Intel slaps 'wide load' tag on new Itanium - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-18-2005, 10:01 PM   #1 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Osiris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 36,817
Send a message via ICQ to Osiris Send a message via AIM to Osiris Send a message via MSN to Osiris Send a message via Yahoo to Osiris
Default Intel slaps 'wide load' tag on new Itanium

With 9MB of cache strapped to its back, Intel's third generation Itanium processor stands as one of the widest loads in the chip game. Now, the tubby beast can handle a wider data load as well due to an increase in its front side bus (FSB) speed.

Intel has boosted Madison's FSB from 400MHz to 667MHz on two new models of the processor. So, you're looking at up to a 65 per cent boost in system bandwidth by picking up the latest and greatest Itanics. This refresh should be the last to precede Intel's release of the dual-core Montecito processor in the fourth quarter.

The zippy FSB permits data to move from the processor to other components at 10.6 gigabits per second versus a previous speed of 6.4 gigabits per second. Montecito will use the same FSB when it arrives.

In a press release announcing the new part, Intel revealed that Hitachi will use the wider load Itanium 2 chips in BladeSymphony servers due out in the next 30 days. Customers are welcome to try out the blade servers at Hitachi's "Blade Symphony Competency Center" located at its "Harmonious Center of Competency," which opened in January. Trust us, you can't make stuff like that up.

The Itanic-based blade market hasn't exactly taken off, as we can't recall a single system being sold. Hitachi, however, is betting on the concept, hoping it can crack the the double-digit system sales marks set by Itanium rivals.

Anyhow, Intel insists that it's as happy as ever with Itanic's progress. It has started shipping a 1.66GHz chip with 9MB of cache and the 667 FSB for $4,655 in large quantities [more than two? - ed]. The 1.66GHz version with 6MB of cache and the new FSB goes for $2,194 in units of 1,000
__________________

__________________
Osiris is offline  
Old 07-18-2005, 10:37 PM   #2 (permalink)
003
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,312
Default

Why are they so expensive?
__________________

__________________
so, umm, err yeah
003 is offline  
Old 07-18-2005, 10:54 PM   #3 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

It would be nice it you could quote your sources...

Am I understanding correctly that these are single core processors? I think that's a big mistake since people will be reluctant to dump a grand ($4,000 seriously?) in a processor that will be obsolete to a cheaper, slower dual core processor.
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 07-18-2005, 10:59 PM   #4 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 530
Send a message via AIM to TheHeadFL
Default

In general, they are not inferior to dual core anything when it comes to pure number crunching, which is basically what they are made for. There was a good thing about the Itanium2's on Slashdot recently.

Basically, the consensus was, they aren't very useful unless you are calculating like the 10 quadrillionth digit of pi. In which case they obliterate anything else pretty much.
__________________
Desktop machine: 2 x Opteron 246, Asus K8N-DL, 2GB PC3200 ECC Reg., XFX GeForce 6600GT, 74gb WD Raptor, 2 x 19\" LCDs, Windows XP x64
Server machine: Intel P4 3.0GHz 2MB EM64T, ECS i865pe, 1GB PC3200, 36gb WD Raptor, Windows Server 2003
Laptop: Dell Inspiron 9100 (Intel P4 3.2GHz 1MB Prescott, i865pe, 512MB PC3200, Mobility Radeon 9700, DVD+R/DL Burner), Windows XP
Linux: P3 450Mhz, 386MB ram, Slackware 10.1 (Running mySQL/Apache)
TheHeadFL is offline  
Old 07-18-2005, 11:06 PM   #5 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

Quote:
In general, they are not inferior to dual core anything when it comes to pure number crunching, which is basically what they are made for. There was a good thing about the Itanium2's on Slashdot recently.
Yes, but what about applications written with multiple threads, something which is ineveitably happening in the next year. Single core processors wouldn't hold a candle.

Don't get me wrong, I find this an impressive feat but I think Intel is focusing on the wrong thing at the wrong time
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 12:19 AM   #6 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 530
Send a message via AIM to TheHeadFL
Default

I agree with you there, but the point of my post was that Itaniums cant really be compared to the x86 because the applications/etc used on them are completely different. Most people running Itaniums are running software that is written specifically for them. That kind of software may or may not benefit from multithreading, I don't know.
__________________
Desktop machine: 2 x Opteron 246, Asus K8N-DL, 2GB PC3200 ECC Reg., XFX GeForce 6600GT, 74gb WD Raptor, 2 x 19\" LCDs, Windows XP x64
Server machine: Intel P4 3.0GHz 2MB EM64T, ECS i865pe, 1GB PC3200, 36gb WD Raptor, Windows Server 2003
Laptop: Dell Inspiron 9100 (Intel P4 3.2GHz 1MB Prescott, i865pe, 512MB PC3200, Mobility Radeon 9700, DVD+R/DL Burner), Windows XP
Linux: P3 450Mhz, 386MB ram, Slackware 10.1 (Running mySQL/Apache)
TheHeadFL is offline  
Old 07-19-2005, 05:35 AM   #7 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Osiris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 36,817
Send a message via ICQ to Osiris Send a message via AIM to Osiris Send a message via MSN to Osiris Send a message via Yahoo to Osiris
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by gaara
It would be nice it you could quote your sources...

Am I understanding correctly that these are single core processors? I think that's a big mistake since people will be reluctant to dump a grand ($4,000 seriously?) in a processor that will be obsolete to a cheaper, slower dual core processor.
www.theregister.com
__________________

__________________
Osiris is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.