How do I fight that which cannot be seen? How can I possible beat something when I don’t even have a damn clue what it is? This glass prision cruelly tempts me. I can see where I want to be; I can see it, I can taste it, and yet I am unable to fully attain that which I desire so completely. My stubbornness will help me endure and fight on.
Do any of you know what I think when I sit so silently staring off into the apparent nothingness. Typically my thoughts meander to and fro, but they never stray far from a central point. I hope you all know how much you mean to me. There is nothing I value more than the joy and friendship that all of you bring to my life. I cannot possibly begin to say thank you enough.
These past few months have been especially difficult, as most of you are well aware, but they have been substantially more manageable with the love and support you have all provided me.
I feel like I just need to stop time. I need to get my feet on solid ground and figure out what the hell is going on with my life. Things are better than they have been, but they are still definitely not “great.” I found an amazing girl, I am so happy with her, but that is only part of being “great. “ I need this spring break like whoa. It’s so hard to have to immediately jump back into this mess and hectic chaos after so long away from it. I feel like I have handled it pretty well, but I still could be doing better with it. Oh well, so is life I guess.
This is my dream processor…:drool:…
I am apparently back from break already. Too bad my mind isn’t quite back however. I cannot seem to get my mind on track and back into the productive mode. It’s frustrating because I keep telling myself I should be working, but I just can’t seem to actually get that initial push in the right direction. Oh well, 5 page paper in 1 night…not a problem, maybe if I was a freshman I would be panicking, but I’ve done WAY worse that this. Anyways…off to the work I go.
I’m here missing you. Alone and yet still in contact with you. it’s hard to not be able to see your smiling face. it’s hard not to be able to hold you close and smell your hair pressed against my face. oh how i miss you so. ciao bella mia
Well somehow half of spring break is already gone. I feel like I haven’t really done anything productive yet. Part of me can’t wait to get back and get the next 6 weeks over with. Once the weather gets warm and sunny the days and weeks will just fly by. I can’t wait to see Liz. This has been a relaxing break, slow and uneventful, but luckily relaxing.
Let us face it, we have been improving multitasking capabilities of consumer operating systems for more than 10 years since the old Task Swapper in MS-DOS shell till the new Windows Server 2003. In 1995 Microsofts PR people told us we were going to experience the true multitasking in Windows 95, but kept saying almost the same thing about all the OSes coming out later, including Windows 98, Windows 2000 and Windows XP. In fact, operating systems already do provide quite effective multi-tasking, but what about our hardware?
Historically it has been more efficient to have a 2-way system in order to get higher performance in situations when a lot of tasks needed to work at the same time or there are extremely demanding applications needing a lot of CPU power. Unfortunately, 2P systems are too expensive for consumers and even some specialists since they require high quality components, two processors instead of one, specifically designed mainboards and so on.
As a result of all concerns about the cost of 2P computers, the Hyper-Threading idea was born. Why not utilize the currently unused CPU blocks in order to get more efficient and cost-effective computing? However, the Hyper-Threading may not be enough when we deal with certain kinds of applications that do not benefit from the Hyper-Threading technology. One of the solutions is to incorporate more CPU cores on a single processor, this idea has been around for some time now and we know that Intel will launch a dual-core IA64 Montecito chip and a dual-core IA32 Xeon Tulsa processor in 2005. Since Intels technologies introduced with server CPUs usually migrate into desktop space after some time, I would expect the dual-core processors for desktop applications to show up sometime in 2007-2008.
Nevertheless, even dual-core CPUs and 2P systems cannot allow us to virtually split a single computer for different tasks and needs. And here comes the Vanderpool Technology newly unveiled during IDF Fall 2003!
As our Anna mentioned in her IDF Coverage Part 1, Vanderpool is a hardware technology implying that your system gets split into several parts that work independently and use the same resources of the PC. Intel will bring this technology to platforms within next 5 years. This is a very interesting idea since microprocessors will be so powerful in 4-6 years time that a single chip (especially if it has two cores) will be able to serve the needs of the whole so-called Digital Home. How about you doing some work on your PC, your children play a game on it, and there are no slowdowns, unwanted windows and so on? Certainly, such personal computer will require a special operating system, but that is what Microsoft here for. Additionally, manufacturers of mainboards, audio cards, graphics cards and other hardware will have to support this technology in order to provide you the terrific opportunities given by the Vanderpool technology.
With Vanderpool, Hyper-Threading, dual-core and other innovative technologies, can you imagine how powerful the personal computers will be in the second part of the decade?
All-in-all, the idea of Vanderpool looks useful enough now, but will require support from the whole industry. Hence, the Vanderpool will be mostly an industry standard, rather than a simple another technology offered by Intels microprocessors.
by Anton Shilov
Quite a lot of interesting facts were said during Windows Server 2003 launch last week. As we revealed yesterday, Dell demonstrated its first Itanium 2-based server during the event and now this web-site added that Intels Paul Otellini shared some information about future Itanium processors and their performance.
According to the executive from Intel Corporation, code-named Montecito processor, Intels first dual-core chip, that is due in 2005, will be two or three times faster than todays Madison CPUs coming out later this year. Furthermore, the Tanglewood processor available in 2006 or 2007 will already be ten times faster compared to this years most powerful IA64 processor. In fact, Otellini did not said that this would be code-named Tanglewood, but referred to it as future Itanium processor, but everybody got the idea right.
We do not know much about Tanglewood CPU at the moment. Based on preliminary details issued by an unofficial source we can figure out that Tanglewood processor will have more than two cores on the chip and will be able to offer even more performance than the predecessor. Keeping in mind that such microprocessor will reportedly consume less energy than Montecito, we can assume that they will be made using thinner technology, presumably 65nm; expect higher frequencies in this case.
Unfortunately, as I already said, there are very few details about IA64 processors that will emerge in 3 or 4 years from now and we cannot tell you what will actually make possible such a huge performance leap. Since large caches always boost performance of server applications, we should see huge speed bump because of the fact that Tanglewoods L3 will be more than 18MB provided by Montecito. Moreover, with 4 or more cores on one CPU, we should expect another huge performance advantage over the present generation devices. I also expect Intel to implement a kind of advanced HyperThreading technology into future-generations IA64 chips, as a result, their speed will increase even more. To sum everything up we can really expect Tanglewood processor with 4 or more cores, high core-clocks, large L3 caches and possible architectural improvements to be really fast and even outperform the Madison by a factor of ten.
by Anton Shilov
04/28/2003 | 06:46 AM
Those of you who constantly read news concerning present and future Intel Itanium processors already know that code-named Montecito design scheduled to come in 2005 will have 2 cores. But was not known until now is that the follower of the Montecito presently known as Tanglewood will have as many as 16 cores, News.com reported quoting a source close to Intel Corp!
Multi-core designs promise to become extremely popular within the next three to five years not only among server CPUs, but also among consumer desktop microprocessors, I believe. A number of cores allow chips to handle a number of threads at the same time, a feature that is supposed to become increasingly important nowadays. Intel is currently offering Hyper-Threading technology for that matter in Xeon and Pentium 4 CPUs, but with more and more complicated tasks a number of cores per chip will be required for successful and rapid operation.
IA64 roadmap has been showing exceptional performance growth since the introduction of the original Intel Itanium processor. It is very logical to expect Intel to continue introducing faster and faster 64-bit microprocessors throughout the decade. There are a number of ways to improve performance of CPUs, including clock-speed increase, addition of extra cores into design, overall architecture efficiency improvements as well as L1, L2 or L3 caches enhancements. According to what we know about future IA64 chips, the Santa Clara, California-based semiconductor giant will perform all the mentioned operations to address even the highest-end servers by its microprocessors with tangibly improved architecture.
As we know, next year Intel is set to launch its Madison 9M code-named processor with 9MB of L3 cache and clock-speed above 1.50GHz. In 2005 the company will launch its Montecito core made using 90nm fabrication process and featuring 2 cores as well as 18MB of L3 cache. In 2006 or 2007 Intel is expected to release Tanglewood, the monster with up to 16 cores, a lot of cache memory and a high clock-speed. The core may be as advanced as next-generation IBMs Power or Suns UltraSparc microprocessors or even faster, I suppose.
by Anton Shilov
09/01/2003 | 12:23 PM