Intel to Ship 8-Core Server Processors Later this Fall
Intel to Ship 8-Core Server Processors Later this Fall
Posted 05/27/2009 at 6:57am
| by Paul Lilly
8
Comments
Print
Intel this week said its Nehalem-EX processor, an 8-core beast of a chip, will go into production sometime later this year and start shipping in server systems by early 2010. Even better, each chip supports 16 threads, says Boy Davis, Intel's GM of the Server Platforms Marketing Group.
Already on-board is IBM, who is already developing a server based around Nehalem-EX. The server will hold eight processors, making use of 64 Nehalem-EX cores capable of handling 128 threads.
"We're very excited today to be the first to demonstrate Nehalem-EX," said Alex Yost, VP IBM BladeCenter.
In addition to more cores and threads, Nehalem-EX also ups the memory ante, doubling the capacity with up to 16 memory slots per processor socket.
Image Credit: Intel
More like this
DJSPIN80
May 27, 2009 at 9:59am
From a business perspective, I can virtualize the crap out of my servers and utilize fewer hardware. I could also utilize this for processing large chunks of data - though, on the other hand, I'm probably more keen to use nVidia's CUDA technology instead. But this will make a great server none-the-less, wish I could afford one for my home. :P
Th3MadScientist
May 27, 2009 at 8:42am
People clueless to the server market will obviously say it is pointless to have more cores because applications are not coded for multiple cores...please educate yourself
These server are not meant to run single threaded applications, they are going to be used for virtualization using VMWare ESXi or VSphere where entire servers will be virtualized and paritioned using the servers bare metal resources. Standalone servers can then be decomissioned and save the company on cooling and energy costs.
You are able to host all the server of a small company on one of these servers when virtualized.
Defiant
May 27, 2009 at 9:57am
The comments below were regarding hyper threading, not physical cores... If thats what you were referring to
Caboose
May 27, 2009 at 7:33am
You know, I honestly don't know why Intel keeps using Hyper-Threading. IMO it's pointless. Lets take a CPU, and cut it's processing power in half so that it can run 2 threads at the same time, that way we can have2 things run half as fast!
-= I don't want to be dead, I want to be alive! Or... a cowboy! =-
DJSPIN80
May 27, 2009 at 9:57am
Not quite, the cores themselves are running at x.xx Ghz, Hyperthreading doesn't half the processing power, all it does is allow the core to run two threads simultaneously. Hyperthreading (a.k.a., SMT or Symmetrical Multi-Threading) requires that software be SMT aware - so there are some drawbacks, but Windows is SMT aware.
Defiant
May 27, 2009 at 7:40am
It doesn't work like that, when something is using your processor core it isn't using all the parts of it, so hyper threading allows another thread to use those unused parts at the same time. It sucked on the pentium 4s, but its awesome on my core i7 920, its a good technology now. I can agree with you now though when we are getting into 8+ cores it is just pointless becuase there are enough physical cores.
Connect with MaximumPC
Featured Content
We introduce Intel's latest class of tablet killers and review 4 of the first Ultra...
Where have all the memorable videogame enemies gone?
This month's issue
Feature
11 Hardware Hacks
Feature
Overclock Your CPU
How-To
Supercharge Your Smartphone
Build It
A Powerful $830 Rig
Most Commented Articles
Latest Max PC Tweets
- maximumpc: Here's what the @horse_ebooks bookmarklet (http://t.co/brE6898A) does to Maximum PC: http://t.co/Y6OhO6zk1 hour 22 min ago
- maximumpc: Microsoft on Patents: Can't We All Just Get Along? http://t.co/g0vginvG3 hours 43 min ago
- maximumpc: Google Drive Cloud Storage: Is Google Preparing To Muscle In On Dropbox? http://t.co/lCWzeYmS4 hours 8 min ago
