|
|
Intel readies a six core chip
Author: Richard SwinburnePublished: 26th February 2008
I am Dunnington, hear me roar.
These are then all bolted onto a massive 16MB of shared L3 cache and also connected to a 1,066MHz bus interface. The L3 cache is there to compensate for the latency and bandwidth stretched front side bus - six cores competing for access should seriously stress this interlink and its access to main memory and the rest of the system. This will be the last core increase until Nehalem arrives at the very end of this year with up to eight cores.
Further details of Dunnington include a TDP of around 130W and the inclusion of the latest SSE4 instructions, however it will be Xeon socket mPGA604 and will fit into the new Caneland platform but will be pin compatible with the current Tigerton.
No specific desktop use has been outlined, but that's not to say Intel hasn't gone down this path before: the first Pentium 4 Extreme Editions used the Galatin cored Xeon chip which was built on the 130nm design and featured 512KB L2 cache and 2MB L3 cache. While there's no reason for Intel to do this given the fact it's currently leading the performance race, was there really need for the QX9770 either?
In addition, Nehalem's platform was again given a bit more detail - despite the fact that it will effectively contain "the north bridge" as it includes a memory controller, Intel is still using a pair of chipsets in its product design. The I/O Hub will only offer the PCI-Express lanes and talk to up to two CPUs but it won't act as the mediator between them because Nehalem includes multiple QuickPath direct interconnects just like AMD's HyperTransport technology.
Included are also SPEC results that show off Nehalem-EP as one meaty beast, pulling quite a lead over the current 3.2GHz 1,600MHz FSB Harpertown server products.
Six cores - great for servers but useful for desktops? What will AMD compete with? Let us know your thoughts, in the forums.
Related
Comments (20)
Compare over 250 mobile phones &
52,000 deals!
Compare over 100 broadband & mobile broadband deals online!
- Site Links:
- About
- Email Editor
- Newsletter
- Privacy
- RSS
- Score Guide
- Our Other Websites:
- Auto Express
- Channel Pro
- Computer Buyer
- Computer Shopper
- Den of Geek
All content © bit-tech.net 2000-2009
© Copyright Dennis Publishing Limited licensed by Felden
2 Core= Duo Core
4 Core= Quad core
6 Core= SEX CORE?
Btw, this is a fraekin trip!
What are we going to do with it though?
Well..........never mind that question. I can think of great things to do with it.
The 1066 bus speed - is that then quad-pumped? Or is that the quad-pumped speed?
so basically its gonna be 2-4 years+ until we start seeing 6core chips in peoples sigs
or 10 moths for 8 core chips.....
Guh, I would've bought a Sex-core PC just for kicks.
2006 - 2 cores
2007 - 4 cores
2008 - 8 cores?
2009 - 16 cores :D
2010 - 32
2011 - 64
2012 - 128
of course, this is probably completely wrong, but hey there we go :)
I can see it now, new AMD 5 core solution with unparalled performance, the note reads: yes, we did it again, a botched batch of proccesors came out of one of our fab's so instead of six, you get 5 but what the hell, maybe we'll get it right one day but for now we'll say that we are covering a niche in the market :P Anyone know what AMD's roadmap has instore for us, will they ever really compete with intel again?
peace
Moores law was just about transistor count, If we assume Moore's law does apply to multicore cpu's and assuming intel would stop increasing the transistor number per core then with a 6 core cpu in 2008 it would mean a 12 core cpu in 2010, a 24 core cpu in 2012... but, Intel wont stop increasing the Transistor number per core, so its rather hard to make predictions based on Moore's Law if it comes to Number of Cores in Future Cpu's.
:)
This is crazy. It's also sort of depressing. No matter how much you spend on an uber high end system, there will always be something better in a year.
Has it taken so long to figure that one out? :P
j/k
No matter what we do the industry will has something better in a few months.. Once You could run DOS 6.22 on a 16MB Ram machine and it would be flying.
Today.. Just to cope with all the bling we need 256 times that amount..
sure in time we will be using more than one core on a regular basis, but in the mean time why spend the extra money.
because they dont have "real" quadcores, their quadcores are two dualcores, so its easy to make a 6 core cpu, 8 cores however would bring more problems with amount of room avalaible, heat output and power consumption (the power regulation on the mainboard woudnt like it).There will be 8 core cpu's from intel, but not in the next few months, wait for nehalem and its new sockets.