Slashdot Mirror


IBM Releases Power7 Processor

Dan Jones writes "As discussed here last year, IBM has made good on its promise to release the Power7 processor (and servers) in the first half of 2010. The Power7 processor adds more cores and improved multithreading capabilities to boost the performance of servers requiring high up-time, according to Big Blue. Power7 chips will run between 3.0GHz and 4.14GHz and will come with four, six, or eight cores. The chips are being made using the 45-nm process technology. New Power7 servers (up to 64 cores for now) are said to deliver twice the performance of older Power6 systems, but are four times more energy efficient. Power7 servers will run AIX and Linux." And reader shmG notes Intel's release of a new Itanium server processor after two years of delays. The Power7 specs would seem to put the new Intel chip in the shade.

10 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. Real question by LordoftheChmod · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's all fun but it doesn't answer the real question : Can it run Crysis?

    1. Re:Real question by skine · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think you clicked the wrong link on Tom's Hardware.

      The question here is whether it can run Linux - followed shortly by a debate on how terrible Ubuntu is.

  2. Re:4.14GHz? by wizardforce · · Score: 3, Funny

    There probably were better ways of increasing computational speed using multicore processor designs than just increasing the clock speed. Kind of like going from a V4 engine to V6 being a better option in terms of power than increasing the individual piston HP of the V4 from 25 to 30.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  3. Re:Apple skunkworks? by Khyber · · Score: 4, Funny

    LOL You're in no position to know.

    I am, however. But my NDA forbids me from saying anything.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  4. Re:Query by scotch · · Score: 4, Funny

    Holy shit, this guy is on to something. You could write these common computing tasks as a sort of "bench" suite of tests. Then on each architecture, you would get different "marks" against the "bench". Let's call them "benchmarks" for brevity. These "benchmarks" would give allow clear and unambiguous comparison of these various chips. Foolproof and brilliant!

    --
    XML causes global warming.
  5. Re:4.14GHz? by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Funny

    There probably were better ways of increasing computational speed using multicore processor designs than just increasing the clock speed. Kind of like going from a V4 engine to V6 being a better option in terms of power than increasing the individual piston HP of the V4 from 25 to 30.

    Back in my day, manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.
    And we liked it that way.
    Now get off my lawn!

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  6. Re:Query by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 3, Funny

    I like your folk etymology. It neatly excises surveying from the discussion.

  7. Re:4.14GHz? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    3.4 is still 3.

  8. Re:4.14GHz? by Your.Master · · Score: 4, Funny

    You learn something new every day.

  9. Re:4.14GHz? by couchslug · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Back in my day, manufacturers used to slap a turbo button on the front of the case.
    And we liked it that way."

    Noobs...
    Back in MY day, I used to wax the strings on my abacus to lessen bead friction.
    We LOVED it that way.
    Now get off my peat bog!

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."