Intel six-core coming in 2008

shadow2get · 26-02-2008, 01:23 PM

Looks like Intel is coming up with ... a 6-Core monster by the Half of 2008 to beat the Hell out of AMD.

I think this will be to rival with AMD's 3-Core processor.

Source

Quote:

Intel six-core coming in 2008
Monday, February 25, 2008 13:16 Monday, February 25, 2008 13:16

Vienna (Austria) – Intel's PR reps are recovering this week from GDC and are preparing for CeBit, which will open its doors next week. But there is a certain presentation about a relatively unknown part, which may keep Intel’s phones ringing this week: Leaked information indicates that Intel’s first hexa-core will debut this year.

I has not been a secret that 2008 will ring in the end of the front side bus at Intel. The company’s Nehalem follows in the footsteps of AMD's K8 architecture (Opteron/Athlon 64), which introduced the Integrated Memory Controller (IMC) and Direct Connect Bus (HyperTransport), which provides offers a complex design that, in theory, represents the most efficient CPU design available today.

However, before the FSB will disappear for good, there will be one more siginificant chip using this structure: Meet Dunnington, Intel's first native multi-core chip. If AMD's definition of “multi-core” is correct, then “multi” indicates a number greater than two (three-core AMD Phenom 8000 series, four-core Phenom 9000, etc). In that case, Intel is set to offer 50% more cores than AMD currently has.

According to a leaked presentation, Dunnington will be last CPU coming out of the Penryn generation and will surface as a single-die six-core chip. This processor is geared for high-integrated systems such as blade servers. Socket-wise, the CPU uses mPGA604 and is pin-to-pin compatible with Tigerton.

To us it looks like this processor is sheer evidence of just how scalable the original Conroe architecture (introduced in 2006) turned out to be. All three dual-core segments in Dunnington have their own L2 cache (3 x 3 MB), which leads us to believe that we are seeing here three Wolfdale (45nm dual-core) dies bolted together. The CPU also integrates 96 KB L1 cache (Data) and 16MB of L3 cache. The power consumption is considerable, but at least below 130 watts. Looks like Intel is preparing another processing monster.

Given the fact that Dunnington will use the Caneland chipset and has the complexity of a single-die design, we're not surprised that Intel engineers opted for a front side bus clocked at 1.06 GT/s (or “GHz”). So, we are talking about 266 MHz QDR (Quad Data Rate) clock, which is used on most Intel Core 2 based processors.

This processor is coming to market in blades and other stacked designs from Sun Microsystems and other Intel partners. Release date is second half of this year, or just a nice warm-up for a monster we known under codename Nehalem.

Intel also provided some information about the potential performance of Nehalem. Depending on the benchmark, Nehalem could be more than three times faster than a Woodcrest 3.0 GHz chip (Xeon 5160). Intel claims that a 2.8 GHz Nehalem CPU will outrun the Woodcrest chip by a factor of 2.8 in SPEC int_rate_base2006 and by a factor of 3.8 in SPEC*fp_rate_base2006.

nvidia · 26-02-2008, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadow2get

I think this will be to rival with AMD's 3-Core processor.

Intels quad core processors can do the job....

Choto Cheeta · 26-02-2008, 01:37 PM

i hope they come in LGA775 package

Tech_Wiz · 26-02-2008, 01:48 PM

rofl

Pathik · 26-02-2008, 01:49 PM

I am desperately waiting for Intel's Skull Trail platform.

Count Dracula · 26-02-2008, 02:09 PM

Lol,AMD got owned.*Waits for Intel to release the so called 6 core processor*

Gigacore · 26-02-2008, 02:18 PM

fantastic, but when will they launch Gigacore?

hellgate · 26-02-2008, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pathik

I am desperately waiting for Intel's Skull Trail platform.

u wanna buy 1 or somethin????

naveen_reloaded · 26-02-2008, 02:37 PM

wht the real purpose of these cores .. when ur pc cant boot within seconds like ut tv or dvd player or other things???

and antivirus like NAV making pc to crawl...
i am better off with ps3+linux+wirelesskb and mice+sixasis

casanova · 26-02-2008, 02:47 PM

Hardware processing power increases and so does the processing power requirement of the softwares.

At the end, there is hardly any difference.

Pathik · 26-02-2008, 02:54 PM

@hellgate hopefully if i start earning by the time it launches..
@naveen wich distro did u install in ur ps3?

naveen_reloaded · 26-02-2008, 03:02 PM

@casanova

true dude true..but wht tis the eal take.. at the end ?? nothing...

@pathik...

was about t install linux but my bro didnt allow me to do.. will do it after few months...

**MetalheadGautham** · 26-02-2008, 03:34 PM

booooooooring.

We already have 8 core processors since before 2006.

now we even have an Open Source 8 Core 72 threads Sun OpenSPARC T2 Processor.

so whats the point of going for a 6 core processor ? Its not even worth calling a beast by today's standards. If it was 16 core, I might have let out a gasp, but this is not worth as much intrest.

Gigacore · 26-02-2008, 03:56 PM

^ but people praise Intel

goobimama · 26-02-2008, 04:03 PM

@metalhead: Where can I buy one of these 8 core processors?

The_Devil_Himself · 26-02-2008, 04:10 PM

^^lol.I hope sun also retails them.BTW sun used to be a processor giant I have heard before Intel took over.

whats the point?I mean I could never see the difference between doom3 and far cry and now crysis,blame my eyes but as soon as you start playing the game,you simply forget how good the reflection on your weapon looks.
This sucks,I bought my c2d when they were released,paying huge prices but now they are outdated.

nvidia · 26-02-2008, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

booooooooring.

We already have 8 core processors since before 2006.

now we even have an Open Source 8 Core 72 threads Sun OpenSPARC T2 Processor.

so whats the point of going for a 6 core processor ? Its not even worth calling a beast by today's standards. If it was 16 core, I might have let out a gasp, but this is not worth as much intrest.

A processor having 8 cores will be more expensive than a 6 core processor.

So people who want an Octa core processor but cannot afford can get a 6 core processor, with 2 cores more than a quad core. Both AMD or Intel havent stopped production of dual core processors just because quad cores are there. So whats wrong in having a 6 core processor when 8 core processors are available?

**MetalheadGautham** · 26-02-2008, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goobimama

@metalhead: Where can I buy one of these 8 core processors?

me still searching.
going to SP Road and National Market the end of march.

QwertyManiac · 26-02-2008, 05:15 PM

Bah, I'd planned for a 4-Core and am sticking to my decision this time. Enough of the numbers, I just need something nice, goddamn market bombarding companies.