Intel Demos Single Chip 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.

tester24

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2009
415
0
18,780
And here is my jackass remark... "but can it play crysis?"

My serious remark, woopty do what happened to their 96 core chip? I can see this only in a server environment.

Also wondering if chip would have hyperthreading?
 

eyemaster

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2009
750
0
18,980
You guys are thinking so small... Who cares if there's not ONE software able to use 4 cores. That thought is single minded. More than one core means you can think with more than one brain. Load up multiple applications, not just one. Then, you see that multi core is great. Look at servers, even game servers. One chip can run multiple CSS servers, put a few chips, say 2 or 4 in a 1U server rack and you've got multiple game servers in a very small package.
 

rubix_1011

Contributing Writer
Moderator
^Not all software needs to be able to run multi-core (like eyemaster mentions) You simply need the ability to run many (potentially hundreds/thousands) of threads simultanesously. The ability to scale is what makes this powerful; not that it can run a single app and devoting all processing power to it.
 

mlopinto2k1

Distinguished
Apr 25, 2006
1,433
0
19,280
48 cores huh? That would take Photoshop to the extreme as well as FL Studio. You would be able to use an unlimited amount of Virtual Instruments! Someone mentioned we already have that in the GPGPU but there are latency issues with real-time streaming like ASIO support for audio. Trust me, I have already been looking into it with CUDA supported effect filters. There is ONE on NVIDIA's site that is pretty good, a reverb. Still.. a 48 core chip that could stream latency free audio would be fantastic.

http://professionalmike.com
 

pocketdrummer

Distinguished
Dec 1, 2007
1,084
30
19,310
[citation][nom]christop[/nom]VERY COOL..But will cost a ton of money.. What home user needs 48 cores. We haven't mastered 4 cores in software.. This would be great for servers..[/citation]

Well, if people would stop thinking that way, maybe 64-bit would take off too. The "when will I ever need this" mentality is crippling our technological progress. Who cares if YOU don't need it. I, for one, DO need it for what I do. Hell, if nothing else, put your wasted cycles to use with Folding@Home. Maybe you'll cure a disease without knowing it.
 

fonzy

Distinguished
Dec 23, 2005
398
1
18,785
Yeah really where is the 80 core chip they showed 4 years ago and promised us to be out "WITH IN" 5 years...now they prototype a 48 core chip.

 
G

Guest

Guest
Heh the responses to this article are sad. But they are EXACTLY what the article wanted(hype around nothing subtantial).

You all realize that these cores are probably very simple? Likely much slower then current x86 chips. The article said its a testbed chip for intercore communication; its not designed to do any real work. You wont be playing games on it, etc.

It very likely isnt even an x86 instruction design, so you couldnt even boot up windows with it.
 

anamaniac

Distinguished
Jan 7, 2009
2,447
0
19,790
I want to know how functional these cores are.
GPGPU requires extremely specialized coding, however a x86 chip is made to grunt through anything.
Are these a middleground, or have they found a architechture epic enough to have full functionality and still rid the crappy performance of x86 cores?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.