Tilera's 100-core Tile-GX processor won't boil the oceans, will still melt faces
By Thomas Ricker 
posted Oct 26th 2009 3:16AM
posted Oct 26th 2009 3:16AM
Sixty-four, sixty-shmore... that's so 2007 in terms of processing cores found in a single CPU: one hundred cores is where the future of computing resides. This magnificent engineering feat isn't from AMD or even Intel, it's the latest Tile-GX series of chips from the two-year old San Jose startup, Tilera. Its general purpose chips can run stand-alone or as co-processors running alongside those x86 chips that usually ship in four-, six-, or now eight-core configurations like Intel's upcoming Nehalem-EX chip. Tilera's 100-core chip pulls 55 watts at peak performance while its 16-core chip draws as little as 5 watts. Tilera uses the same mesh architecture as its previous 64-core chip in order to overcome the performance degradation accompanying data exchange on typical, multi-core processors -- or so it says. Tilera's new 40-nm process chips have cranked the clock to 1.5GHz and include support for 64-bit processing. And while its processors could be applied to any number of computing scenarios, Tilera's focusing on lucrative markets like parallel-processing where its meager developer and marketing resources can extract a relatively quick payout. The fun begins in early 2011 with volume pricing set between $400 and $1000.[Via PC World]
100 cores netbook its comming...
blah
This sounds pretty ridiculous....ly awesome. And I want one
Will this make me breakfast?
it'll *cook* you breakfast if the article title is accurate.
i thought this was nvidia for a second because of the logo color and font.
Exactly what i was thinking.....
and if this processor can do x86/x64 computing such as running windows.
then nvidia has nothing to worry against intel.
nvidia can make a chipset and gpu for this processor.
who knows if that comes to fruition, i may cross the border and abandon intel in the future!
i know, there may be licensing issues, then again if any licensed x86/x64 chip maker (VIA, Meta Crusoe Etc.) should acquire this company, they could also make an alliance with nvidia for a better computing. accelerated flash on netbook (or any pc, mid, etc) would be awesome compared to the current state of netbooks with intel gpu, which are barely passable for use.
Damn son...... I'd hate to see how these cores play with caches, memory, etc
It's got 99 problems but a cache ain't one.
hahaha, nice
100 cores doesn't necessarily imply face-melting performance - I'm more interested in the performance of an individual core. That'll put the 100-cores figure in proper perspective. For all we know, we're still better off with our 4 core Nehalem chips, as far as desktop requirements go (for eg. gaming)
A safe bet considering they aren't x486-based cpus.
the performance of a sole core won't tell you much - with 100 threads you're going to have cache problems out the ass, and to get down to a 5W TDP with 16 cores it's not likely they have the fancier things like branch prediction on them.
@ John
Branch Prediction is pretty much required. Depending on how accurate you want it, even a small bpred unit (area & power wise) will likely net 95% + accuracy. Look at the ATOM, with the TDP from 2.5W-5.5W (depending on the version).
Regarding the cache, each core has its own cache, 32K+32K L1 and 256KB L2 (similar to ATOM). Somewhat similiar to the GTX280 Nvidia chips.
The more interesting questions are:
1) What kind of compiler support exists (recall the Itanium)
The site says GCC works, but performance numbers will tell the real picture.
2) How many instructions are issued per clock?
3) What are the power provisions; ie DVFS...
The detail on the site are really limited.
In short, quite an interesting processor. But until the silicon comes out in `11 and performance is evaluated, it's more like a good idea on paper rather than a product.
--Tom G.
Man I wish software would catch up.
Now imagine something like this costing much less and being faster and beating the whole intel/windows into submission?
...running linux extremely fast (that is)
Intel != Windows
I shudder at the thought of having to use Linux on a daily basis.
Having to compile your own wifi-drivers sucks as much on 100 cores as it does on 2.
You get used to it after compiling the graphics drivers, and using chmod a few times!
A fantastic user experience indeed!
I rather spend the time it takes to compile your own drivers doing my work and actually get paid for it in the end.
Linux? No thank you.
Haha, funny guys. This sarcasm is obvious to people using Linux, but you shouldn't scare off the ones who haven't used it before.
I'll jump in with Windows sarcasm too, to even it out:
Yeah, you have to compile everything in Linux, but it's better than removing the 20 viruses from every driver you have to download. Jeez, even your virus scanners have viruses on it now, it's terrible!
100 CORES?! :O
*jizzes*
go get checked for premature ejaculation.
can it run crysis?
CRYSiS Linux edition :P
Unimpressed. ATI GPUs already have 1600 cores and they are programmable with OpenCL or DirectX Compute Shaders.
@imbusy... wtf u on about?
Go read about GPGPU.
100 seems like a rather odd number to increase too. Why not go for double, up to 128? Or is that for next year when they need something else new to release?
Exactly,
If companies actually put to market what they can actually manufacture now, we'd be farther ahead. They hold back of course so they can sell more product that way.
The computer science lab where I work has been engaged in research with the Tile64 for several months now. Hopefully we get access to the real hardware soon (not just the emulator). Exciting!
5 watts? When can I get a netbook with 16 cores, x64, and 12 hours of battery life please?