“Late last month in Austria, Intel presented Sun with roadmaps discussing details of its upcoming server platforms, including the fairly secret Xeon Dunnington and Nehalem architectures. Unfortunately for some, this presentation ended up on Sun’s public web server over the weekend,” Kristopher Kubicki reports for Daily Tech.
“Dunnington, Intel’s 45nm six-core Xeon processor from the Penryn family, will succeed the Xeon Tigerton processor. Whereas Tigerton is essentially two 65nm Core 2 Duo processors fused on one package, Dunnington will be Intel’s first Core 2 Duo processor with three dual-core banks,” Kubicki reports. “Dunnington includes 16MB of L3 cache shared by all six processors.”
“Intel’s slide claims this processor will launch in the second half of 2008 — a figure consistent with previous roadmaps from the company,” Kubicki reports.
Full article with slides and benchmarks here.
[Attribution: MacNN. Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Brawndo Drinker” for the heads up.]
There comes my next Mac Pro.
Apple better has a wait for a real 8 core chip… Will also be coming sooner as expected and more energy friendly than these banked dual cores.
How long until it becomes feasible, or cost effective, to upgrade my 2.66Ghz Mac Pro with newer processors?
Finally, an improvement on the 4-assed monkey.
My head hurts!
Too fast, too much!
ow!
…ow!!
……ow!!!
Dunnington? Intel’s running out of names.
Can’t wait for an intel chip with an on-board memory controller.
If these chips get any faster, you’ll be able to order your new Mac Pro tomorrow and have it delivered yesterday.
With core count and memory sizes starting to increase fairly smartly, does anyone know how well 64 bit Vista scales to utilize them? I would expect the UNIX based OS X system to have a distinct edge in scaling performance over the Windows system, but have no information to support this. I’m wondering where the point of diminishing returns is for Vista and OS X, and am thinking that OS X may have a good message here. Of course how well the applications can make use of multiple cores is a whole other topic.
Vista (client) can only use 3.3GB of memory. With a simple patch, that can go to 4GB. It’s limited on the number of CPUs also.
Hrm dunno if mach can handle more than 8 processors yet…
@Harvey – Ask Bill. I think you’ll be told that 3.3GB is more memory than anyone will ever need.
Not sure what the point is. Most software doesn’t even use 2 cores let alone 6.
I’m holding out for the G5 Powerbook. I hear that is going to blow everything away!
doing my video editing, I could easily use a large pipeline and many cores
“uh“, you are both right and wrong. “Most” software is designed to use a single core – end of story. But … “most” software was either designed a couple of years back or really can’t benefit significantly from multiple cores, or threads, or whatever. Much of the newer software – especially from Apple, itself – that can benefit from multiples is designed to take advantage of what’s available. Logic and Final Cut, for example. No real point in multi-threading Solitaire ’till Dawn, is there? Pages, on the other hand …
Dave
Having said the above, I have multiple single-core instances of Folding@Home running on my Dual G5 and would love to get a Quad (or Dual Quad?) to run a couple more. As it is, I lose a third of my cycles on each when running WoW. That is one of the “problems” with taking advantage of multiples. A Quad (or better) would allow me both to run an additional instance of this important software AND play WoW without cutting back on the cycles devoted to F@H.
Dave
@ Blodwyn
I’m not sure when we’ll hit the point of diminishing returns for OS X, but, for Windows Vista, that point is called the “point of sale.”
@ DLMeyer
Could you renice the WoW and F@H main threads to give the balance that you’d like?
Two of those would make an even dozen.
And you could use just one for a six-pack iMac.
Seriously, I think Mac OS XI (eleven) will mark the milestone of software that can actually take advantage of all those cores in everyday use. Meanwhile, the Windows crowd will be getting Windows XP SP4 (aka Windows 7).
I see the Steve hasn’t gotten Intel to use Keynote yet. Man, those were some ugly a$$ charts. Almost as frightening as Obama, Clinton or McCain as President.
Intel’s screwed. The Amercian people are screwed. What next?
Intel’s screwed. The Amercian people are screwed. What next?
CVS causing glossy screens on children’s eyes.
THE ENTIRE WORLD WILL NEED GLASSES JUST LIKE ME!!!
MUHAHALALLAALA!! – Steve Jobs
Psst: piratebay – requiem-1.0 – transmission – unlock iTMS DRM – hurry!! Limited time offer!!
@DLMeyer
Get a PS3. It runs several copies of F@H very quickly I hear.
http://forum.micromart.co.uk/Topic200841-52-1.aspx
John
Ok. Am I missing something here?
The MacPro has 2 x Quad processors. 8-core machine.
That’s 2 MAIN chips inside and each CPU has 4 processors combined on one die. AM I RIGHT?
SO now – what is being offered here… by Intel to Sun.
What is a 6-core machine then and why less?
It would sound better if it were 4 x Quad processors.
OR 8 x Dual processors – COME ON now!
3 x 2 Dual ? Uhhhhh
Good that they are pitching SUN!!!!