Coffeehouse Thread

15 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Intel pledges 80 cores in five years

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    Secret​Software
  • User profile image
    MB

    ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.

  • User profile image
    Secret​Software

    MB wrote:
    ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.




    And that is good. I want more power under my hands with a windows that works, but is not heavy on the system. Hell I will put windows 98 in it just to fly with the winds. I hate hour glasses, I like things super fast.

  • User profile image
    Charles

    MB wrote:
    ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.


    Wrong.
    C

  • User profile image
    Jack Poison

    SecretSoftware wrote:
    
    MB wrote: ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.




    And that is good. I want more power under my hands with a windows that works, but is not heavy on the system. Hell I will put windows 98 in it just to fly with the winds. I hate hour glasses, I like things super fast.


    Vista is faster than XP. Now, from my memory, XP was much faster than my Windows 98 machine..

    Assuming my memory is correct, wouldn't you rather put Vista on it than Windows 98?

  • User profile image
    Secret​Software

    Charles wrote:
    
    MB wrote: ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.


    Wrong.
    C




    Ya, There are plans to release a new version of widnows every 2 years or so? So I am sure as the hardware technology moves  foreward , windows will too.

    Now I wished if Channel9 will put video from the IDF about things that would be interesting to C9 community and the windows community in general. Like the CEO of Intel's Keynote.

  • User profile image
    DigitalDud

    MB wrote:
    ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.


    Well people need to realize this isn't a general purpose processor. It's made of 80 floating-point cores. It's specifically ment to reach 1 teraflop. You'd probably throw a bunch of them into a supercomputer or something.

  • User profile image
    Jason Cox

    MB wrote:
    ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.
    Thats more like the lenght of time it will take most of us to save up to buy one of these chips.

  • User profile image
    Chadk

    SecretSoftware wrote:
    
    Charles wrote: 
    MB wrote: ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.


    Wrong.
    C




    Ya, There are plans to release a new version of widnows every 2 years or so?

    Yes. The new kernel is different from XP. The thing about the new kernel, is that its more module based, thus they will be able to more rapidly shoot out new builds for us.

    There is this very interresting interview with Rob Short, about this topic, here: http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=148820

  • User profile image
    Shiv

    Jason Cox wrote:
    
    MB wrote:...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.
    Thats more like the lenght of time it will take most of us to save up to buy one of these chips.


    this i can certainly agree with Wink

  • User profile image
    MB

    Charles wrote:
    
    MB wrote: ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.


    Wrong.
    C


    With all due respect... I'll believe it when I see it.

  • User profile image
    sbc

    Jack Poison wrote:
    
    SecretSoftware wrote:
    MB wrote: ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.




    And that is good. I want more power under my hands with a windows that works, but is not heavy on the system. Hell I will put windows 98 in it just to fly with the winds. I hate hour glasses, I like things super fast.


    Vista is faster than XP. Now, from my memory, XP was much faster than my Windows 98 machine..

    Assuming my memory is correct, wouldn't you rather put Vista on it than Windows 98?

    Each new edition of Windows seems faster as the hardware has also improved. Windows 98 outperforms XP on a low end PIII with very little RAM 9if XP runs at all).

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    Charles wrote:
    
    MB wrote: ...and a version of windows tha can utilise it will be available in 10 years.


    Wrong.
    C


    ....isn't Windows Vista limited to 2 processors anyway?

    That if you want to run a high-end SMP workstation with Windows you need to run Windows Server Enterprise and not a workstation OS?

    Doesn't seem right to me.

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    Actually, XP, 2003 and Vista can make the distinction between physical and logical CPUs, and the limitation is for two physical CPUs. So if you have two quad-core CPUs, it'll use all 8 cores, because there's only two physical CPUs. There's eight logical CPUs, but that's not limited.

    But as I said in the other thread, Windows is technically limited to 32 logical CPUs for x86 and 64 logical CPUs for x64 and ia64 (at least it used to be for XP and 2003, not sure if they changed that in Vista).

  • User profile image
    MB

    W3bbo wrote:
    ....isn't Windows Vista limited to 2 processors anyway?

    That if you want to run a high-end SMP workstation with Windows you need to run Windows Server Enterprise and not a workstation OS?

    Doesn't seem right to me.


    That's processors, not cores.

    Cores are considered just a variant of Moore's law... merely a way to make a processor go 'faster'... i.e. a Core2-Quado is a single processor... albeit with 4 cores.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.