Intel Testing 80-Core Processors

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Dec 27, 2007.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]

    EETimes profiles a recent Intel research prototype that incorporated 80 cores onto a single CPU. As a research prototype, the CPU itself was designed primarily for experimental purposes, but Intel believes it will be able to build an 80-core Processor in the next five to eight years. This would represent a large jump over existing processors which now cap out at 4 cores per processor.

    Despite the large number of cores, Intel reports that the 80-core chip required only 100 watts of energy, compared to 105-130 watts for current quad-core processors. Each of the 80 cores in the experimental processor, however, is much simpler than existing cores in today's processors, so tasks are broken down into smaller units for each core to handle.
    Each of the 80-cores can also be recruited on demand, with active cores being shifted if one core gets too hot. This concept of "core hopping" would decrease the amount of heat generated by the processor as a whole.

    Other questions addressed in this 80-core experiment was dealing with networking and communications between the 80 cores.
    While 80-core chips may be five to eight years away, Intel's technology strategist Manny Vara suggests that some sort of hybrid processors with a combination of complex cores and simple cores could be possible in the interim.

    Apple moved from PowerPC to Intel processors in June 2005, citing increased performance and reduced power consumption as the primary driving forces behind the decision.

    Article Link
     
  2. macrumors 68040

    Naimfan

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
  3. macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #3
    Didn't we hear about the 80-core chips at a previous IDF?

    Don't make me get my Google-fu out...
     
  4. arn
    macrumors god

    arn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2001
  5. macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
  6. macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #6
    No worries. :D
     
  7. macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #7
    We never left RISC. Intel Core architecture is RISC-based.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    Muncher

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #8
    I thought that since they were i386 compatible, they were more CISC. They do have VLIW. (This stuff confuses me :p).
     
  9. macrumors 65816

    deputy_doofy

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    #9
    Intel scares me sometimes.

    Intel's first OCD == MHz/GHz. Let's get this as fast as possible. Who cares about efficiency?

    Intel's latest OCD == # of cores. Let's create a 1,000,000,000 core chip. Who cares if programs actually use them.

    Sometimes I want Intel to take a step back and reflect.
     
  10. macrumors 65816

    TurboSC

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #10
    true, but in the end they make some pretty awesome processors...

    I guess they have some extra money to throw around and experiment.
     
  11. macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #11
    Life is no longer simple. ;)

    http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/270/4

     
  12. macrumors P6

    twoodcc

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Location:
    Right side of wrong
    #12
    looking forward to the next 5-8 years! (my wallet doesn't though)
     
  13. macrumors demi-god

    CWallace

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #13
    80 cores might actually make Windows Vista responsive.

    Or allow Time Machine to start a backup without brining my iMac to a dead-stop.
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    yeroen

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Location:
    Cambridge, MA
    #14
    Better get on the Mac Pro threads and warn them not to jump the gun on Penryn, best to wait for the 1.21 gigawatt! 160-core Mac Pro!
     
  15. macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #15
    Man.. I hate to see the size of the heat-sink if that beast,
    even thought it does have 80 simplified cores... Oh i can't imagine.... Remember the G5 with it's tiny heat-sink?
     
  16. macrumors 65816

    Brianstorm91

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    #16
    It is tiny hink-seat what?
     
  17. macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #17
    Liquid cooled G5 would like to have a talk with you.
     
  18. macrumors 65816

    rockinrocker

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    #18
    i think that's "1.21 "jig"-awatts.
     
  19. macrumors 68020

    majordude

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Location:
    Hootersville
    #19
    Actual photo:

    [​IMG]

    It can boil a cup of water and determine the actual size of the universe in 0.002 seconds.
     
  20. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
  21. macrumors 68030

    Full of Win

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Location:
    Ask Apple
    #21
    super - just hope the OS and apps can take advantage of them in a timely manner.
     

Share This Page