Intel's 32 Core, Quad-HyperThreading Super Chip

Status
Not open for further replies.

dxwarlock

Distinguished
Sep 20, 2008
190
0
18,690
1
[citation][nom]mauller07[/nom]Sounds nice, but whos gonna say it first.. i dare ya[/citation]
ok i will
but can it play Wolfenstein?
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
Looks like Intel has been working hard on its MIC products since Terascale. Its a good idea and looks to bring a lot of new stuff to servers, HPCs and Cloud computing.

Can't wait to see this in action.
 

jellico

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2009
622
0
18,980
0
This is an absolutely staggering level of computing power. It always amazes me to think that my first PC (not my first computer, mind you) was a 80386 25MHz with 4MB of RAM and a 100MB hard drive... and that was considered a pretty nice machine at the time. By comparison, however, it was a friggin stone axe by today's standards. I can't wait to see where the technology will be in the next 25 years!
 

mauller07

Splendid
have to remember that each core is also only a fraction as powerfull as a current processor core (in a current pc it would be very under powered) in say quad core, septa core etc but its the number of them and threading of the program that makes up for the power
 

kingofwacky

Distinguished
Mar 3, 2009
35
0
18,530
0
[citation][nom]mauller07[/nom]Sounds nice, but whos gonna say it first.. i dare ya[/citation]
....but can it play............................................crysis?
 
D

Deleted member 217926

Guest



No, no the real question is........can it play Crysis on max settings? :lol:
 

tu_illegalamigo

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2010
147
0
18,690
1
Great for parallel tasks, but mas programacion en paralela por favor! I think parallel computing is where everything is going to go next, due to certain limits being reached these days.
 

awood28211

Distinguished
Aug 1, 2007
204
0
18,680
0
I think multi-core processing will be more evident if given the ability to divide the cores into logical workloads. Must everything run on core1 that's single threaded until the OS decides it's too bogged down? I want core 30-32 to run my games, core 20-29 to run all my single core apps, dividing each processor to one per core unless I exceed all 9 cores in use. give me the 1st 5 cores for my OS and services. Put the rest into anything else that is multi-threaded. Let ME configure it. There is NOTHING that's more of a pet peeve to me than my machine using near 100% of 1 cpu and 2% of another all the while making every application I own come to a crawl....just because the OS thinks it knows how to handle it.
 

mikem_90

Distinguished
Jun 24, 2010
449
0
18,780
0
This is not your gaming computer. This is for clusters and big iron systems that need to process a LOT of threads and tasks at once.

Its interesting to see that Larrabee didn't get totally shelved, and was possibly an experiment leading into this. Maybe they were hoping for some discrete graphics products to come from it too, but possibly not.
 

gm0n3y

Distinguished
Mar 13, 2006
3,441
0
20,780
0
[citation][nom]jellico[/nom]This is an absolutely staggering level of computing power. It always amazes me to think that my first PC (not my first computer, mind you) was a 80386 25MHz with 4MB of RAM and a 100MB hard drive... and that was considered a pretty nice machine at the time. By comparison, however, it was a friggin stone axe by today's standards. I can't wait to see where the technology will be in the next 25 years![/citation]
Man, my first PC (a Mac actually) only had a 20MB hard drive. Its was color though (16bit I think).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS