backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 69 comment(s) - last by Tsuwamono.. on Jan 14 at 5:41 PM

Intel's dual quad-core "V8" system
Intel makes 8-core processing the new playground

At CES 2007 today, Intel reaveled a proof-of-concept PC designed specifically to counter AMD's 4x4 platform for gamers. Dubbed the "V8" system, Intel demonstrated a system running on a pair of quad-core Kentsfield Xeon processors for a total of eight physical cores.

The system runs at 2.4GHz utilizing a 1066MHz system bus and is loaded with FB-DIMM memory. The graphics card is supported by a single NVIDIA 8800GTX. According to Intel, the "V8" system dished out a score of 6089 on 3DMark CPU bench.

DailyTech previously reported on AMD's 4x4 platform, which was later given an official name called Quad FX. AMD broke news of its dedication to the gaming community early in 2006 and received good praise from the general enthusiast community. Dual-processor systems have not been as popular as they were several years ago due to the advent of multi-core processors and the cost and complexity of the systems in general.

Unlike AMD's Quad FX platform, Intel's "V8" system will require FB-DIMMs while Quad FX will work with regular unbuffered memory.  The AMD Quad FX platform can also support multiple GeForce video cards in SLI configuration, while the "V8" is currently limited to a single graphics card.

Despite the enourmous amount of processing power packed into Intel's "V8" system, AMD is not far away from releasing something along the lines of an "8x8" system utilizing quad-core Opteron processors. AMD demonstrated its Barcelona in November of 2006 and mentioned that the new Opterons would be making a showing in mid-2007.

Apple launched its dual-xeon Mac Pro platform earlier this year.  The Mac Pro slots two Core-based Xeon DP processors, and is dual-core ready.  However, only weeks after the Mac Pro launch my former employer was spotted running the system with quad-core processors instead.  Support for official quad-core support in the Mac Pro will launch shortly, presumably at the MacWorld convention tommorow.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Will this be an end to multi-bit?
By Comdrpopnfresh on 1/9/2007 12:47:00 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know much about the subject, but with 64-bit not being utilized very much by majority of people, will the use of multiple processors mean an end to performance increases by scaling the bits? Say going from 65-128? And is it true that using a 64-bit system disables some architecture features in current chips (like the intelligent look-ahead on c2d?), I think I remember reading a blurb about that.




RE: Will this be an end to multi-bit?
By IntelUser2000 on 1/9/2007 1:04:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
by Comdrpopnfresh on January 9, 2007 at 12:47 AM

I don't know much about the subject, but with 64-bit not being utilized very much by majority of people, will the use of multiple processors mean an end to performance increases by scaling the bits? Say going from 65-128?


The performance increase coming from 64-bit comes mainly from the two following reasons:
1. Support for RAM greater than 4GB(that includes virutal memory)
2. 64-bit support means new programs need to be compiled for it. That means CPU manufacturers can put additional enhancements, like more registers, since it needs to be re-compiled anyway

NONE of the 64-bit CPUs support 64-bit memory addressing(the highest is Itanium 2 with 50 bits, that is support for 1 Petabytes). Simply nothing requires that much. 64-bit memory addressing equals to 16 Exabytes(Giga-->Tera-->Peta-->Exa). It took us 20 years to go from 16-32 to 32-64. Considering many users aren't that starved for memory capacity as they were back 20 years ago, I bet it'll take much longer than 20 years to go to 128-bit.

quote:
And is it true that using a 64-bit system disables some architecture features in current chips (like the intelligent look-ahead on c2d?), I think I remember reading a blurb about that.


Not the intelligent look-ahead. Its Macro Op Fusion. For most part the performance impact is minor(less than 5%).

(I think there are two things people are overreacting nowadays. One is the system requirements for Vista and the other is the 64-bit support for Core 2 Duo)


RE: Will this be an end to multi-bit?
By masher2 (blog) on 1/9/2007 9:29:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
"The performance increase coming from 64-bit comes mainly from the two following reasons:
1. Support for RAM greater than 4GB(that includes virutal memory)
2. 64-bit support means new programs need to be compiled for it. That means CPU manufacturers can put additional enhancements, like more registers

And a third reason, extremely important for some scientific and simulation/modeling applications...native support for numbers larger than 2^32.


By jak3676 on 1/9/2007 4:36:14 PM , Rating: 2
this will probably be the reason we'll eventually move past 64-bit processing too. I don't think it will be for a lack of addressable memory.

I can already see where native support for numbers bigger than 2^64 or even 2^128 would help cryptography.


RE: Will this be an end to multi-bit?
By rippleyaliens on 1/9/2007 1:05:00 AM , Rating: 2
Well to answer a few questions.
1- With regards to the thin client guy. YES we still use that, it is called Windows terminal services, with CITRIX being the head technology. More cores=more users on 1 server, = cheaper installation.
With multi cores now, and virtualization, business's can run the same amount of services, on fewer and fewer pnysical servers.

Now with regards to home users. I see a lot of people here are young, and under the age of 30 easily. A True personal computer runs in the 3500-4000 dollars. That is how much a decent computer cost in 1991, 1996 2001, and 2007. If you have a 1000 computer now, well that is a entry level machine by standards. These arent 1year investments, but 3-4 year investments.

With piss poor programers to blame today for the sluggish of MS windows. Not neccessarly windows itself. Read your history, EVERY 18 months, Computational power DOUBLES. PERIOD Quit fighting the grain. What can i do with 4 or 8 cores. LOL, what do you need 1TB hard drives for?
infact, MS win2k3 server only needs 800mb to actually install. XP, 600 MB. Why do you need all the extra GB,s TB's-- MP3's.. lol.. EASY
Because it is evolution.

My personal machine is a e6400, 4gb ram, 7950gx2, 1x36gb 15k drive, 4x 250gb drives, 2x 400gb drives, and i can fully saturate the CPU, Easily, with the apps i run. I welcome dual quad cores, 32GB of ram, etc...



RE: Will this be an end to multi-bit?
By Pandamonium on 1/9/2007 4:00:45 AM , Rating: 2
1) "True" personal computers don't run in the $3.5-4k range. It's more like $1-2k.

2) Computational *power* does not double every 18 months. Intel's founder said that processor *complexity* will double every 18 months, and the company has tried to honor its founder by adhearing to that statement. Intel can roughly double complexity by doubling L2 cache, for example.

3) I need 1TB drives for porn, dvd backups (I like virtual mounting better than loading physical discs), and cd archives. I can fit all important documents on one CDR or less. I would argue that this is true for most people, but few are bold enough to admit it.

4) I don't need extra stuff "because it's evolution". I don't need extra stuff, period. I *want* extra stuff because I am a packrat for files. I *need* extra stuff to play the some of the latest games.

5) Nobody cares what your PC's specs are. We might, however, wonder what apps you run. Way to be specific!


By Pandamonium on 1/9/2007 4:04:02 AM , Rating: 2
We really need edit buttons. Preview is just a hastle.

adhearing = adhering

*need* was supposed to have quotes around it. None of us need new technology, we just want stuff badly enough that we think we need it. That was the message.


By rippleyaliens on 1/13/2007 8:29:55 PM , Rating: 2
What apps,
Maya, VMWARE, Games..
I play my game, with Anti-virus runnig, fraps, instant messaging, etc.. More CORES= Better response. I am not a Cheap Sucker. I pay, so that when i do anything on my PC, it is relayed to me, how i desire it. Fast and effecient.
When i say a pc is in the 3500-4000 range, i do mean LEGAL software included. hell my laptop cost me 4000.. a measly $3 a day. having a pc that cost me $4 a day is an acceptible cost.
If you cant afford it, then you dont need it.


Tick Tock fashion
By crystal clear on 1/9/2007 1:07:51 AM , Rating: 2
*The momemt AMD Ticks -Intels Tocks.

*The momemt AMD comes up with something,there comes Intel
with something better.
Back again to square one.
It appears Intel is sitting on whole bunch of New CPUs-just waiting to be released ,in a TICK TOCK fashion.
From high end to entry level-Intel has one ready for release.

If thats not enough it responds with pricing the same way.

This brings me to my point-

Recently there was an article
in "DIGI TIMES" which really gave the facts/situation/conditions in reality in the market today .

Intel CPU launches too frequent for second-tier mobo makers

Mobo, chipset | Dec 28, 16:52

Intel's fast and frequent launches of CPUs put Taiwan-based second-tier motherboard makers under pressure for their product development and prices, according to industry sources. Read more

also this

Mobo makers: CPU wars to enter new level with 45nm Penryn in 2007

Mobo, chipset | Nov 29, 15:56

In response to the news that Intel has started making prototypes of 45nm Penryn processors, motherboard makers said they expect CPU wars to enter a new...

and-
Intel to launch pricing campaign in 2Q 2007

Mobo, chipset | Dec 21, 14:37

Intel will launch a pricing campaign in the second quarter of 2007, with the price for the Core 2 Quad Q6600 processor falling to US$530, according to industry sources.

Unquote-
I have not given the link as its only for paid subscription

In short -they Intel barely give other component manufacturers & ofcourse OEMs to catch up,only to find a new
CPU to be released-sometimes not mentioned in their road maps at all.
This applies also to pricing-price cuts come
on a regular basis.
Theorotically speaking it sounds great for the consumer-looks good on paper,but infact in practice this creates a sought of instability in the market both for the buyer & manufacturers.

It started with Duo then Quad all in a short span now 8 Cores & more............
They appear to be entering IBM & SUN territory with 8 cores plus.

Its like flying through bad weather...




RE: Tick Tock fashion
By Comdrpopnfresh on 1/9/2007 2:58:32 AM , Rating: 2
agreed- and what about on the mobile market- how they're changing sockets there? At least with amd 939 was around for a long time, and revisions are being made to am2 to make am3- but the socket remains the same.


RE: Tick Tock fashion
By crystal clear on 1/9/2007 3:51:48 AM , Rating: 2
Thats a very valid argument you put forward.
Food for thought.


RE: Tick Tock fashion
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/9/2007 8:34:13 AM , Rating: 2
LGA 775 Has been around since the later P4 models. It's been around for several years now. So what if they are changing it?


RE: Tick Tock fashion
By Comdrpopnfresh on 1/9/2007 3:44:37 PM , Rating: 2
here is a situation in which a socket change would have been needed. Because it spans such a wide era some mobos can't handle this or that- lv, ulv, c2d, EE.


RE: Tick Tock fashion
By IntelUser2000 on 1/10/2007 12:35:54 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
agreed- and what about on the mobile market- how they're changing sockets there? At least with amd 939 was around for a long time, and revisions are being made to am2 to make am3- but the socket remains the same.


The problem on mobile is really only apparent to the laptop makers. Most people couldn't care less because they buy a new laptop to fit their purpose anyway.


RE: Tick Tock fashion
By crystal clear on 1/10/2007 2:40:06 AM , Rating: 2
"Intel now offers a total of nine quad-core processor versions in the desktop and enterprise market segments."

http://digitimes.com/mobos/a20070109PR200.html

Unquote-

Just look at the time span from Duo to Quad & the amount of
processors put out (launched).
Its amazing, barely gives the industry time to digest the Duo,up comes the quad.


One ups
By qwerty1 on 1/8/2007 10:29:39 PM , Rating: 2
When the world is just starting to brace itself for the upcoming onslaught of quad core, out comes octa. Guess the 80 core prototypes really aren't that far away from consumer use after all. But what's the point when most software developers can't even catch up with the physical prowess?




RE: One ups
By slashbinslashbash on 1/8/2007 10:52:55 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, it's to the point where it's kind of absurd. The number of cores is getting way past the point where a single person can generate enough input to fully utilize them.

Which brings me to wonder whether we'll see a return to the thin client (as Sun and others have been predicting for a while). When I was in college, we logged into 16 and 24 CPU Sun SPARC servers to read email, edit and compile programs, etc. It seems that a small office could be serviced with one or two 8-core machines. I don't know if it'd be cost-effective, but it's just about the only way I can think of to really utilize this kind of CPU power in everyday life.


RE: One ups
By qwerty1 on 1/8/2007 11:00:52 PM , Rating: 2
It's definitely cost-effective. In fact, I've got a friend who provides network-computing consultations. He says that they've found that assuming no heavy graphics nor computations are involved, a group of 30-40 office workers' needs can be fully satisfied by networking with one above average server. No matter what, 30 computers are going to cost a lot more than a server+networking.


RE: One ups
By BigToque on 1/8/2007 11:21:33 PM , Rating: 2
Makes sense to me...

Each home can have one main server, and every one or every room can have it's own terminal. Access whatever content you want from where ever you want in the house.


RE: One ups
By ADDAvenger on 1/9/2007 2:01:48 AM , Rating: 2
I was just thinking about that actually. You could even put a terminal in front of the crapper so you'd never have to duck out of a great conversation (or game or whatever suits your fancy) because you're about to make a mess in your pants.