Intel reveals 80 core processor

I want to see Activity Monitor on this thing...

cool, we need a room just for the case, and 3 monitors in a row just to watch the activity monitor, and a nuclear powerplant for its little power needs

oh my....

we need a geforce 10-cores and we're set

skynet's construction is begun

128 cores on the 8800 Geforce?

are you sure?

Uhh.... did you notice this part?

In November, Nvidia introduced its most powerful graphics processor, the GeForce 8800, which has 128 cores.

EDIT: Careless you beat me to it

it does not have that many cores, but has 1 core with 128 unified shader engines.

Could I borrow some cores please?

howmuch?

Actually apparently the whole thing runs on one socket with just 62W of power altogether! However it looks like what it does is very specialised, it's not X86.

howmuch?

Just 10%

Does this mean the X86 line will soon be over? Or will we just get a lower powered 10-20 core X86 version now and down the road another platform change?

gt

x86 will never die

intel lots-a-cores “more chips than doritos in one chip...”

Yeah, I thought the NVidia part was a little suspicious. They'd be making a lot more than GFX cards if they were up to that much.

i read about this a month ago. it uses less power than the current quad core chips. (full implementation may be a little higher)

essentially making each core do one process, and several cores are alotted a process.

for example cores 1-30 do graphics, core 31-60 do something else, so on and so fourth.

more cores, less complex, lower power. in theory it should work but we will have to see.

I read about this a while back also, the first thing I thought about was the Cell processor. The whole idea sounds solid but I don't think it will go anywhere.

Great! Now we only need 60,000 dollars to buy it and we are on a roll!

yeah, i see AMD doing a combined CPU / GPU on the same die with embedded ram how damn fast what that {censored} be. remember where you heard it first when this becomes real....

i would sell my family for one of those... id even prob sell yours as well. wanna borrow them to me.

Great. First we had the Megahertz race, now we are already in the Cores race. Let's see who can get to 1,024 Cores First.

Then they will probably say, Mmmm. This many cores is just not fast enough and it's way too hot, I think we need a platform change and incorporate a Venus Fly Trap CPU. We've been developing this secretly since the beginning of time. Now all we will need for power are a few bugs and water.

gt

The Venus Fly Trap CPU is code named the Audrey II

This thread just isn't fair without hearing AMD's side of the story.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/02/07/...;cgd=2007-02-08

Anything with more than 50+ cores, either in a CPU or GPU, won't be widely available for consumer use for a while. Sure, some supercomputers have a ton of cores, but it nothing the average person could afford.

I'm sure we'll see a 16-core processor by 2010 though. They'll probably follow the "exponents of 2" trend by having 2, 4, 8, 16, etc. Before we reach the 128-core point, processors will probably have a different aspect being focused on, just as clock-speed is no longer the primary focus. Rather than the number of cores, engineers might shift focus to the strength of each individual core and the ways in which they inter-operate. All sorts of crazy new things are going to redefine processors as we know them in the years to come. A lot of the modern-day CPU architecture might even be totally thrown into the garbage and obsolete before we see 100+ cores packed into a Dell's CPU. To look at what the current trend is and simply say, "ok now extend that same trend and keep increasing cores to get an idea of what future CPUs will be like" is just naive. It's almost as futile as these attempts to continue using gasoline in cars with greater efficiency while dodging the idea of using completely alternative fuels. You need to be open-minded.

Just me two-bits.

Great. First we had the Megahertz race, now we are already in the Cores race. Let's see who can get to 1,024 Cores First.

Soon we'll be asking how many megacores a CPU has...

I just wonder how this is all going to play out with quantum computing becoming more advanced.

Im still waiting on the Silicon to Carbon switch, then i can have 1/3 of my body a huge processor.

also when that happens we can have alot more computing power because of Carbon's elemental makeup.

just how long til it happens??

I wonder how big the socket is? Hoprefully it uses AMD's new Barcelona technology to disable cores not in use and release the amount of power being used.

Am I the only one that sees this going the 3DFX Principle here? "If it isn't fast enough, just add more damn cores!"

Sorta funny how Intel just happened to announce it now that the first quantum computer has been made. I've actually known about the 80 core processor for a few months, my teacher saw it a while back. Me thinks Intel, IBM, and AMD are all a little bit worried about the quantum computer, especially since it can run 64,000 processes at one time rather than running processes sequentially. If anyone is interested, my teacher got permission to check out the quantum computer in march (the company who made it is 10 minutes from my school), I can probably get you some pictures other than the ones on slashdot along with some more information.