RAM and cores are very different. IT is like saying "who needs 8 cores" a few years ago. And quite frankly, the answer to that right now is STILL "Almost nobody."
A professor at Stanford CS dept said that he projects min of 256 cores by 2016 and it is very possible to reach 1024 cores. And this info is coming from "next 10 years of CS" seminar in 2006 @stanford. We better have these things by 2016 REALLY. Hopefully software will be ready for all these cores.we have gone too far down the road on clock speed wars. whether or not software is ready, i want to see 1024 cores packed into a single cpu in my laptop. by 2016. that is long enough wait. Otherwise , THE FUTURE SUCKS!!(i am CS student and does useful work out of computing power that is why)
...wat?Breaking the laws of physics at over 3.8Ghz? I don't know if it's possible to be more wrong than you are right now, but you're horribly wrong. Especially considering with just a fan-based cooling system you can break 4Ghz on a C2D easily (with proper MoBo and PSU).
It's not a consumer targeted product and it's absolutely needed for the market it IS targeted too. 16 core (2x8 core) servers are a reality today. Doing it in one chip is just the natural progression.
Closed AccountApr 24, 2009
RAM and cores are very different. IT is like saying "who needs 8 cores" a few years ago. And quite frankly, the answer to that right now is STILL "Almost nobody."
deepfreezedApr 24, 2009
why don't they work on a 6 core version first
lilhelperApr 25, 2009
Dude, enough with the skynet s**t...
slashdotordiggApr 28, 2009
A professor at Stanford CS dept said that he projects min of 256 cores by 2016 and it is very possible to reach 1024 cores. And this info is coming from "next 10 years of CS" seminar in 2006 @stanford. We better have these things by 2016 REALLY. Hopefully software will be ready for all these cores.we have gone too far down the road on clock speed wars. whether or not software is ready, i want to see 1024 cores packed into a single cpu in my laptop. by 2016. that is long enough wait. Otherwise , THE FUTURE SUCKS!!(i am CS student and does useful work out of computing power that is why)
ravatarMay 1, 2009
You're mistaking processor hardware with graphics hardware. Perhaps drmangrum should have clarified.
Closed AccountMay 3, 2009
Now if we can only have software that works with multiple cores.
headinawheelMay 4, 2009
...wat?Breaking the laws of physics at over 3.8Ghz? I don't know if it's possible to be more wrong than you are right now, but you're horribly wrong. Especially considering with just a fan-based cooling system you can break 4Ghz on a C2D easily (with proper MoBo and PSU).
elamoMay 6, 2009
THANEDIT: f**k the ghost comments. The ones that only appear after you already posted.
deadbabyMay 9, 2009
It's not a consumer targeted product and it's absolutely needed for the market it IS targeted too. 16 core (2x8 core) servers are a reality today. Doing it in one chip is just the natural progression.
jaderavenJun 7, 2009
LOLwe are all Cylon ALL OF US=CYLONSo say we all