Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AMD's Six-Core Istanbul Opterons

Posted by kdawson on from the nothing-outruns-my-v8-ford dept.

EconolineCrush writes "AMD's latest 'Istanbul' Opterons add two cores per socket, for a grand total of six. Despite the extra cores, these new chips reside within the same power envelope as existing quad-core Opterons, and they're drop-in compatible with current systems. The Tech Report has an in-depth review of the new chips, comparing their performance and power efficiency with that of Intel's Nehalem-based Xeons. Istanbul fares surprisingly well, particularly when one considers its performance-power ratio with highly parallelized workloads."

5 of 123 comments (clear)

  1. Wasn't it called Constantinople? by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or isn't that anyones business but the Turks?

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    1. Re:Wasn't it called Constantinople? by underqualified · · Score: 5, Funny

      no no no. that was the beta version.

  2. Fuck Everything, We're Doing Six Cores by iamdrscience · · Score: 5, Funny

    You think it's crazy? It is crazy. But I don't give a shit. From now on, we're the ones who have the edge in the multi-core game. What part of this don't you understand? If two cores is good, and four cores is better, obviously six cores would make us the best fucking processor that ever existed. Comprende? We didn't claw our way to the top of the CPU game by clinging to the two-core industry standard. We got here by taking chances. Well, six cores is the biggest chance of all.

    Here's the report from Engineering. Someone put it in the bathroom: I want to wipe my ass with it. They don't tell me what to inventI tell them. And I'm telling them to stick two more cores in there. I don't care how. Make the cores so thin they're invisible. I don't care if they have to cram the sixth blade in perpendicular to the other five, just do it!

  3. Re:Istanbul runs your shells by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Istanbul was Constantinople
    Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople
    So if you were waiting for a core called Constantinople
    It's been released as Istanbul.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  4. it's interesting, but not becase of 6c by markhahn · · Score: 5, Informative

    the real news here is not the extra couple cores, but coherency snooping. this feature will make 4/8s machines far more attractive; it doesn't hurt that with 48 cores and 32 ddr3/1333 dimms, you have quite a monster. _and_ incidentally something that Intel can't currently answer.

    there's no question that nehalem has put a serious dent in the market, but Intel's going quite slow in rolling out higher-end products. yes, a nehalem socket delivers about 50% more bandwidth than a current opteron socket, but show me the 8s nehalem machines. nehalem-ex is coming, but how soon and at what price?

    one thing I haven't seen is any attempt to measure real SMP performance on new-gen chips. I don't mean something like Stream or VMs, where there is no real sharing inherent to the workload. how long does it take to exchange a _contended_ lock between cores (in the same socket vs remote)?

    finally, the real question is whether there is actual demand for more-core chips. I'm in HPC, and we always want more, and throw good money. but it has to be smart more - the 6-core core2, for instance, was just asinine because even 2c core2 is drastically memory-bandwidth-starved. nehalem-ex seems quite promising, but if it's cheaper to cluster dual-socket machines rather than pay the premium for 4s's, the 4s market will be stunted and less successful in a self-fulfilling way...