Slashdot Mirror


Windows 7 To Be 256-Core Aware

unassimilatible writes "As new features of Windows 7 continue to trickle out, ZDNet is now reporting that it will scale to 256 processors. While one has to wonder, like with Vista, how many of the teased features will actually make it into the final OS, I think we can all agree, 256 cores is enough for anybody." This Mark Russinovich interview has some technical details (Silverlight required).

17 of 441 comments (clear)

  1. Linux: 4096 by setagllib · · Score: 5, Informative

    The most recent mainline Linux release has integrated mature patches for 4096 core scalability, that have been developed by high performance computing corporations and tested in the field for years. Previous versions were rated for "only" 1024 cores. That still makes 256 look like a Gameboy.

    It must be really hard for Microsoft to compete in the HPC space. I almost feel bad for them. Almost.

    --
    Sam ty sig.
    1. Re:Linux: 4096 by catmistake · · Score: 4, Informative
    2. Re:Linux: 4096 by eclectus · · Score: 5, Informative

      It won't take too long. Sun's T2 chip has 64 threads, and the T5440 that I have at the office has 4 chips in it, for 256 threads, all in a 4u chassis. Granted, it doesn't run windows, but seriously CMT chips are out and growing fast. BTW, the T2 cpu is only about an inch quare, and it's only done on 65nm tech, not even 40nm.

      --
      This signature is a waste of 42 characters
  2. Re:eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    No... No he didn't.

  3. Re:eh by hedwards · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sigh, first off, it was 640kb of ram, and second off it's not even his quote. And additionally I'm not sure who really said it, but it wasn't Gates.

    The 640kb wasn't meant in the long term it was meant at that point, a time when they were talking about how to divy up the limited ram. It was the sensible way to proceed, it's just that drivers and such didn't get loaded into the rest of the ram causing huge headaches for gaming.

    Even at that point it was asinine to suggest that ram wouldn't become more common in machines. I think at that point they'd already seen ram increase by a few thousand percentage points easy if not more.

  4. Re:Memory scaling by setagllib · · Score: 5, Informative

    Linux supports NUMA which largely solves that problem, and ccNUMA which solves it even better. It's all about locality once again. Linux has been running on multi-thousand CPU machines for years, and has been optimised and refined by the stakeholders of those projects, so it's not a toy project to show off.

    --
    Sam ty sig.
  5. Re:Another excuse not to RTFA by PerfectSmurf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Opera browser and NO Silverlight here. That said there is no article to read but an interview to watch and the summary is wrong - it only requires Silverlight if you're using Internet Explorer. It streams video (.wmv) just fine to me.

    --
    I smurf everything and everything I smurf is perfect.
  6. You don't actually need silverlight by ubbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you look more closely (just below the description section) there are download links for:

            * iPod (MP4)
            * MP3
            * PSP (MP4)
            * WMA
            * WMV
            * WMV (High)
            * Zune

  7. Re:256 cores... pfft by ElMiguel · · Score: 4, Informative

    256 cores means that it can be stored in a 16-byte flag

    Er... there are 128 bits in 16 bytes. HTH.

  8. Re:Memory scaling by jargon82 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm reasonably sure 64 bit windows supports NUMA as well. I've worked with the IBM x3950, which is a NUMA architecture, and several of the folks (the minority, to be sure) whom I configured these systems for ultimately used windows.

  9. Re:eh by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Except the architecture they chose was pretty much limited to 640, so i don't buy your argument.

    Sure, soon afterwards ways around it was found, and eventually broken completely but it was a HARD limit at one point and i don't give Bill credit for seeing beyond his nose due to his 'self importance' attitude, which has burnt him more then once ( but with billions in the bank, its easy to buy your way out of a mistake ).

    It was also marketing spin against the competing motorola chips ( and systems ) which could address more. "you really don't need that extra headroom, stick with microsoft'

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  10. Re:eh by Immortal+Poet · · Score: 5, Informative

    Supposedly it's an urban legend that he even said that, because no one on the internet can actually source the quote. And if the internet can't find it, then it probably doesn't exist. To sate those who want at least something, however, here is a relevant quote from 1989:

    "I have to say that in 1981, making those decisions, I felt like I was providing enough freedom for 10 years. That is, a move from 64k to 640k felt like something that would last a great deal of time. Well, it didn't - it took about only 6 years before people started to see that as a real problem."

  11. Re:Hmm by Khuffie · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ya, I really wish they get rid of their multiple editions. I see only need for Windows 7 and Windows 7 Server (and even if they want to stretch it, Windows 7 Home and Windows 7 Business/Pro like they did in XP), but 5 versions are ridiculous.

  12. Re:eh by A+Friendly+Troll · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've read that it was an IBM engineer who said it. Could be another urban legend.

    Anyway, Gates denied saying it: http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1997/01/1484 (Oldest link - it's from 1997 - that I could find.)

    QUESTION: "I read in a newspaper that in l981 you said '640K of memory should be enough for anybody.' What did you mean when you said this?"

    ANSWER: "I've said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time."

    Gates goes on a bit about 16-bit computers and megabytes of logical address space, but the kid's question (will this boy never work at Microsoft?) clearly rankled the billionaire visionary.

    "Meanwhile, I keep bumping into that silly quotation attributed to me that says 640K of memory is enough. There's never a citation; the quotation just floats like a rumor, repeated again and again."

  13. Re:Actually, maybe not fair by Khuffie · · Score: 4, Informative

    Erm, they also gave out disks, and some have installed it on lower hardware. See here where they install it on a Celeron lappy. Microsoft demonstrated it running on a netbook. I can't remember where, but I recall reading a review of Windows 7 where they installed it on a laptop with 1 gig of ram, and said it ran as smooth as XP on the machine.

    Not to mention, giving out a laptop with known devices and hardware for a pre-beta built isn't exactly out of the ordinary. That way Microsoft can ensure that all the devices and drivers on that laptop are actually supported (remember: PRE-BETA). Not to mention the specs for those computers aren't exactly out of the ordinary now, and will be either standard or 'underpowered' two years from now when Windows 7 will be released.

    But your point is moot anyway, since they've already given out installer discs, and people have installed it on a variety of hardware and still were impressed with the performance.

  14. Re:Differing theory by Gavagai80 · · Score: 5, Informative

    You tell me that making OSes that crash every few hours and have to reboot all the time is part of a "mature industry"?

    This is obviously your own personal problem for downloading malware or whatever. Just because you break your operating systems doesn't mean they aren't mature. My last reboot was several months ago (not due to a crash -- last crash was probably a year ago), and the last time I used Windows (2003) I actually found XP quite stable and not in need of any regular rebooting (except for security updates).

    --
    This space intentionally left blank
  15. Re:Enough? by ModernGeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can link to the exact spot in the video by adding #t=XmXs at the end.

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.