I AM NEHALEM

[SephYuyX]

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1136/...e5ce9aa616.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_%2 ... tecture%29
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/830178/i_am_nehalem/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUbCaDT9PME

So yeah, I was talking about this with my aunt (she does marketing for Intel) over Christmas and she told me about this new chip theyre working on. It was first announced back in Sept, but I never paid attention to it.

Intels new chip, it's an 8 core microprocessor, with 2 threads each for a total of 16. Wow, so just 4 more cores? Well, the nice thing about it is that the chip isnt always running at full capacity all the time, saving energy, cutting down on heat and only using whats needed. It can control how many cores need to be used, how many threads need to be used, how many caches need to be used, etc; thats the real nifty part. Doesnt sound like much, but that means Nehalem will be a beastly multitasker. Also features alot more intergrated controllers such as memory, SATA, DDR(2/3/w.e), and more. Boot up times is significantly decreased as well.

8core2thread is the Q2 2008 release, the future ones will feature more threads/cache, GHz and more.

Sounds like this summer is a good time to rebuild my PC.. Poor AMD, they got killed with Duos, and theyre not even caught up yet, and now with this 8core.. :Q

[levish]

*stiffy*

[Robert]

sounds expensive

[Avanarius]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97uSsjjoSNM&NR=1

only 4 more years!!!

[levish]

the 80 core chip is more like a couple/few real processors then lots of little dumb processors (like the cell)

[SephYuyX]

sounds expensive

Does, but im told there will be a steping price structure similar to what the Duos had.

[Shuemue]

Q2 2008 seems a little early considering they've only just released the Penryns two days ago and in retardedly limited supply.

[levish]

no sellouts on zipzoomfly / newegg for the e8400 yet

waiting on the e8500 myself :D

[Yangsing]

8 cores? Seriously, does any home user really need that?

[Avanarius]

8 cores? Seriously, does any home user really need that?

In my point of view there really is a point where advancing technology does become futile for some things. For computers my general expectation for the average home user is that things happen when you click, not 5 seconds after, which in my opinion was best accomplished when core duo 2's came out.

The average home user will not need any more unless microsoft bloats us with more software like vista with higher requirements (hello OS requiring 8 core cpu).

This kind of advancement reminds me of sharp talking about patenting an hd tv resolution 4x higher then the current 1080p. In my mind it's so pointless, I mean does hd really look bad? No it doesn't, did antenna tv look bad? yes it did. Will people still buy whatever comes out next? Probably.

[Shuemue]

I think there's still a long way to go with home computing, shit gimme 80 cores so I can run one machine serving a bunch of terminals like the old days, but with proper zing.

[mootsfox]

The number of cores is not as important as the way they work.

About freaking time Intel adds an integrated memory controller. AMD did it about 5 years ago and was in part what made the A64 series so much better than the P4's. It also allowed them to lower the amount of cache on die, reducing costs unlike Intel.

The A64's really kicked ass though, they beat the shit out of Intel so bad that people still think AMD is faster.