Overclock.net banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Quote:
SUN'S NEXT processor line will pack 16 cores and tape out by the end of the year, according to a report on News.com.
With all the fuss over Intel versus AMD, it is sometimes forgotten that multicore processors are nothing new and that IBM and Sun had the lead on both of the best names in x86 design. Codenamed Rock, the Sun chip will double the core count of the current UltraSparc T1 generation, still better known by its Niagara codename.

The report suggests that Sun CPU engineers will have to wear a tie if they don’t make their 31 December deadline for the tape-out.

Sounds pretty rosy, doesn’t it? However, although a milestone, taping out does not mean that volume supplies are just around the corner. Indeed, Rock-based servers are not expected to arrive until 2008, says the report -- that will be five years after the project was first publicised by Sun.

By the time Rock servers are available, Sun’s processor division might have yet more questions to answer, despite winning the mainstream CPU crown for numbers of cores and powering part of Sun's best server line-up in years. Even though Sun does not fabricate, CPU design is still immensely costly and Sun is already hedging with its AMD relationship. It also has an ongoing lawsuit with Azul Systems, designer of the 48-core Vega CPU for offloading Java work.

Don’t be surprised if Sun next year goes further than its May 2004 announcement of a shared server development plan with Fujitsu, under the resoundingly literal name of Advanced Product Line, or APL. However, even that project has not seen smooth progress. Originally scheduled for delivery this year, there is still no sign of the merged lines.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36247
 

·
Filthy Casual
Joined
·
8,653 Posts
Ya I thought it odd Macs have hade 2 dua lcore CPUs for a few years now, and PCs with quad cores jst came out a month ago. Not to mention the 4 socket 940 server boards capable of 8 cores that have been around since who knows when.

I guess now it's just affordable and practical, that's the main difference.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,004 Posts
I've always liked Sun. (Hardware at least.. Java = Not my cup of tea...)


I think that the hardware companies need to slow down. They're cranking out new stuff before software companies can develop software for the old stuff, and what's happening is the growth of a huge gap between software and hardware capabilities. For exmple: 64-bit CPUs. Now we are starting to see more software coded specificly to take advantage of them, but how many years after thier release? I'm just now starting to see desktop (non-OS) applications that can take advantage of SSE2, but now the hardware is on to SSE4. Either software dev houses need to step it up a lot, or hardware needs to slow down or have premade "modules", if you will, for the software companies to use to support thier hardware. That's my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
787 Posts
Yeah, but us entusiasts don't use Macs or Suns, so who cares? The IBM have the really crazy POWER series CPUs, but we dont use them in our overclockable desktops.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Pc Ftw!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Wait a minute, this Sun cpu is a server chip with 16 cores? I don't think the enthusiasts consumers would want a server cpu for their overclocking neeeds.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,195 Posts
Cant really say they're greater, after all their multi-core chips only run at about 1.2 GHz. Intel's Quad runs 2.66 and its Octo will see similar numbers, probably higher even. Technically, Intel > Sun. (In many more ways than one).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,000 Posts
havent dual cores been around for like 10 years? Maybe not phisically, but maybe the blueprints? I heard compaq made a dualcore CPU, but it cost so much they scraped the project.

Now everyones all ga-ga over dual cores, thinking their new and whatnot, its just that we can actually use them and get a boost now.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,004 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by tuanming View Post
Wait a minute, this Sun cpu is a server chip with 16 cores? I don't think the enthusiasts consumers would want a server cpu for their overclocking neeeds.
How so? I agree with you that we probably won't see too many people on the forums running out to buy SPARCs, but plenty of server CPU's get used for overclocking. Opterons? The server CPU's from Intel and AMD are often no more than more stable versions of thier "desktop use" counterparts, which makes them better for our purposes.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,062 Posts
Quote:


Cant really say they're greater, after all their multi-core chips only run at about 1.2 GHz. Intel's Quad runs 2.66 and its Octo will see similar numbers, probably higher even. Technically, Intel > Sun. (In many more ways than one).

How so? Their architecture is completely different. You should know that comparing clock speeds is the worst way to compare the power (and as should anyone else).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Quote:


Originally Posted by Chipp
View Post

How so? I agree with you that we probably won't see too many people on the forums running out to buy SPARCs, but plenty of server CPU's get used for overclocking. Opterons? The server CPU's from Intel and AMD are often no more than more stable versions of thier "desktop use" counterparts, which makes them better for our purposes.

I'm sure there are people on this site interested in IT and server applications, and some architectural changes can lead to the advancement of other technologies.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,004 Posts
There's plenty of "other" CPU makers out there, just not for your typical desktop Windows use. Fujistu, Motorola, Sun, IBM, and even Via (great CPUs) are all out on the market, plus many more whom I'm not readily aware of.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top