Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Research @ Intel 2007, 2TFlops at 6.26GHz!
|
TSlex
|
  Jun 28 2007, 11:21 AM, updated 19y ago
|
Old Am I?
|
Source: TrustedReviews - Research @ Intel 2007:QUOTE Talking of the 80-core CPU, Intel has now managed to get it running at 6.26GHz which gives a theoretical 2 teraflops (2,000,000,000,000 floating point operations per second), but that's not all. Using new dynamic core control, the number of operating cores can be throttled on the fly. This means that while running all 80 cores at full pace the chip consumes over 150 Watts, with just four cores running at 3.13GHz it consumes a paltry 3.32 Watts. That's way faster than IBM's Power6 at 4.7GHz  |
|
|
|
|
|
ikanayam
|
Jun 28 2007, 11:31 AM
|
|
|
Power6 is a complete working CPU (with schmoo plots up to 6ghz). This is not. Not even close.
|
|
|
|
|
|
edwin3210
|
Jun 28 2007, 11:38 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(ikanayam @ Jun 28 2007, 11:31 AM) Power6 is a complete working CPU (with schmoo plots up to 6ghz). This is not. Not even close. confuse now, which mean this 80core intel thing cant really run? codes have to written specifically to run on it or wat?  |
|
|
|
|
|
ikanayam
|
Jun 28 2007, 11:39 AM
|
|
|
Yes, go read up about it. It's not an x86 core or anything like that. It's just 80 ALUs that can do MADD ops and variations of that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSlex
|
 Jun 28 2007, 11:40 AM
|
Old Am I?
|
QUOTE(ikanayam @ Jun 28 2007, 11:31 AM) Power6 is a complete working CPU (with schmoo plots up to 6ghz). This is not. Not even close. I was just surprised that they can crank their silicon up to 6GHz without using extreme or exotic cooling like LN2. |
|
|
|
|
|
ikanayam
|
Jun 28 2007, 11:50 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(lex @ Jun 27 2007, 10:40 PM) I was just surprised that they can crank their silicon up to 6GHz without using extreme or exotic cooling like LN2. They are extremely simple cores. ALUs are one of the easier things to get running at such high speeds (with good design of course). The difficult part is usually the front end of the CPU, the fetch/decode/OoO engine. The instruction scheduler for the OoO engine is usually the hottest part of the chip, and limits frequency in many cases because it is on the critical path. All of which are not present in this thing. And Power6 also does not have OoO for the integer units (compromise they had to make for the high clocks), even though IBM has tried very hard to avoid mentioning this. This post has been edited by ikanayam: Jun 28 2007, 11:52 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
SlayerXT
|
Jun 28 2007, 12:30 PM
|
|
|
As comparison, 8800Ultra can do 500++Gflops. I wonder how much time to get x86 cpu to get 1Tflops performance....
|
|
|
|
|
|
kmarc
|
Jun 28 2007, 02:05 PM
|
The future is here - Cryptocurrencies!
|
Interesting. Here's another short review on the Larrabee proc: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20070627133943.htmlI guess it is not for us gamers. See the quotes below QUOTE Intel's code-named Larrabee processor, which seems to be an array of computational arithmetic logic units (ALUs) with caches as well as memory controller, will be capable of processing "well in excess" of a teraflop of data......
Even though the code-named Larrabee processor can compute 3D graphics, just like any other modern microprocessor via ray-tracing technology, it is not designed for computing traditional Direct3D or OpenGL computer graphics and is not a graphics processing units, such as ATI Radeon or Nvidia GeForce. |
|
|
|
|
|
patches
|
Jun 28 2007, 02:37 PM
|
New Member
|
thats amazing..
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSlex
|
 Jun 28 2007, 03:26 PM
|
Old Am I?
|
More info and pictures from (ahem!) The Inquirer - Intel shows off 2 TFLOPS processor. Interesting quotes... QUOTE Now, here's the big kicker for this demo. Currently, this project is actually split in two: one project is currently integrating x86 cores into an massive 80-core monster, while another project is actually stacking of SRAM and DRAM memory on top of this Tera-Scale processing monster. When that happens, cache memory will have bandwidth measured in hundreds of gigabytes per second. Is this "integrating x86 cores" the "Larabee"? Wafer pictures here courtesy of (ahem!) The Inquirer - Future of CPU design pixellated. Seems that this 80-core beast has a name! QUOTE Numero Uno is Polaris, the 80-core concept. Numero Due is SRAM Cache memory, all neatly produced at the same wafer.  This post has been edited by lex: Jun 28 2007, 03:27 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
cks2k2
|
Jun 28 2007, 03:40 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(lex @ Jun 28 2007, 03:26 PM) More info and pictures from (ahem!) The Inquirer - Intel shows off 2 TFLOPS processor. Interesting quotes... Is this "integrating x86 cores" the "Larabee"? Wafer pictures here courtesy of (ahem!) The Inquirer - Future of CPU design pixellated. Seems that this 80-core beast has a name! The name "Polaris" was already announced the first time it was shown to the public. |
|
|
|
|
|
ikanayam
|
Jun 28 2007, 07:56 PM
|
|
|
The 80 core teraflop chip (polaris) is not Larabee. Larabee is quite different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SlayerXT
|
Jun 28 2007, 09:09 PM
|
|
|
How bout AMD Fusion processor Any data about the performance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
ikanayam
|
Jun 28 2007, 10:06 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(§layerXT @ Jun 28 2007, 08:09 AM) How bout AMD Fusion processor Any data about the performance? Of course not. It's like 2 years away. Can't even find hard data on K8L which is supposed to be a few months away  |
|
|
|
|
Quote
0.0176sec
0.47
5 queries
GZIP Disabled