# FIFTY (50) core processor shown off by intel. Holy crap that's a lot :O



## Kevinaswell (May 6, 2009)

You're looking into the eye of a monstrous processing beast. Intel just showed off this 50-core processor it's calling "Knights Corner," an energy-efficient 22-nanometer processor that will somehow shoehorn more than 50 cores onto a single chip. Sheesh, and we thought 12 cores was mind-blowing.

Intel, you're teasing us — no release date was announced. But as soon as this baby's unleashed, computers will be able to do lots more things at once — in this case, 50 processes at the same time.

Meanwhile, programmers will need to know how to write software that can be efficiently multi-tasked by this 50-headed beast, so Intel's now seeding a few developer kits to get code writers working on this multi-headed hydra. When they do, computers will be a lot faster, one step closer to the Singularity, when computers are as smart as humans.










Source.





Holy crap that's insane :O

Wantwantwnantantwnatnwantwnantwantwnnwatnnwatnwantnawtnwntnwantnawt.


----------



## sarek (May 20, 2010)

Now lets hope that much power will finally enable the programmers to turn quantity of processing power into quality. For decades now processors have continuously increased in speed without a comparable change in the basic paradigms of computing.


----------



## OmarFW (Apr 8, 2010)

someone call skynet


----------



## Blueguardian (Aug 22, 2009)

Happen to know how hot this thing runs?


----------



## OmarFW (Apr 8, 2010)

our cooling technology will have to increase exponentially before we will ever be able to run something like this without it catching fire within the first five minutes of use

we will also have to start using the more modern btx style computer cases that allow for more efficient airflow over the standardized atx style cases.


----------



## Drake (Oct 31, 2009)

DROOL-worthy :laughing:


----------



## Solace (Jan 12, 2010)

*For the TL;DR:* This is a 50-core chip (based on the 48-core chip clocked between 1.2GHz-1.83GHz) with x86 instruction sets; runs between 25-125W power/TDP.

[Link 1]
[Link 2]
[Link 3]




OmarFW said:


> our cooling technology will have to increase exponentially before we will ever be able to run something like this without it catching fire within the first five minutes of use...


Semiconductor companies are still working within the confines of their heat output which is noted by the Thermal Design Power, or TDP. As stated elsewhere, this chip runs at a maximum of 125W power draw, which may or may not be different than it's TDP (which means that may dissipate 125W _of heat_; it is not a measurement of power _usage_) and cores can be automatically turned off to reduce TDP (or consumption?) to as little as 25W. Intel has never been very clear about their processor power usage and has had legal trouble from AMD about it, as AMD tends to use a true usage model rather than heat dissipation when measuring power requirements.

The cores will operate somewhere between 1.2GHz and 1.83GHz according to TomsHardware and other news aggregators.





sarek said:


> Now lets hope that much power will finally enable the programmers to turn quantity of processing power into quality. For decades now processors have continuously increased in speed without a comparable change in the basic paradigms of computing.


As you mentioned, as processors continue to get more and more complex to code for, programmers will have to keep up with the technology. As it stands I think there is a lack of initiative to code good code, especially low-level code. This chip is designed to increase awareness of the effort that needs to be made in that regard for massively-parallel computation in servers.





Blueguardian said:


> Happen to know how hot this thing runs?


Each of the 48 cores runs somewhere between 1.2GHz and 1.83GHz. The "power consumption" is supposedly up to 125W, within normal air-cooling limits for conventional computers, but this is for R&D and testing purposes and not general use. This is just an extension of Intel's Terascale project with x86 instruction sets. For reference, the Terascale processor produced 1.8T FLOPs.


----------



## Kevinaswell (May 6, 2009)

Blueguardian said:


> Happen to know how hot this thing runs?


The article says it was pretty efficient, so I imagine not that hot!


----------



## Happy (Oct 10, 2008)

Hmmm I just had an orgasm reading this article.


----------



## KyojiK (Apr 14, 2010)

Damn, throwing Hyperthreading onto that would be pretty ridiculous. I can already imagine the performance gain.


----------



## skaiflakes (Apr 15, 2010)

drdrysdthghdtuty

... I wish I had money.


----------



## Ac3rino (Jun 7, 2010)

Not for the public, but it's fun to dream.


----------



## Robatix (Mar 26, 2009)

With a 50-core processor, Roomba could do windows.


----------



## Steve MD (Jun 11, 2010)

I gotta get one of those...............


----------



## TJSeabury (Nov 23, 2010)

Ok thats all well and good, now give me MRAM, a HD and chipset that can keep up. XD

I want a 50 core that runs at 4.0 GHz. ^_^ ...or more.


----------



## marckos (May 6, 2011)

*scumbag marckos* have 50 cores.....used in facebook, redtu%e and download torrents. But really holy crap what do you want to do with such power? *cof cof* skynet *cof cof*:mellow:


----------



## wuliheron (Sep 5, 2011)

Raw number crunching power doesn't mean much. A freight train is powerful and fast, but very limited in its abilities.

Ideally you want 8+ cpu cores for running full fledged matrices and 300+ simplified processors for parallel programming. Add a neuromorphic chip and then you can watch the first terminators stumble off the assembly line and start to teach other how to walk and talk.


----------



## Extraverted Delusion (Oct 23, 2011)

50 cores = more whores.

Dem girls flock, I got the skills to overclock.

We out.


----------

