IBM Power7浮出水面，2010年@45nm，8cores/die，4GHz，32GFlops/Core

Prescott

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/11/ibm_power7_ncsa/
看样子Power6的高频设计还是不某种水产啊

IBM's 4.0GHz Power7 to fuel 40,000 chip monster One watery box to rule them all By Ashlee Vance in Mountain View → More by this author
Published Friday 11th July 2008 23:45 GMT

Exclusive IBM looks set to join the seriously multi-core set with the Power7 chip. Internal documents seen by The Register show Power7 with eight cores per processor and also some very, very large IBM boxes based on the chip.
The IBM documents have the eight-core Power7 being arranged in dual-chip modules. So, that's 16-cores per module. As IBM tells it,each core will show 32 gigaflops of performance, bringing each chip to 256 gigaflops. Just on the gigaflop basis, that makes Power7 twice as fast per core as today's dual-core Power6 chips, although the actual clock rate on the Power7 chips should be well below the 5.0GHz Power6 speed demon.
In fact, according to our documents, IBM will ship Power7 at 4.0GHzi n 2010 on a 45nm process. We're also seeing four threads per core onthe chip.
For some customers, IBM looks set to create 2U systems with four of the dual-chip modules, giving the server 64 cores of fun. These 2U systems will support up to 128GB of memory and hit 2 teraflops.
IBM has an architecture that will let supercomputing types combine these 2U boxes to form a massive unit with 1,024 cores, hitting 32teraflops of performance with 2TB of memory.
And, er, if you are a seriously demanding type, boy, does IBM have the system for you.
The Giant The Register has uncovered the first detailed specifications of the "Blue Waters" system IBM is building for the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA).
If our documents are to be believed - and they're penned by an IBM executive - this system, funded by a $208m grant and meant to go up at the University of Illinois in 2011, will be the most massive machine ever created.
We've got documents showing IBM going after a 10 peraflop system (peak) compromised of 38,900 eight-core Power7 chips with each chip running at 4.0GHz. This monster will have an astonishing 620TB of memory and 5PB/s of memory bandwidth.
According to the documents, IBM will rely on a 1.30PB/s interconnect to link the systems and will feed them with 26PB of storage. As ifthat's not enough, IBM will offer an exabyte of archival storage. Whynot?
This insane machine will be compromised of more than 100 racks filled with servers and storage systems, taking up close to 4,400 sq.feet.
Er, if this stuff isn't sending shivers down the spines of Sun and Intel, then I don't know what will.
IBM has clearly decided to get a bit radical with Power7. This isn't the single-thread focused Power6. It's a true multi-core chip, which could stack up very, very well against Sun's 16-core rock and whatwill likely be an eight-core version of Itanium around in 2010.
And then IBM still has the Quasar project lurking in the background,where it's combing Power and Cell chips. Stand back, friends. Standback. ®

[ 本帖最后由 Prescott 于 2008-7-12 10:39 编辑 ]

zoubinaa

看看.............

hefei229

原帖由 Katmai 于 2008-7-14 19:52 发表
发现很多人都有神话IBM的倾向，cell当年吹得那么凶，到头来不就那么回事？

CELL当年的发挥相比A-I应该算是正常吧

Prescott

原帖由 bessel 于 2008-7-15 18:41 发表
每个插座要提供256GB/s的带宽？
不好实现吧。

如何实现，这个问AFan吧，不是有人YY Power7和Opteron针脚兼容嘛。

bessel

每个插座要提供256GB/s的带宽？
不好实现吧。

原帖由 Prescott 于 2008-7-12 10:35 发表

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/11/ibm_power7_ncsa/
看样子Power6的高频设计还是不某种水产啊

IBM's 4.0GHz Power7 to fuel 40,000 chip monster One watery box to rule them all By Ashlee Vance in M ...

the_god_of_pig

原帖由 samhrc 于 2008-7-15 16:58 发表




～～～～
～～～～～～～

啊呀，偶也没说唯心主义不好啊{lol:]


偶个人认为如果360当初用了哪怕yonah游戏体验也会比现在好，不过卖的一定比现在少{wink:]

记得哪篇文章来着,给了Xenon个评语，Xenon是三核不是因为它太强了，而是因为它太弱了{biggrin:]

naze

原帖由 samhrc 于 2008-7-15 16:58 发表




～～～～
～～～～～～～

zy21文中并无讨论游戏性方面问题
而是直接的xenon于core2的性能对比,,
凭空得出ibm很niubility的结论
不是唯心那是啥

samhrc

原帖由 the_god_of_pig 于 2008-7-15 15:52 发表


唯心主义好呀{lol:] {lol:] {lol:]

要是用了Intel的U就和PC一样了，结果就是和苹果一样YY度降低{biggrin:]

话说回来，用着那么次的性能还要有优越感，没唯心主义还真是不行{wink:] {lol:]

～～～～
～～～～～～～

the_god_of_pig

原帖由 zy21 于 2008-7-15 13:35 发表


INTEL的CPU根本不用想,XB那代刚进军游戏界草草用了INTEL的CPU,360这代有了研发的时间转而投向IBM

正因为这样出现了360不兼容XB的游戏,,下代更不可能

再说游戏机架构不像电脑，而且嘛IMB的CPU浮点运算强大， ...

唯心主义好呀{lol:] {lol:] {lol:]

要是用了Intel的U就和PC一样了，结果就是和苹果一样YY度降低{biggrin:]

话说回来，用着那么次的性能还要有优越感，没唯心主义还真是不行{wink:] {lol:]

zy21

原帖由 itany 于 2008-7-14 09:31 发表


XO360的下一代更可能使用Nehalem的CPU+GPU单芯片方案

INTEL的CPU根本不用想,XB那代刚进军游戏界草草用了INTEL的CPU,360这代有了研发的时间转而投向IBM

正因为这样出现了360不兼容XB的游戏,,下代更不可能

再说游戏机架构不像电脑，而且嘛IMB的CPU浮点运算强大，做游戏机这方面很熟手，这代三大主机的U就是很好的说明


INTEL的U嘛，电脑用用就行了，扣肉出那时360的U都3核了{titter:]

samhrc

原帖由 Katmai 于 2008-7-14 19:52 发表
发现很多人都有神话IBM的倾向，cell当年吹得那么凶，到头来不就那么回事？

俗话说数不到的葡萄永远是酸的，引申一下就变成了吃不到的葡萄永远是甜的。

Katmai

发现很多人都有神话IBM的倾向，cell当年吹得那么凶，到头来不就那么回事？

samhrc

原帖由 elisha 于 2008-7-14 14:11 发表
应该差不多是开发时期的高端，发布时期的中端，这样才不至于落后太多

游戏主机的开发周期确实要比主流PC更新换代的周期长的多。

frankincense

原帖由 doom4 于 2008-7-14 12:28 发表
IBM啊，可惜当年的OS/2被比尔小子陷害了，不然我们现在可能在用OS/8，而不是请注意称呼用词。的Vista！{cry:]

OS/8？比较可能会叫做OS/Vista

elisha

原帖由 samhrc 于 2008-7-14 13:15 发表


好像游戏主机都是赔钱销售，靠软件来赚钱的， 而且游戏主机的更新速度远不及PC快。所以我认为游戏主机的硬件似乎选择偏高端一些更有优势，可以给未来的游戏开发预留充分的储备性能。以便不会短时间内淘汰。

而 ...

应该差不多是开发时期的高端，发布时期的中端，这样才不至于落后太多

samhrc

原帖由 itany 于 2008-7-14 13:02 发表


游戏主机成本控制才是第一位的，就是要用的低端方案
游戏机重载重在优化的

好像游戏主机都是赔钱销售，靠软件来赚钱的， 而且游戏主机的更新速度远不及PC快。所以我认为游戏主机的硬件似乎选择偏高端一些更有优势，可以给未来的游戏开发预留充分的储备性能。以便不会短时间内淘汰。

而且似乎买TV GAMES 主机的玩家不在乎里面到底是用的IBM还是Intel 的芯片，只要游戏体验过瘾就会掏钱买，所以用 “intel inside” 的金字招牌来做噱头起不了多少效果。

Prescott

原帖由 itany 于 2008-7-14 13:02 发表


游戏主机成本控制才是第一位的，就是要用的低端方案
游戏机重载重在优化的

但是这样不YY，没办法骗小白的。下一代一定要能吹嘘成模拟太阳系才行。{lol:] {lol:]

itany

原帖由 elisha 于 2008-7-14 11:09 发表

这个是低端方案，应该不会是这个

游戏主机成本控制才是第一位的，就是要用的低端方案
游戏机重载重在优化的

doom4

IBM啊，可惜当年的OS/2被比尔小子陷害了，不然我们现在可能在用OS/8，而不是请注意称呼用词。的Vista！{cry:]