Skip to comments.
IBM's eight-core Power7 chip to clock in at 4.0GHz
The Register ^
| 11 July 2008
| Ashlee Vance
Posted on 07/14/2008 11:03:59 AM PDT by ShadowAce
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
1
posted on
07/14/2008 11:03:59 AM PDT
by
ShadowAce
To: rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; Salo; Bobsat; JosephW; ...
2
posted on
07/14/2008 11:04:24 AM PDT
by
ShadowAce
(Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
To: ShadowAce
3
posted on
07/14/2008 11:06:03 AM PDT
by
rawhide
To: rawhide
Yeah—think of all the nuclear simulations we can do with one of these—not to mention Folding@Home!
4
posted on
07/14/2008 11:07:32 AM PDT
by
ShadowAce
(Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
To: ShadowAce
Man, think about how many folding@home units a day that monster could crunch. :)
5
posted on
07/14/2008 11:08:42 AM PDT
by
kingu
(Party for rent - conservative opinions not required.)
To: ShadowAce
Sun Microsystems is already shipping (slower clocked) 64-thread, 8-core processors, that run relatively mainstream OSes like Solaris and Linux and OpenBSD.
What does IBM have? A promise to ship something (quantity and pricing unknown) two years from now...
6
posted on
07/14/2008 11:09:21 AM PDT
by
ikka
To: ShadowAce
The scary thing is that in about 10 years your home PC will blow the doors off this machine.
7
posted on
07/14/2008 11:10:29 AM PDT
by
2001convSVT
("People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence")
To: ShadowAce
So, how fast is the disk I/O on the machine? I’ll be impressed when the disk I/O is as fast as the processors.
8
posted on
07/14/2008 11:11:47 AM PDT
by
isthisnickcool
(OBAMA IS AN ARAB! _NEENER_NEENER!)
To: ShadowAce
Microsoft just found its miniumum requirements for the next version of Windows.
9
posted on
07/14/2008 11:14:26 AM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(Whale oil: the renewable biofuel for the 21st century.)
To: isthisnickcool
I imagine the RAIDs are tuned pretty well. I know I've seen 4GB/s now (between servers) using IB, which is quite a bit slower than the 1.3PB/s interconnects mentioned in the article.
Which those interconnects, tuning of massive RAID arrays, and fast discs, I can see some massive I/O speeds on this puppy.
10
posted on
07/14/2008 11:16:05 AM PDT
by
ShadowAce
(Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
To: KarlInOhio
Right, but it will take a Tb of ram to keep that version from bogging down.
To: ShadowAce
I was forced to buy a new desktop for the home, and although there is nothing wrong with a dual core machine with an out of the box 2 ghz, whose mother board can accept a quad core processor,
if you can, wait until the new motherboard architecture is out, because these "old" 775 socket type boards are going to be obsolete. That way you should get a good 8 years (or more with upgrades)of use out of it before the next generation of computer comes along rather than buying one that is already obsolete.
To: Sgt_Schultze
Right, but it will take a Tb of ram to keep that version from bogging down. What are you talking about? This system has 620TB of RAM--that'll be the new minimum... :)
13
posted on
07/14/2008 11:20:01 AM PDT
by
ShadowAce
(Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
To: ShadowAce
Wow. But I still won’t upgrade until service pack 1 is released. ;-)
To: ShadowAce
for sheer gigaflops, I’d say Obama’s running a close second.
To: ShadowAce
Cool! I'll take two of 'em.

16
posted on
07/14/2008 11:29:22 AM PDT
by
rdb3
(Upward, onward, beyond...)
To: ShadowAce
100 racks isn’t actually all that much, just 10x10 racks. If you wanted to, you could squeeze them into an area the size of a small house (about 70x24 feet) and still have room to walk around. I’ve seen bigger datacenters, but of course nothing with even close to this much power.
To: the invisib1e hand
To: antiRepublicrat
100 racks isnt actually all that much,... It's a pretty good size for a single machine. Granted, for an entire datacenter, it's not that big.
But this is designed to be a single machine.
19
posted on
07/14/2008 11:35:32 AM PDT
by
ShadowAce
(Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
To: ikka
Sun Microsystems is already shipping (slower clocked) 64-thread, 8-core processors, that run relatively mainstream OSes like Solaris and Linux and OpenBSD. It was an open bid for a future high-speed system, and IBM won it. It's not about what's available now, it's about what can be installed in 2010, and that is slated to have over three times the clock speed as the UltraSPARC T2. It looks like what Sun has now and the upcoming IBM will have about the same density, although the IBM system will be doing half the number of systems (1 2U IBM = 2 1U Sun).
I am wondering about how the architecture approaches will compare. The Sun has 8 cores on a chip, 8 threads each. The IBM separates it out a bit, 8 cores per chip, 4 threads each, two chips per module.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson