Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by garrettroyce, Dec 3, 2009.
So yeah, I thought this needed to be shared:
Wow! That's awesome. My dual core looks even more rubbish now. These things are getting smaller...and better.
That's amazing, 48 cores, blimey. :O
The big problem now is to convince programmers that yes, no really, properly multi-threaded applications really are the way to go. Even a lot of current supposedly "multi-core utilizing" applications make use of just two cores.
--- Mr. DOS
first half of 2010. I think im gonna hold off buying a new computer for a while.
=) thanks for the info
Its more about making it easy to make multi-threaded programs, than convincing programmers. It isn't easy to write multi-threaded programs... (Which is why there's also so much research going on in that topic, but even that isn't going that fast...). Then again, the main use for such processors is servers, and especially virtualised server systems, which are inherently parallel. A desktop system rarely needs the sort of processing power even a single core can offer.
Mainly it reduces the space and power requirements. single chip cloud computer named by intel.
I doubt it will catch on though... Google use cheap commodity machines (read more in an article here) for a lot of their work (I've not seen cloud computing mentioned explicitly, but I doubt they would use much different a system there) because of their price to performance advantage, and the resulting redundancy because of their number, and the advantage of distribution (for a lot of work cpu isn't the main bottlehead -- with that many cores it's going to be the hard drive supplying data for processing) etc. It's likely to be rather uneconomical to have expensive powerful systems, which are also more of a problem if they fail. There's also a nice article about cloud hardware here, which is more general. Amazon mention their use of commodity hardware here -- and 48 core is hardly commodity. Bog standard web servers is where I see these chips ruling -- there is hardly a web host not offering virtualised servers nowadays. The more they can get in a machine the better. (And then you have the fast-computer freaks who just want to have the absolutely fastest hardware, even if it's of no practical use.)
@ah-blabla : Good info thanks for sharing
I want one, anyone willing to buy me one?
My wallet hurts
This could be incredibly useful when your house begins to have 100's of computer controlled devices all linked together. What if your TV, DVR, Computer(s), video games, etc ran off of one central device? We're getting pretty close to that point, it's just everything is on one network with huge amounts of wasted resources on each device.
Or, consider some extremely complicated task, like driving a car. How many things are you doing at once without realizing it? You're watching the road, the mirrors, the speedometer, the climate controls, the radio, you're adjusting the steering wheel, gas, brake, clutch, gear, and listening for any signals from other cars and whatever else is happening all at once. The human brain is always running multi-threaded x1000. With a processor able to do all of these tasks at once, we're one step closer to being able to have autonomous automobiles with a processor able to keep up with all these tasks :biggrin:
I also agree that programming needs to become more sophisticated to a certain extent. But, what sort of program needs that many processes? Webservers, for sure, but maybe also CAD/CAM systems and video games. But, a word processor using 48 threads is probably more contrived than it is useful.
That's a good point, garrettroyce, but still seems like overkill to me. Yeah, you can centralize your TV, computer, DVR/cable box, video games, stereo system, and maybe climate controlling, but after that it's just kind of clutching at straws.
Will people use it for toasters or microwaves? Making coffee? What I'm getting at is that there aren't a whole lot of options after the first few obvious ones. Not enough to make a 48-core processor practical.
Sure, it's cool, but that's the question I have with it - practicality.
I think the car comment is great. You can get in the car, program the directions and sit back and take a nap if you want. Or read, or watch a movie; whatever. That would be great. Seems to me that would be the direction in which these things go more than any other.
Folding@Home, SETI@Home and the other science programs will love the 48-core CPU. Those committed to running those programs as well as using their PC for other things would benefit from it.
WTF?!! 48 Core, and ye dual core is now something like pentium I 3 years ago!!!
Separate names with a comma.