Slashdot Mirror
Intel Launches Its First 10-Core Desktop CPU With Broadwell-E
Two years since the release of Intel's Haswell-E platform, which popularized 8-core processor to users. On Tuesday, the chipmaker unveiled Broadwell-E family, which consists of an "Extreme Edition" of Core i7 chipset that has 10 cores and 20 threads. (Do note that Intel is intentionally not calling it deca-core.) Intel says the Extreme Edition is designed for games, content creators, and overclockers. From an NDTV report: The 7th generation Intel Core processors are built on the 14nm fabrication process, and are part of the 'semi-Tock' release -- neither in the Intel Tick or Tock cycle. and come with Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 for more efficient core allocation for single-threaded processes, giving up to 15 percent better performance compared to the previous Haswell-E generation. All four new Intel Core i7 Enthusiast processors, codenamed Broadwell-E, support 40 PCIe lanes, quad-channel memory, and bear a TDP of 140W. Give Intel $1,723 and the Extreme Edition pack is yours.
"Intel says the Extreme Edition is designed for games, content creators, and overclockers."
Also known as people too dumb to realize they're paying a thousand percent markup for commodity hardware.
but does it go to 11?
Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
"Do note that Intel is intentionally not calling it deca-core."
Perhaps somebody could elaborate on this?
It's obviously not meant for plebians. It's meant for the programmer who makes >$200 an hour, i.e. the time lost to compiling is worth more than this extreme high-end CPU is.
Don't be too hard on them. They are helping to pay for the technology which will bring the price down for everyone soon.
Website Just Down For Me? Find out
Its called "the monopolist determines the prices". AMD is no real competition, and ARM is for mobile devices only. As intel is monopolist for desktop CPUs, they demand what they want.
This is just a consumer version of one of the new Xeon E5 v4 family.
http://ark.intel.com/products/family/91287/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-v4-Family#@All
The LGA2011 (Tn this case the newish LGA2011-3)platform is consumerized Xeon, and the Xeons lag one generation behind the mainline consumer (Which is currently at skylake)
Expensive, but not bad if you want consumer-oriented desktop features and lots of memory bandwith, cores. They usually are clocked high because thats what desktop users usually need.
Sometimes, though, if you shop around you can catch a deal on some of the real Xeons. (There are some odd skus that end up being resold bare) Finding a motherboard that makes a suitable desktop system can be more troublesome though. Workstation boards that accept Xeons are less common and server-oriented motherboards are often not great for desktop systems. (Slow boot with lots of management features you wont need, odd slot configurations, nonstandard form factors, non-typical power connectors, lack of sound, lack of drivers or official support for non-server OSs)
Then again, server oriented Xeons usually lean lower clock and higher core count - Not what you want for a desktop most of the time.
People who might actually need something like this are those who are running a lot of different applications simultaneously or have individual apps that were programmed to do lots of processing in parallel. I am currently building a data management system that uses lots of threads to greatly speed up processing. The more cores are available, the faster I can process large data sets. With column based relational tables, I can assign a different thread to process each column separately. If there are 100 columns in a table, lots of threads are needed. The more threads that can run at the same time in the CPU, the faster the query will complete. These processors are not just for gaming.
I believe this announcement is a response to the rumors of AMD's Zen processor, with more instructions per clock than Skylake and with a 95W TDP. Competition is sweet. Bring it on AMD!
Currently, 8-core for AMD.
Not buying online? Enjoy your 50%+ markup.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
It's obviously not meant for plebians. It's meant for the programmer who makes >$200 an hour, i.e. the time lost to compiling is worth more than this extreme high-end CPU is.
I did a PC refresh project at a Fortune 500 company a few years ago. The initial batch of Dell workstations had six-core processors. But Dell ran out of six-core processors and dropped in eight-core processors. The senior engineers almost broke out into a riot since they grabbed the initial shipment and the junior engineers were getting the eight-core processor workstations, upsetting a delicate pecking order throughout the office.
Yeah, about that. Compiling is obviously a process with tremendous interconnected dependencies. While there are multi-core compilers, one would expect mediocre scaling, especially above the "normal" 4 CPUs.
With AMD Zen right around the corner (October-ish) I believe Intel is milking their performance monopoly as much as they can with their $1700 CPUs.
The Zen should give us roughly Skylake IPC (Some predict a little better, some predict a little worse.) Being it's AMD, they'll have to undercut Intel's price if they want marketshare. If the arch is good, this will lead to a price war, which should drive down Intel to AMD price levels.
With any luck, high end Zen launch will be a 16-core with Skylake level single thread performance for $999. Sign me up for one of those!
Do the coils also whine 10 times more, it has been a nightmare with this new Skylake.
I suspect that they avoided the "dec" prefix because it is too close to "decimate". This was the old roman practice military discipline in which soldiers were divided into groups of 10. Each group of 10 would draw lots, and the soldier who drew the unlucky lot was killed by his 9 fellow soldiers. Probably not so great an idea from the marketing perspective. Sort of like an early form of stacked ranking.
Besides maybe Ashes of the Singularity does any game use more than 2 cores ( not counting crap like Far Cry 3 where it binds to core 3 for some inexplicable reason)?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
cd /tmpfs/mybuild
make -j 10
It's obviously not meant for plebians. It's meant for the programmer who makes >$200 an hour, i.e. the time lost to compiling is worth more than this extreme high-end CPU is.
Oh please, according to OpenBenchmark you can compile the Linux 4.3 kernel in 62 seconds on an Intel Core i7-5960X. Unless you have a developer who just whacks the build button to throw shit at the wall and see what sticks - which is not the kind of person you should be paying >$200/hour - then almost any kind of employee perk or complimentary service would be more effective than 0.1 second off his compile time.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
While a few companies are re-writing code to multi-thread, many are not. Intel's single-thread champ is still the venerable two year-old i7-4790K, which will smoke any "enthusiast" chip out there for most things that enthusiasts care about, like gaming, rendering, etc.
But the server / workstation -oriented motherboards due have dual cpu / lot's of pci-e slots (Some broads have all X16 with slots at 8 or 16 3.0)
I think I'm having an NUC next anyway. Screw having PCs that you can cook on.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
You are essentially destroying the job of the offline seller here. Yes, you also create a job for the parcel delivery, but how long until the drones take over, and the delivery companies pay real shit wages.
Just as using uber destroys the jobs of taxi drivers, or self driving automotives will destroy the jobs of professional uber drivers and truck drivers.
You as customer have choice between new model and the older one. The question of course is what happens with all the workless people this economy creates.
Given the price I think that it's meant for a very select audience.
How many compilers support multi-threaded compiling? I can't find any reference that says Visual C++ complies using multiple threads, but of course that doesn't mean that it doesn't (just that I'm not hitting on the right question) but I'm curious if it does? Most references that I found mentioned that compiling a large project is pretty disk intensive and people recommended a SSD and more ram to speed compilation?
No shit you can use 10 cores, but how much faster is 10 than 5? Note the word "scaling"?
AMD ZEN more pci-e then skylake. With all the pci-e based storage around Intel's skylake can't even power 2 M2 pci-e cards + 1 video card at full speed.
with amd zen it seems like 2 videos cards at full speed + lot's left over for storage / network / usb / TB 3.0 and more.
The software I support takes about an hour to compile with a 20 way build on an enterprise class server blade farm. Before I optimized and increased the parallelization of the build process it used to take 10+ hours. Not every project compiles and links that quickly.
"You are essentially destroying the job of the offline seller here"
No, they destroyed themselves by failing to follow a basic tenet of business success - diversification.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
At least in the C/C++ world most compiles are done on a per-file basis and then linked together at the end. So it's no problem to compile multiple files at once (provided your memory and storage can keep up).
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
...in bases of two, four or eight.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/using_concurrency.html
I'm sure many others, this is the only one I'm even remotely familiar with though. An SSD would help of course. Anymore, many programmers compile on either their local work cluster, or via something like AWS.
AMD has x86 processors with 16 cores. As I recall you can have up to 4 CPUs per motherboard, so 64 cores total. Whether that's appropriate for your "desktop" is your decision. Their APUs have 4 CPU and 8 GPU cores.
Fry's and Microcenter are reasonable choices for brick-and-mortar retailers.
That's interesting that your software takes 100 times as long as the Linux kernel does. My first thought was "I bet that could be reduced by 90%", but you said you already did that, reducing it from 10 hours on 20 build servers. I'm curious why it takes so much longer, what the difference is. Does this project have a lot more tightly coupled dependencies than the kernel does?
In this day and age, it is still amazing to me that people say of cutting edge technology "Yeah, but whey do we need it? We'll never use it."
We will find a way to use it. We always do. "640K of memory..." and all that. Sheesh.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Visual Studio C++ compiler supports multithreaded compilation. I'm not sure when it started but it's been a while now.
You mean like this 18 core Xeon? http://ark.intel.com/products/...
-Unresolved symbol? Byte me!
Value Isn't in the Chips, but in the fact that you are less likely to need a less cantankerous dual-CPU motherboard for doing workstation chores such as CAD, Design, Photoshop, Video editing, and moderate raytracing.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
How many compilers support multi-threaded compiling? I can't find any reference that says Visual C++ complies using multiple threads, but of course that doesn't mean that it doesn't (just that I'm not hitting on the right question) but I'm curious if it does?
At least in the C/C++ world paralellism isn't done in the compiler itself, it's done by running multiple instances of the compiler at once working on different files. gnu make can easilly do this, dunno what things are like in the MS world but I'd be surprised if they don't have a soloution.
Most references that I found mentioned that compiling a large project is pretty disk intensive and people recommended a SSD and more ram to speed compilation?
Yes if you build a buildbox round one of these you will need to make sure the rest of the system is up to supporting the CPU cores. What that entails will depend on what exactly it is you are building. The platform supports 128GB of ram which I would imagine would be more than adequate to support 10 paralell compilers and at the same time have a ramdisk for the build tree to avoid IO bottlenecks.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
The poster claimed that compiling is hard to parallelize. I pointed out that there is, in fact, a lot of opportunity for parallelism in many build processes.
With respect, I think your approach to the puzzle of how to parallelize things needs more fundamental thought. (I speak from a position of one who has been in this situation!) The compiler doesn't need any "support" for parallelism whatsoever. Any project of non-trivial scale consists of many separate modules. All you do is run "make -j10" instead of "make". WHATEVER compilers make invokes are then run 10 at a time instead of one after another.
Of course I'm thinking in terms of working in a serious environment such as Unix, BSD, linux, or OSX. A toy plaything like Windows may possibly have tools of comparable sophistication, but I leave that inquiry to someone who cares.
Or people working on video. Or PC Gamers who also stream on sites like Twitch. There are desktop users who can use that type of horsepower.
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
NUCs are indeed awesome. I've got 3 chugging away in the server closet, having replaced older, slower, bigger, hotter, louder boxes and 1 retrofitted with an extra ethernet port that replaced the consumer grade router. The workload isn't bigger. So the servers can shrink.
I've got one on my desk at work, chugging away on simulations so I don't have to share the data center machines with 10,000 other engineers.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Sounds like a poor company culture to me. I'm in a Fortune 50 company, and new hires are getting nice high resolution 27" monitors, while we stick with our 5 year old 24" screens, without a complaint. Heck, we're all in cubicles, VPs included.
If you go down this road carelessly, you'll end up with an ultra-wide bus. So consider server back door operation, as this is generally an underutilized port. Make sure you employ Logical Unit Bus Expansion tech in both cases; otherwise bus errors are much more likely to occur. Note that as with all bus expansions, you must arrange for the bus impedance to be low; this requires low resistance, and also, if capacitance is relatively high, you'll find that although the bus will work to some degree at low rates, data will be lost trying to charge surfaces that exceed the capacity of the bus driver. Should you have to deal with a high-capacity system, large auxillary drivers can compensate for this. In my designs, I have found that stocking the right components tends to skirt problems up front WRT driver installation procedures, and with the drivers themselves, as full access to the bus is available without having to completely strip the hardware to the chassis. Please note that installations should always undergo vibratory stress testing under full load as a precursor to customer acceptance. This also tends to increase long term bus compliance.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Sounds like a poor company culture to me.
More like H1B culture gone wrong. All Indians.
This is meant for those million government contractors that have a new PC a year in their hardware budget. The price will fall after they all get theirs..
Few average people will be running these LGA2011 boards/processors. The important news is that the mainstream i7 now has 6 cores. It really isn't affecting much else, as workstations have been built with Xeon processors for many years now, which have all had more than 4 cores for quite a few years now.
Only gamers and people with an OC fetish buy "Extreme" processors; everyone else just buys Xeons.
Each AMD module has two cores. Each core has a control unit (scheduler) 4 execution units (2ALU 2AGU) and an I/O unit to get data in and out. Each core is therefore capable of eight independent single-precision operation or four independent double-precision operations per cycle. With two each of ALU and AGU, arguably that's TWO cores and AMD should call it a 16-core CPU rather than an 8-core.
Several years ago, Intel's CPU cores were what most would call 75% of a core, sharing more parts between "cores" than AMDs' did, so Intel tried to redefine "core" to mean just those parts. Now the situation has reversed a bit - AMD cores can either have separate, dedicated DP FPUs, or two can share it as a DP FPU. Intel's are separate FPUs, so now Intel changed their mind and wants to redefine "core" again.
What can be objectively said is that at the moment, Intel's cores share fewer resources. It used to be the other way around, and it probably will be again.
I game on a high-end PC and I think typewriters are cool.
Admittedly only if converted into mechanical keyboards. And if I don't have to use it myself.
But it is cool. I still want one of those devices used by the office workers in the film Brazil, they rocked.
But I don't know what a hipster is. I just know that people who claims others are hipsters tend to be total cocks.
Don't be a pathetic racist nerd.
The racist nerd is the Indian who has 40 half-empty coffee cups with molds in different states of growth. The guy got fired and a hazmat team had to scrub down all the cubicles surrounding his.
Get outta your basement and your cubicle and meet real people.
Which is it? Basement and cubicle are mutually exclusive. You can have one or the other, but not both.
You don't think Indians are real people? How racist.
When is the last time you had sex?? And the boring motions you have with your lifeless wife everyday does not count as sex.
One, I'm not married. Two, when it comes to worshipping the tech gods, celibacy is highly valued.
> If your standard for production software quality is "the Linux kernel", then you must really look down on almost every software project!
Yes, I do. I'm with Sturgeon when he said "90% of everything is crap." :)
> You are essentially destroying the job of the offline seller here.
If they can't offer value, why should we continue to support them?
> Most consumer level computers don't have the best ways to keep a CPU from over-heating
Most consumer level computers don't have an enthusiast chip that costs 1700 bucks and has no integrated graphics either. These aren't consumer level computers, these are enthusiast level, and they literally support overclocking. Heat limitations are real, but they aren't the only things holding back multicore stuff.
And while these are probably reject Xeons, they are also clocked higher than the Xeons, and probably binned to be at least mostly oveclockable above that some.
Actually it isn't so much that I expect everything to be that level of quality, but the kernel about 20 million lines of code (up from 5 million about three years ago). I was thinking few projects should be far LARGER than that. Others pointed out that C++ takes much, much longer to compile.