- Messages
- 5,609
- Reaction score
- 251
- Points
- 63
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.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
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.)Mainly it reduces the space and power requirements. single chip cloud computer named by intel.
My wallet hurtsI want one, anyone willing to buy me one?
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.