Intel crams 48 cores onto stamp-sized processor, wants to do what Cell did
By Richard Lai 
posted December 2nd 2009 5:47PM
posted December 2nd 2009 5:47PM
Just when we thought Intel's yet-to-release six-core Core i9 would be the future, the silicon giant drops the bomb yet again with more multi-core madness -- the experimental 48-core Single-chip Cloud Computer (SCC), a.k.a. Rock Creek. While it looks like Intel still has a long way from their 80-core target in 2011, this bad boy packs an impressive 1.3 billion transistors on a 45nm fabrication, but sucks up just 125 watts which is a far cry from Core i9's 130 watts. Intel's stated that their main goal is to use SCC's parallel computation -- a field where high clock speed isn't necessary -- to enhance gesture control. Sounds familiar? Yes, it was Toshiba's SpursEngine, but there's no harm in having a new contender for the challenge. You go, girl!
@spigot
Yeah, a chip like that is very useful for androids, since sensor/vision processing is something that can be made highly parallel. Where many smaller cores is better then a few large cores. A lot of companies are going in this direction, Creative Labs (Zii), NVidia, ATi, IBM, etc...
How is this in any way the same as the Spur Engine? They are totally different bits of technology. The 24 dual core IA-32 PROCESSORS are actual processors, not SPE's like in the SpurEngine's multiple cores. You probably could even add a SpurEngine along side the Rock Creek CPU for even more processing hilarity.
@SirDrinksAlot You're right, of course, but we are talking about the application, not specification. Both are made for similar purposes.
And I thought I was future proof for at least a little while when I got the i7 version of the iMac.
@Hotrod
How would a non-upgradeable computer be future proof to begin with?
@smib Future proof means it will last for sometime. It really has nothing to do with it being upgradable. The only difference is that Mac users can BUY a new computer when it gets outdates instead of UPGRADING it.
This is cool, but not for home or power users...we would need an actual OS and Apps that actually take advantage of the power this has to offer...most applications today aren't even designed for multiple core computers.
@surgex i agree. I mean we barely have applications that use dual core technology, trying to get those applications to use 48 cores is not going to happen for a long time. Much less these aren't used for home users, more for the companies and researchers who need the extra cores for extreme processing chores.
Oh my f*cking God... Chuck Norris jokes are among the WORSE jokes I've ever heard.
@Lucas In ten minutes, Chuck Norris will burst through your door and proceed to roundhouse kick you into the twelfth dimension for your hearsay.
@Lucas Love the Ferry Corsten logo.
So wait. Intel is making a chip that draws resemblance to the Cell processor that's in the PS3?
Wow. Well before we know it Valve will no longer be supporting Intel chipsets and will claim that Intel should just do a "do over". How *dare* they try and make any type of hardware that's not EXACTLY the same as what Valve has been developing on for the last 10 years.
How fucking DARE you Intel. You should be ashamed of yourselves...
@kenny goo
Chill. They aren't event remotely close to each other other than being multiple cores on one die. The Engadget editor has no clue what he's talking about, one is a processor with a series of processors the other is a co-processor with a series of SPE cores.
@SirDrinksAlot
They're both processors that aim to spread our their power over multiple cores/SPEs to handle specific tasks individually. The concept is still the same, and with the Cell having it's PPE and seven SPEs, it's spreading out that power quite a bit more then most multi-core processors out there today. This processor has 48. I think the comparison stands.
Either way, who gives a fuck. It was a chance for me to take a stab at that hack Gabe Newell and his ridiculous comments. That alone should fill the void of logic that may or may not have been in my comment.
We are longing for Core i1024. Come on! Intel!
The Chuck Norris pic is a nice touch.
I didn't even see the Chuck Norris until I looked at this picture a second time a few hours later. xD
WTF does it matter that there's 48 cores? Software designers today hardly use parallel processing at all, so 47 of your cores sit idle. Faster clock speeds are where it's at currently. When devs finally figure out how to do parallel processing right, THEN these chips will be worth something.
There are some more slides and info on this project here: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=825