Intel and AMD say by 2015 We will have 128 core CPU's

[Maximilian]

I agree, I don't understand why moderators feel compelled to kill old threads. I see absolutely NOTHING WRONG with "necroing".

100% this

Im in favor of basically letting people do whatever the hell they want, necroing causes no harm.

 

[scannall]

Thank you! I totally agree. Cant necro, cant make a second thread about the same topic, that is conflicting.

Most necro threads really are pretty useless. But this one has some real gems in it. I hope it sticks around for another 10 years, to get necroed again, and see how right or wrong we all are.

 

[Blitzvogel]

I enjoyed reading those old posts but they remind how fast time has been flying for me since graduating high school in 2005 D:

 

[TeknoBug]

God I'm glad the mods are letting this one stay alive, what a great thread. 10 years ago technology was expected to advance as fast as it was at the time, but it has stalled so much to the point that releases are being refreshed.

 

[jihe]

Well we do have 128 core GPUs at least.

 

[scannall]

Well we do have 128 core GPUs at least.

The IBM Power8 has as many as 96 threads. Kinda close eh?

 

[BUnit1701]

Most necro threads really are pretty useless. But this one has some real gems in it. I hope it sticks around for another 10 years, to get necroed again, and see how right or wrong we all are.

This exactly, all necros are not automatically evil, but the large majority that do happen are utterly useless. As in most things, there are no absolutes.

 

[MountainKing]

Great thread Thanks for the necrofication or whatever its called!

 

[MountainKing]

Multi core is going to be a case of diminishing returns faster than the mhz bumps were under today's circumstances. There's only so much you can thread out before the cost exceeds the benefits. At some point, the process will be "fast enough" and adding in another core won't be worth the expense. Even games, especially games, have a point where there's more cores than threads. If you could thread out core gameplay, physics, graphics, sound, and AI, you're talking 6 processors total counting one for the OS. Considering Graphics and Sound already have dedicated chips, 6 would allow you to do processor intensive stuff in the background as well.

The only way Multi-core is going to need to move beyond 6-8 cores is if we move to an age where there's a single computer running screens with inputs throughout the house. If a single computer is supplying an entire family's worth of needs, then we could see a need for more than 6-8 cores, but still that would likely top out around 10-20 cores.

While that is a very possible, even probable, sceneario it's still unlikely any user will need any more than 6-8 cores at any given time.

I'm guessing Quad-Core will be where it stops though.

Give this guy a medal and lock the thread!

 

[SPBHM]

Well we do have 128 core GPUs at least.

like the 8800GTX?



anyway, 10 years ago a dual core 2.4GHz k8 was more expensive than the 5960X is now, not quite 128 cores, but I think it's like well over 10x the MT performance at least

 

[Systems analyst]

I would have thought that Unix/Linux lend themselves to distributing processing over a number of processors; this can be of use in a number of ways;

1. Security checks on a system lend themselves to massive parallelisation; this is useful when handling data from secure financial websites.
2. Filtering of, for example, share prices lends itself to parallelisation. In general, financial data is massively parallel; for those of us watching the markets, the data flows 24 hours a day, 5 days a week.
3. Processing of sensor data involves multiple sources; for example, cars may sport a dozen cameras, and other sensors, in future; this technology may lend itself to home security, for example.
4. Developments in games may involve exo-skeletons with sensors and actuators, plus virtual reality; the sky is the limit, in terms of processing power required for this; imagine a virtual battle with an 'enemy', where the exo-skeleton enables you to feel the force of a blow? - and to deliver a forceful blow?

I would think that there will be many such possibilities in the future, and that they will use SoCs designed to be fit for purpose, with many cores, and heterogeneous computing.

 

[chaosdragonlord]

Thats 10 years and i dont call that to unrealistic.

It sounds good to me. I would like to pick one of those babies up and hook it up to my 40" 3D Projection LCD Monitor And 1024 pipeline 10Gb Videocard. Overclocked to 8Ghz Core / 40Ghz Memory ^____^ weeeeee

Those specs are made up but in 10-15 years they wont sound very made up.

The Future will be something crazy for us all, and we are at the dawn of a new eara in computing technology .... Cant Wait.

Hey, guy from 2015 here, I hate to break it to you, but the most cores we have so far is 18, and the highest clock speed without overclocking is 5GHz. We have videocards up to 12GB.