Added: 5 years ago
From: kevinepodtech
Views: 25,215
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (120)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • whats funny is the ati radeon hd 7970 on single precision - 3.5 Tflops on double precision - i think 1- 1.7 Tflops LOL!! gpu's are more powerful than most cpu's today

    freakin.... the 7970 is MORE POWERFUL than the nvidia TESLA!! almost double

    :::::PPPP ololl

  • thank you  ,supercool97! ,,,,,

  • IBM CREATED ON AUGUST AUGUST 17,2010...A GRAPHENE TRANSISTOR AT A FREQUENCY OF 100GHZ ,ALSO PROVED ,,,,,,,,I JUST LOVE THIS ! THIS IS THE START OF THE NEW ERA,NEW POSIBILITIES! GOOD LUCK FORWARD!

  • @winchestermentolatt In 2006, IBM made a silicon/germanium processor supposedly capable of 350GHZ. They sold a few but now I'm wondering what they're gonna do with that technology.

  • .....ABSOLUTELY ,,,HERE IT DOES STARTS THE FIRST VERY ELEMENTARY PROCESSOR,,,,,,NO I'M AFFRAID THERE'S MUCH MORE TILL THE TERMINATOR,,OFFICIALLY,,,BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT ARE MORE PROTOTYPES IN THE WORLD TODAY AT A HIGHER LEVEL,LIKE GOVERNMENTS,,,,,,ET CETERA,,,,,,,,I'M HAPPY THAT A CVILIAN CAN FINALLY USE A REAL CHIP,,,,,,THIS IT'S ACTUALLY THE START OF REAL TECCNOLOGY!THANK YOU SCIENCE ,UNIVERSE ,GOD ,EVERYTHING,AND ALSO THANK YOU INTEL ,YOU ARE THE BEST,I LOVE YOU!

  • 4:09 No, it's up to you to do the best job you can. Did anybody else catch that? Basically, "we'll limit our chipset releases to make sure this guy looks good, and now we have a reason so we can make more money".

  • *Your battery is fully charge*, pull out charger plug...*Your battery is low please ch!#12313.....* laptop died.

  • 80 Core for president

  • This is stupid. Didn't they already create a GRAPHICS CARD that achieved FIVE teraflops?! Haven't you guys heard of the Ati Radeon HD 5970?!

  • @roxas 5 That is a GPU, while unified architecture means that similar calculations can be carried out on a GPU in similarity to a CPU, they are still not as versatile compared to a CPU and are totally different processing units.

  • @roxxas5 But having 1 TFLOP running on 80W sounds better than 0.5KW (and more) which some top shelf cards use.

  • I was just turned on.

  • this is how terminator will be created.

  • 2011 Intel renamed himself "Cyberdyne". 2012, Teraflop becomes aware of himself and fire tactical ICBM nukes at several locations in the world.

  • I have a 6 core processor in my desktop. this processor would rape mine.

  • @mickycheese27 hows hexa core working out for you? I heard that theres not alot of applications that use the last 2 but i imagine over the next couple years more and more will. Is the power noticeable in windows?

  • @ryN45678 Windows is really low at sucking power but I managed to crank it up to at least 8% max. of the entire processor's capability. I opened every thing in my hardisk and external drive (together 1.256 terabytes out of 2 terabytes) it opened up in a jiffy. (32 secs!!!) . Every application works perfectly. totally worth the money. You can notice it's power while playing games. I played every single game on the highest res. and max. anti aliasing. I ran a dynamic physics app. and it roared.

  • @mickycheese27 Yea but what GPU do you have? the windows stuff is all cpu power ( an impressible at that) but games are MOSTLY gpu power, i know the cpu dose do a substantial amount of work too.

  • @ryN45678 try playing with multimedia apps like after effects or nuke and make something incredible. The cpu really excels at this with the gpu disabled.(with gpu enabled it's like getting $ 1 trillion dollars for free). my gpu is a Nvidia GTX 480. the processor is good for everything form opening apps to using them and also calculating dynamic formulas ( I do physics as a hobby). you can't feel any difference with gpu enabled or disabled. the processor is too powerful.

  • @mickycheese27 But wait isnt CUDA and physx with all the cores of a 480 better for physics calcs?

  • @ryN45678 You see when doing DNA and Physics Calcs the GPU only displays the dynamics and functions. The processor is the man behind the curtain who does the calculations, he calculates the formula and tells the gpu to render it out an behave what the object would behave like. With out the calcs a balloon for example could turn out to act like a bowling ball.

  • Comment removed

  • Think of the implications of this. There could be real advancements made in artificial intelligence by this chip that could pave the way to general intelligence AI and superhuman level expert systems.

    As the number of cores increases, the capacity for parallel processing increases, as does the ability for a computer to replicate aspects of human cognition.

  • if that was real you could wave goodbye to your dick.

  • propose a high charge laptop battery suuckka "booker t voice"

  • but down to the real question.... can I run commander keen with this 80 core processor?

  • I would like to play games online where I can talk with everyone in my language and it translates in real time to the other person in his language. But still with my voice. :) Another thing that I want to see in games in the future is to be able to control the whole body of the game character. Moving the legs and the arms and the whole body just as you like. :) Being able to do fast and slow body movements in 3D games. It adds more personality to each character.

  • @MrKarlalfred88 maybe in a 100 years buddy :)

  • @gir4evr nope sientist says that they will be able to make a computer that can convince a human that it speaks to another human, in 2020, so it should be able to translate it too :D

  • or what if it had 8 Cores and each one ran@3Thz idk LOL!

  • I remember when pentium 300mhz game out and school had them it was like wow.... now try crisis on it. 80 cores...sounds insane now but in 10 years..... Maybe someday there is 1 core for every file program/game has not 1 core/CPU trying to swallow whole 10giga program. Looking forward new 80, 1000 or million core processors. :)

  • Could video games utilize the true power of teraflop processors?

  • @youngdones It's really not a problem of current processors having the ability to handle the code, but more of how fast can the video update and how fast can the bus change with data.

  • hello everybody

  • you would need to redezhine the mother broad chipset inorder to handle al that extra capicty. idot.

  • all i can say 1945 ufo

  • THIS 80 CORE SPEED IS 1TERAFLOPS ... WHAT THE SPEED OF i7 ???? can anyone say it?

  • its 1  trilion opereations divided by 40

  • u mean 1 Tera flops / 40.... its like 1024giga diving by 40 = 25.6giga calculation so u mean today's i7 can do max is 25.6giga per sec ?? tell me if i am right and understood well?

  • well ye but i7 is designed for time sharing,while this one is for real time operations.

  • thx for that help :)

  • Comment removed

  • Speed of Core i7 goes up to 3.33 ghz but you can overclock it to about 4 ghz if you really wanted to.

  • 2.66 giga hertz my friend for the core i7

  • Core i7 920@stock = 33.15 GFlops (Linpack, N=18000)

  • this thing puts up 2.2 teraflops, and it has been overclocked to 6.3ghz per core!

  • hope its MUCH BETTER than nehalem although nehalem is the best

    (beckton will be better, its basically updated nehalem)

  • NOT ONLY DO YOU GET MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF PROCESSING, its a frisbee too!

  • lmao, 80 cores, amd made a chip with 800! ever heard of rv770? 1.2 teraflops!

  • So you're saying 800 cores putting out 1.2 teraflops is better than 80 putting out at least 1??

  • r u stupid dude????? rv770 is a GPU chip....how can u compare gpu's to cpu's...gpu's are dedicated for graphics work while cpu (though less in power) is an all-rounder

  • isnt this a gpu ???

    Remember intel prommised gaming chips last year ;)

  • Computer processing is phenominally uncontrollable. i mean in eight years like SR20Dett said....its gonna be unreal.too fast to control. imagine the cooler required to cool that. it uses less power than average household appliances but that still doesnt mean it will be efficient....average power usage of a PSU is that of a 400W. Gfx cards need between 380 - 900w... without SLI/Crossfire config!.... gonna be immense!

  • what are you talking about lol. gfx cards dont USE even close to 380w. Average psu usage in a dell is about 150w. LOL. and the amount of heat produced cannot exceed the power usage( a 10 w proc cannot creat more than 10 w of heat.)

  • I dont think you understand. to manage ALL loads CPU GPU etc you need a high rate PSU that can handle this. You think about it, Why would requirements for such PSU be so high. If you think you can power a Quad or even dual coreand GFX card with a 105w PSU then you have issues. GFX draw immense power because its not just the GPU that uses it every other component has power to heat ratio markers built on the card which show how much is produced with a Grapical multimeter. You have a lot to learn!

  • me? because if you have noticed, the TDP of a 4870 is 150w and the tdp of my q6600 is 95w, so therefore, a high quality psu(considering the MB power usage), could be a 300w and survive.

  • as long as you dont do anything like run an OS or anything. Thats a pretty conservative figure before you add HDD. Plus you have usb stuff to consider. also you should note that the higher the wattage a psu can take doesnt mean it can handle it forever. peak means peak. no more. if you run a psu at peak for a long time it will fail. If you have a psu that can handle twice the load you ask of it. it runs cool and smooth. less heat less noise.

  • @AvianAzn you dont know what you talking about, Im running nvidia geforce, 1 gig onboard and i had change my 500 w psu out for a 750 psu, the computer wouldnt even boot the video with only 500w... if you think a 150w will power my gfx card, your sadly mistaken, or on some really good drugs, if drugs be the case let me know wher your getting them cause ill sell my soul for an oz. cause that has to be some really psychedelic.. stuff

  • i would use the processor and build an artificial intelligence if i could,

  • You will need calculations in the range of millions of Yottaflop per second to even be close to a atomic simulation of one single human body. and you will need billions of times even faster than that to simulation many body's in a simulated fully natural enviroment (with all the plants, chemicals, gases worms etc.). So 1 terraflop or even pettaflop (1000xTR)or even exaflop((1000000xTR) or even Zettaflop (1 billion x TR) or even yottaflop (1000 billions x TR) is not even close to what we need.

  • Billions of yottaflops will take another 93-95 years at today's pace.

  • But I think new innovations, technologies and scientific discoveries could speed things up.

  • My cell processor takes 1 yodaflop, IN YOUR FACE!

  • Can anyone say, Terminator? lol

  • @rbolo29 all these silicon computers are no smarter than an insect, im pretty sure terminators are smarter than insects

  • then just wait until carbon nanotubes are perfected... processors so small they cannot be seen by the naked eye and yield the same processing power as conventional GPU's today with room for improvement as anything is,,lol will be able to be created..they already have tests running as we speek...

  • i think computing technology is growing so quickly we almost cant keep up with it

    i mean only 8 years ago was the release of XP and pentium 4, and look at even 8 years before that...the advances between XP and now has grown so much quicker than the ones in the gap prior to XP does anyone agree?

  • in 5 years i have to spam Props in Gmod 10 with no lag

  • Dr kliener = (1090KB) x 100000000 with lag ROFL

  • makes me wonder if investing too much on a high end gaming laptop is really worth it in the long run...

  • That would be phenomenal.

  • 80 CORE DILDO`S FOR EVERYONE!!

  • This makes me wonder..why do we even learn math in schools these days? Basic math like dividing and multiplying sure. But geometry and calculus and algebra is out of date. All you have to do is bring around a calculator and you'll get the solution to any equation 10x faster.

    By the time i graduate from college advance math shouldn't even be tought anymore, and should be replaced by something like computer apps or electronics apps.

    How many of us are actually going to use albegra anyway..

  • The people that design these things are going to use it for starters...

  • @speedsk8r010 just like your teachers tell you, you cannot live without algebra.. they were right, i found that out the hard way, and here I am 37 and just now learning algebra..

  • approx every 1 year technology doubles in speed, so we should see 1.48 Million GB's of RAM on Video Cards, and Main System Memory, in 6 years

  • Moore's law is simply Exponential Growth, the formula looks like this

    2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512,102­4,2048

    if you were to continue at this rate after a total of 20 times, it would be at the 1 Million point, so after 9 more stages of development we should expect to see Video Cards with 1,048,576 GB's of Ram, so 1.48 MILLION GB's of Ram!

    versus what we have now, 2048 we are using, in a single Dual CPU Core..

  • I can't wait to see the Heatsink.......

  • That's stupid, it's taken years to get just a handful of programs and operating system to optimize for 2 or 4 cores.

    How is throwing another 70-odd into the mix gunna help.

  • I asked myself a same question in 2001 when the pentium4 got a first appear in the markets and heard about multi-core processors, just wait, one day this 80-core will be needed!!

  • hold one to ur seat cuz in 20 years we will have Quantum computers that will do calculations that a classic cpu won't do even if it would be the size of a galaxy.

  • its real and its coming out in 2 or 5 years

  • Terminator technology.

  • @BurtWilson1 So it begins.........

  • It's a Wafer not just a single processor.

  • (Intel Proposes 80 Cores ) Right! And Intel r&d staff is on crack. Instead of proposing 80 useless burning cores of wasted energy, why not start at being pioneers in processor energy efficiency. Intel doesnt even have a rohs compliant nor energy star approved

    cpu to its name.

  • what about incraseing the number of biu circet

    paths between the cache memory and insrecion cores and number insturicons per cammonand

    has lot larger afect on clock speed than transitor size idtiots ??.

  • Umm this is not an X86 processor heck it's not even general purpose.

    These are very simply risc like cores that are very specialized.

    If anything it's like the rapport kilo core which uses a PPC and 1024 8bit cores but useful only for vector and matrices type operations.

    In short it's a GPU.

    BTW it only did 1 teraflop of nothing as it doesn't even have a memory controller yet.

  • Will intel make free c++ etc. compilers for such chips?! Also, when I saw in BBC tv some PR-guy speaking about such tech's use in 3d-games, it was strange that he didnt speak about image processing, especially robotics related image processing, and also data compression. We need such chips for car driving and robot arm control etc., 3d-games are far less important.

  • Photorealsitic games would need radiosity or things like that, which you wuld need an 8000 core CPU. So no photorealistic games this decade (possibly the next)

  • you're mistaking, photo realistic games don't depend on processor cores at all! they depend on heavy workload computer language programmings in c++ or visual C and the like, high bandwidth and instant access HDDs is what is needed for very dense game rendering, a 1GB/S second ram hard drive and basic 3d video card can makes this totaly possible. a processors only interprets instructions, it does not make them.

  • RAM and level 2 and level 1 cache serves as your high speed storage. Photorealistic games depend on calculations like raytracing, advanced physics and animations, micropolygonal subdivisions and the likes, which requires computational power beyond what we have today. A processor assigns memory adresses.

  • i disagree with you, see ppl never would have needed caches in cpus and not even need any ram if the pagefile on the hard drive hadn't bottlenecked to modern computer for 20 years. caches are not needed when information access is instantaneous and it never was instantaneous because hard drives have slow access time because theyre mechanical, the day we have drives that have no latency such as ram drives + high capacity and GB/s bandwidth Hdds large cpu caches and ram will be of little benifit.

  • i mean we already have ram drives and blazing fast ssd's but companies are putting a choke hold price or performance restraints on them because there would be a profit loss on a bunch of crap we dont need that companies are selling right now.

  • Well you got a point. Processors could work much faster if it was not for slow storage. But that would not increase performance bymany orders of a magnitude, which is required to meet the demands for a real time highe end raytracer.

  • even nvidia doubts ray tracing

  • devs were already pissed off with ps3's arichitecture now this?!?!? who wood want 2 program 80 fuking cores???

  • Devs were pissed off because the Cell was so bad. Intel 80 core will use x86 architecture and will be just as easy to program for as the Core 2 Duo. The Cell is a server processor, remember? ;)

  • Wrong this is not X86 but a bunch of riscy cores with DSP like functions but not as specialized as the SPUs in cell and cannot be programmed like X86 it will require completely new methods.

    It's closest relative might be the i960 embedded processor often found in laser printers and such.

    You can't even use this a a primary processor maybe as a GPU but nvidia and ATI got one teraflop a long time ago.

  • so will it be windows compatible?

  • Apparently programming for this will actually be easy... watch the intel research day video.

  • if only ATi and nVidia would be like this

  • most people are only just getting used to dual core, now, an 80 core? WTF?

  • nvidia made the g92

    it has 1 TeraFLOP

  • Yes, it has a 1 Tflop peak theoretical preformance, however that doesnt givae a clue of it's regular preformance which won't be anywhere near 1 Tflop. CPUs are more general than GPUs and are thus less efficient, GPUs are strong on a few things and can't do many things a CPU can.

  • I am to believe that :D.

  • Intel says so much which one an ear rushing already gets!

  • I never heard of that. Super computer perfomance for laptops and PCs? Sounds interesting!

  • good luck writing software for something like that.

  • interesting now if only thayed put an entire computer including its hard drive on to a single chip, ive had my own ideas of how a computer should be

  • I'd like an AI in my room.

  • i wish they put this on gpu...

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more