Intel talks up multi-core Larrabee processor, powerline Ethernet

Intel's already been doing quite a bit of talking about future products amid the hubbub of the Intel Developer Forum, but it looks like it still has plenty on its plate, with the company now revealing some details on two slightly nearer-term initiatives. First up, the company has confirmed its long-rumored, general purpose GPU-competing Larrabee processor, which it describes as a programmable, multi-core processor that'll reach "at least one teraflop." The first such chips, apparently with "tens of cores," are set to be demonstrated sometime next year, with a number of different versions of the processor also planned, each with varying numbers of cores. On another front, Intel also looks to be making a big push for integrated powerline Ethernet, with the company set to work the HomePlug AV 200Mbps powerline standard into its desktop designs next year as an optional feature, in particular in its Viiv platform.

Read - The Register, "Intel confirms programmable, multi-core chip"
Read - Reg Hardware, "Future PCs to integrate powerline Ethernet"

[RyanTV @ Apr 17th 2007 1:36PM]

"tens of cores" sounds great and all... but I'd sure like some software that is written to take advantage of my core 2 duo chips instead.

You can pack a zillion cores into a processor, but it isn't going to do you a bit of good unless developers write their applications to take advantage of them :/

[jimgirardi @ Apr 18th 2007 12:46AM]

just use a mac or some other OS that can handle multi-thread natively

[techwarrior @ Apr 17th 2007 1:44PM]

i agree ryan

[OddManOut @ Apr 17th 2007 1:48PM]

"...set to work the HomePlug AV 200Mbps powerline standard into its desktop designs next year as an optional feature, in particular in its Viiv platform."

Hmm...will this version of Homeplug actually be able to pipe my BB connection from the downstairs to the upstairs at more than a spotty 900kbps like the supposed 85mbps did? Heck even the old 14mbps hardware manages around 6mbps (but the bridge didn't like being connected directly to a switch...else I'd be using it now...)...

[fubar @ Apr 17th 2007 6:12PM]

OK, I'll ask the stupid question...

The name is a Get Smart reference, isn't it?

[J L @ Apr 17th 2007 9:49PM]

I can't wait to have 80 cores in my watch!

[Munch @ Apr 18th 2007 12:42AM]

So...we went from the "who's got the most GHz in their processor" wars to the soon to develope "who's got the most cores" in their processor? Like the GHz wars, I'm sure this will plateau in a few years, until they find their next jump in speedy processor tech.
When my processor has 1x10^23 cores in it, and needs 1.21 gigawatts(what's a jigga-watt?!!!)....I want to go back to the future.

[James @ Apr 18th 2007 1:10PM]

jim: In what way does Windows *not* "handle multi-thread natively"? The problem is not the OS -- Windows does just fine handling multi-threaded apps, thank you. The problem is that coders have for years learned single-threaded code development models. Good multi-threaded code is hard, and bad multi-threaded code can be a real disaster. It's my understanding that Supreme Commander (haven't played, heard it's good, not sure it would even run on my top-notch-in-2003 machine) has a "simulation" (gameplay) thread and a separate "rendering" thread, which is a good start, but optimizing code for an arbitrary number of cores is not an easy task. IMHO, it's going to become (if it isn't already) the next Big Thing in CS research. The problem is, we're definitely not there yet.