made some big, big changes since Power6)

 

[one-shot]

I'm not sure if AMD is copying Intel on this. It appears IBM and AMD have worked together to implement something similar in design. I don't think IBM has copied Intel when Intel only has 2 threads per core and IBM has 4. I would love to see AMD make a powerful CPU so I can give AMD in the CPU segment. Too bad IBM doesn't make x86 CPUs.

 

[macelo]

I think AMD calls it CMT and a lite version may debut with the the new enterprise chipset. Or not . AMD has been good about backing up and delivering on what they say the last year and a half (except on the &^$! sb800).

The Power7 is a RISC chip and won't run x86 instructions (I think --- unless they have made some big, big changes since Power6)

Correct, Power7 is PowerPC processor (RISC based), so no x86. Designed for super computing purposes. Doesn't affect PCs. However, this is good news for consoles, which almost all have PowerPC cpus. 360, PS3, wii this gen.

 

[paperfox]

ive allways wondered when they would start making CPUs with more than 2 threads. single core CPU with 100 threads FTW!

 

[Shadow703793]

At the end of the day, hardware is only useful as the software that runs on it. What's the point if you have 16-24 threads available but don't have many software to use that power?

 

[one-shot]

At the end of the day, hardware is only useful as the software that runs on it. What's the point if you have 16-24 threads available but don't have many software to use that power?

E-PEEN, Duh, what else?? haha

 

[paperfox]

What's the point if you have 16-24 threads available but don't have many software to use that power?

its kind of like the chicken and the egg... why make a cpu that has a dozen threads that no current software can use or why should programers optimise their code to use threads that do not even exist yet...

 

[megamanx00]

Hyper threading was originally developed to make a CPU more efficient. For example one thread would be doing a floating point operation while another would be doing integer operations. If both threads needed to use the same resources, such as the same integer register, then one would have to stop and wait it's turn. It's like your left hand can use a screw driver, and your right hand can use the wrench, but you only have one of each so if the left needs the wrench also it needs to wait it's turn.

It seems like rather than copying Hyper Threading, AMD wants it's core to be able to execute another thread regardless of what the first thread is doing, basically giving it two wrenches and two screwdrivers rather than one of each. We'll see if it manages to work that way or if it really just ends up being hyper threading.

 

[amnotanoobie]

Bulldozer......and if Intels Nehalem can copy Phenoms architecture, then why cant AMD copy hyperthreading?

I think AMD wants to make a better implementation, not that there's anything wrong with the current HT.

What's the point if you have 16-24 threads available but don't have many software to use that power?

its kind of like the chicken and the egg... why make a cpu that has a dozen threads that no current software can use or why should programers optimise their code to use threads that do not even exist yet...

Currently there are few apps that utilize even four cores/four threads, we're getting to the point where there's excess capacity but few software to use it. Of course this may be due to the fact that dual-cores are way cheaper and more prevalent. Though any progress is good for all of us.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Bulldozer......and if Intels Nehalem can copy Phenoms architecture, then why cant AMD copy hyperthreading?

Because AMD made such a big deal about "native" vs MCM back when they didn't have any quad-cores, and more recently pooh-poohing SMT on Nehalem as just a leftover "trick" from P4 days. Yes, they can copy Intel but they'd look silly doing it, just as Intel would if they suddenly started selling 'triple-cripples' .