Slashdot Mirror
Intel Launches Xeon E5 V3 Series Server CPUs With Up To 18 Cores
MojoKid writes Intel took the wraps off its Xeon E5 v3 server line-up today and the chip, based on Intel's Haswell-EP architecture, is looking impressive. Intel's previous generation Xeon E5 V2 chips, which were based on Ivy Bridge, topped out at 12 cores per socket. The new Xeon E5 v3 processors, in contrast, are going to push as high as 18 cores per socket — a 50% improvement. The TDP range is pushing slightly outwards in both directions; the E5 V2 family ranged from 50W to 150W, whereas the E5 V3 family will span 55W — 160W in a single workstation configuration. The core technologies Intel is introducing to the E5 V3 family pull from the Haswell architecture, including increased cache bandwidth, improved overall IPC, and new features like AVX2, which offers a theoretical near-doubling of floating point performance over the original AVX instructions. Full support for DDR4 DRAM memory is now included as well.
But couldn't they have put 19 cores in?
I would have thought a 16 core config would be an efficient number.
As a programmer I so want one of these.
$ make -j 18 # FTW!
You know what would be awesome? A 42-cores CPU. To keep your cup of tea really, really hot.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
An oldie, but one of the greats...http://www.theonion.com/articles/fuck-everything-were-doing-five-blades,11056/
A pox on web designers who feel that window.innerWidth == screen.availWidth
I remember 8-16 cores being announced YEARS ago, but they never ever appeared in regular desktop computers (well, not at your cheap online stores or mainstream street stores either).
As a hobbyist 3D modeller, the more cores the merrier (and more memory + cache of course). But I'm kind of disappointed about where we're headed. Announcements of new processor with an astonishing amount of cores appear all the time, but they never appear in the actual stores, are they too expensive or something?
I remember the good times when I built my own computers, just going to the local computer shop and purchasing the needed components, aahh...the times we could overclock our cheapo AMD and then Intel came back with a much more overclock-able CPU etc. I've been stuck with my 4 core cpu for the last 6-7 years now and the only thing that has improved my rendering is the NVIDIA GPUs...but they do have their limitations, you can't render everything at improved speeds with these, some things just have to be done with a regular CPU.
What's up with that?
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
These shiny new processor having working TSX instruction sets? The ones that are supposed to help with virtualization?
The way they design their CPUs it is easy to have pretty much any number that is divisible by 2. It isn't a big deal to have something that is any particular amount more or less. So then it comes down to power, thermal, and die size limits.
Apparently 18 cores is what they cap out at, this time around. I'm sure you'll be able to get 16 core, and less, chips, that is just the most they could stuff in there before exceeding whatever design limitations they'd set.
SQL server went to per core pricing a few years back and are looking at around 8 cores per server now when we buy new hardware. more cores won't do much for us except send more money to microsoft
it only has a third more cores?
4096 8 GHz cores at 120 Watts. The only useful comparison is MIPS/Watt.
> These shiny new processor having working TSX instruction sets? The ones that are supposed to help with virtualization?
TSX is not for virtualization, but for transactional synchronization, it provides efficient transaction locking for multi-threaded applications. Not necessarily virtualization, although it can benefit from efficient locking as well
No, as far as I know, these have TSX disabled, or will be with a microcode update, as TSX isn't expected to be fixed until 2015 in Broadwell or Haswell-EX Xeons (not Haswell-EP which these are).
the architecture that can achieve the fastest speed on complex relational joins.
You remember normalized tables and joins of course because they aren't going away since they are the only program constructs that are remotely built on the solid foundation of real math set theory
AND they aren't even Turing machines!!! LOL.
You might pick up a clue from history. These server chips are low wattage compared to those left behind. And the older versions weren't able to turn much inside of the chip off. Many server features were always on and sucking power (thus powering your tea heater).
Here is a modern version to compare with.
SPARC T4 @ 240W. wikipedia.org doesn't show watts for the newer versions.
This is really great for doing cpu intensive jobs but what seems to never get any love is moving massive amounts of data around. We need to put as much effort into buss bandwidth as we are with cpu's.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
Some reviewers are talking about lower, AVX-heavy workload frequencies. The Intel's ark-service doesn't reveal what those might be for various models. Could somebody clarify the situation?
"The answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything is 42"
--- The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Is there any reason for enthusiasts to choose the Core i7 over this?
If you don't know about 42, you don't belong here.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
It doubles integer performance.