It seems Intel Dual Core processors are about to take a backseat to make rommfor a new batch of consumer multi-core processors.

The new processors, which are 64bit Quad Core (ie 4 cores) and named as Intel Core i7, are based on the Nehalem microarchitecture and will have simultaneous multithreading (which means each core can handle two threads, giving a total of 8 threads).

Nehalem, which will replace the Core architecture, uses the 45nm manufacturing tecnology from Penryn.

for the more geeky among us, here are some of the features:

Two, four, or eight cores

731 million transistors for the quad core variant

From 45 nm move to 32nm manufacturing process

Integrated memory controller supporting DDR3 SDRAM and between one and six memory channels
Integrated graphics processor (IGP) located off-die, but in the same CPU package

A new point-to-point processor interconnect, the Intel QuickPath Interconnect, replacing the legacy front side bus

Simultaneous multithreading by multiple cores and hyperthreading, which enables two threads per core. Simultaneous multithreading has not been present on a consumer Intel processor since 2006 with the Pentium 4 and Pentium XE.

Native (monolithic, i.e. all processor cores on a single die) quad- and octo-core processors
The following caches:

32 KB L1 instruction and 32 KB L1 data cache per core

256 KB L2 cache per core

2-3 MB L3 cache per core shared by all cores

33% more in-flight micro-ops than Conroe
Second-level branch predictor and second-level Translation Lookaside Buffer

Modular blocks of components such as cores that can be added and subtracted for varying market segments



so what does all these mean to you, the average nairalander? think smaller, thinner, lighter systems;

less heat (probably no more heatsink);
]
lower memory latency;

faster systems (clock speed is still in the 2+ghz range but multithreading will make those CPUs efficient and faster in crunching instruction sets),

more hardware integration closer to critical buses (which means faster data throughputs).

and of course, more money to buy te darn things.

(via Engadget and wikipedia.)

Thanks so much for your detailed analysis on this upcoming processor. ve actually read about it in pcmag and its due to be lauched in october this year. I'm really excited about this because the benchmark tests were really impressive.
Nevertheless i dont agree with u that the dual core processors will take a back seat since they were just developed about 2 years ago and new releases are also to be made next month.
I ll like to order for the core i7 processors if i'm bust up before the years ends but the problem is that it will also employ a different type of motherboard as they are socket B (LGA 1366) while dual core makes use of Socket A (LGA775).

A few corrections
They ll feature 8MB shared L3 by all cores
They ll disipate more heat 130 watts compared to my current processor dissapation of 90 watts
They are still based on the 45nanometer process for the 3 current models

this link gives the full features

http://www.core-i7.com/features-overview-table.html

lets see how these machines will perform

@ Ex inferis

You don start abi . Was it not you saying the other time that your Apple laptop is beating other pc's senseless that have bigger rams and faster processors. I think you are quite right. The problem people is not only about how much ram or how many Ghz or cores your processor has. The OS and other software's you run also matters. At the end of the day, the elves at the intel factory keep on producing more processors for us to buy and microsoft and other companies keep on producing bloated & memory consuming software's to go along with it. I tell you people its a vicious circle. By the way, am ordering a new MacBook 13-inch (White), 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo MB403LL/A together with the ipod touch 32GB. I dey come KD soon, so you go help me love-vendor am small.

@Djcn

YOU SAY: " i don't agree with u that the dual core processors will take a back seat since they were just developed about 2 years ago "

I SAY: its not a question of seeing a lifecycle through, its a matter of getting new technology out there before the competition, AMD. its happened before with the Celeron when the previous line was phased out by a newer line with updated caches.

Core Duo was quickly replaced by Core 2 Duo and Core Extreme within a very short space of time and since the new i7 are coming out soon you can expect OEMs to gobble them up. Anyting to generate more sales especially in these times of bloated specs. by the way i don't put much faith in benchmarks. the p3 versus early p4 debacle as well the Athlon era put a stop to my faith in benchmarks.

YOU SAY: " They ll feature 8MB shared L3  by all core"

I SAY: i don't see how that is a correction. i said " 2-3 MB L3 cache per core shared by all cores". 2-3MB PER CORE. see my point? lets say 2mb per core (3mb is a possibility), that means 2mbX4cores=8mb L3 TOTAL.

YOU SAY: " They ll disipate more heat 130 watts compared to my current processor dissapation of 90 watts"

I SAY: that wont surprise me seeing as we are talking of quad core versus dual core. two dual cores will have a combined heat dissipation of 180watts while a quad core (with 8 threads) will dissipate 130watts. still less heat then.

YOU SAY: " They are still based on the 45nanometer process for the 3 current models"

I SAY: "Nehalem, which will replace the Core architecture, uses the 45nm manufacturing tecnology from Penryn." still the same thing, 45nm.

35nm is a logical next step from 45nanometers, wont you agree?

you know, when i saw the 'i' in i7 i thougt it was based on the Itanium architecture given that i7 is also 64bit. intel is crafty, AMD watch out (although AMD still has ATI)

thanks for the link and your insight.
by the way, i7 will come overclocked. goodnews for gamers

@samir101ng

like i said earlier, unlike Windows OEMs, Apple puts specs to good use by optimising both hardware and software to work efficiently. windows OEMs are at the mercy of Microsoft's Windows OS. that said, im eagerly awaiting the next batch of Mac machines which are hinted to be radically innovative, and will ship with Snow Leopard, the most technologically advanced and sophisticated OS in the world.

when you get your macbook you will agree wit me. by the way your Macbook will come with Leopard and BootCamp preinstalled, so you can dualboot with Vista (if you so wish) and see Vista speeding u like you've never seen it before. it runs at Mac's native speed.

cheers.

ps: all corrections of my errors are duly welcomed. im only human.

The study of the developement of microprocessors, the properties and nomeclature is a course of it's own. i've got over a thousand pages of books on mP. One truth is that while these guys at intel are working hard. They are more out there to make profits by introducing new processors every now and then and bringing out confusing naming schemes.

I'm interested in the i7 cos of the multitreading capability, but note that this will not out perform all core 2 duo processors in every application.

@Ex Inferis. The intel Core 2 is a family of processors that include 4 major classes of processors, these are the
Intel Core 2 solo
Intel Core 2 duo
Intel Core 2 quad and
Intel Core 2 extreme

Core duo is based on Intel's Core Processor and was designed for mobile computers ONLY.

BOTH processors were released in the same year with just some five months interval and the major difference is the 32 and 64 bits. They both employ the same socket (4 mobiles) and have many features in common.
Core 2 duo was based on the Intel Core microarchitecture, and so was a developement and not a "replacement"

None of the current i7 will employ 3MB per core which will amount to 12MB and so stick with 2MB per core.

When i said that my processor dissipates 90Watts of energy, i didn't specify the processor.
Note this Mobile models of Core 2 processores could be as low as 5.5 watts for example check out the U2100, U2200, SU3300 processors
and the desktop versions could be as low as 65 watts, check out these E4300, 4400, 4500, Core 2 Duo E6300 and a host of others, though some are higher.

Thanks guy, i love this subject,

All this grammar is giving me a headache. As an average consumer, i dont want to buy a processor now and then be told that its no longer as "new". Its all a matter now of money. Where is the almighty AMD ? abi, dem they sleep.

cor! im not poking a finger in your eye, am i? it puzzles me how everything on nairaland must be reduced to arguments.

in any case the Core Processor architecture, which is 32bit, IS a precursor for the 64bit Core MA and now that Core Duo is hardly imlemented in mainstream laptops its easy enough to see that it has performed its role of a precursor by ushering in the popular Core 2. thats the basis of my point. Core 2 has replaced Core Duo whether we term the process "development" or "replacement".  

its a known fact that the 64bit Core MA is a derivative of the 32bit Yonah processor. so Core MA is phasing out Core. just about every new modern system now comes under te Core MA and not Core Duo, even Apple replaced their lineup from Core Duo to Core 2 Duo (the iMac has a Core Extreme configuration).


as for the 3mb l3cache, that was in the earlier spec sheet and is not altogeter impossible. remember we had the era of 128kb l2 cache (which appeared in the earlier Celerons) so since computing resources sometimes develop exponentially, a 12mb total l3 cache in the near future is foreseeable. i did say "3mb is a possibility", and not "3mb will be implemented"


by the way a fork of the Nehalem MA (code named Westmere/Nehalem-C) will be manufactured under a 32nm process and will have six cores. its slated for a 2009-2010 release.

and you are rigt on the heat dissipation issue; the following is from wikipedia " "expect a 20-30% overall advantage over Penryn with only a 10% increase in power usage."

Good posts, i'm not very comfortable of your use of the word argument. To me it's all about enlightment snd education. I can remember just last year when someone told me that a PIII was faster than a P4. The guy had a point 2 prove 2 me.

Well as at today, the Core Processor architecture is no longer employed in computer systems, all of them. But do u know that manufacturing of the 386 processor stopped last year. End of 2007. That was some 21 years in the factory from (1986-2007).

Well, we will continue 2 see faster processors, more transistors, more cores, more threads, smaller process and the likes but there will always be a limit to all of these, and some guys are already tagging 2015.  My current research is on after the transistors era,

let's always expect d best.

Yes and more money going into Intel and AMD's accounts. You guys haven said anything yet about AMD.

@samir101ng

we are not saying much about AMD because somewhere down the line they went asleep after the success of the Athlon (a dubious sucess since it was remarkable mostly in gaming rigs). Turion just doesnt cut it. i think the onl y decent thing they did was buying ATI but stupidly enough they still lag behind intel in  the mobile computing market. intel's GMA is trouncing ATI's Radeon even though Radeon is suppossely better.

processors are not getting any faster; they are getting more efficient while software, the linchpin, are becoming more bloated and demanding (ask Cyberlink or Adobe). very soon they'll hit the transistor threshold and then we'll start seeing a decline in performance. except if quantum computing became a reality and does away with silicon wafers.

@Djcn

thanks for pointing out my misuse of the word 'argument'. these days i focus my attention more on GPUs rather han CPUs since GPUs are the future of computing. right now some specialist devices (some inboard car computers and SatNavs) are using GPUs to do the work of a regular CPU because the former crunch numbers exponentially faster and better than CPUs. parallel processing is the future and thats why the whole Nvidia SLI/ATI CrossFire interests me. im thinking of moving over to PC Gaming and im saving up for a $3000 Alienware CrossFire rig (Dual Radeon HD). im figuring by the end of next year i'll have saved enough to buy it. its so powerful it uses a liquid cooling system.

by the way its true, the first gen p4 was beaten by the last gen p3. but of course they used a benchmarking tool so its not really real-world.

Ex Inferis:

@samir101ng

we are not saying much about AMD because somewhere down the line they went asleep after the success of the Athlon (a dubious sucess since it was remarkable mostly in gaming rigs). Turion just doesnt cut it. i think the onl y decent thing they did was buying ATI but stupidly enough they still lag behind intel in  the mobile computing market. intel's GMA is trouncing ATI's Radeon even though Radeon is suppossely better.

processors are not getting any faster; they are getting more efficient while software, the linchpin, are becoming more bloated and demanding (ask Cyberlink or Adobe). very soon they'll hit the transistor threshold and then we'll start seeing a decline in performance. except if quantum computing became a reality and does away with silicon wafers.

@Djcn

thanks for pointing out my misuse of the word 'argument'. these days i focus my attention more on GPUs rather han CPUs since GPUs are the future of computing. right now some specialist devices (some inboard car computers and SatNavs) are using GPUs to do the work of a regular CPU because the former crunch numbers exponentially faster and better than CPUs. parallel processing is the future and thats why the whole Nvidia SLI/ATI CrossFire interests me. im thinking of moving over to PC Gaming and im saving up for a $3000 Alienware CrossFire rig (Dual Radeon HD). im figuring by the end of next year i'll have saved enough to buy it. its so powerful it uses a liquid cooling system.

by the way its true, the first gen p4 was beaten by the last gen p3. but of course they used a benchmarking tool so its not really real-world.

Thats so true about AMD. It seems Intel has dealt AMD a terminal knockout TKO . About the Alienware, wallahi if you blow up kaduna, i go carry MP go your place sraight. Those things are freaking dangerous. But awesome.

@samir101ng

LOL!

nice one, 'blow up kaduna'. the niger deltans will do that first courtesy of MENDS. remember we are supposedly parasitic lazy smegs cowering in the shadows while pecking at the oil wealth of the region even though in reality te average northener is no better and no worse off than the average niger deltan.

oh well, anoter thread for that.

was watching "Click" on BBC the other day, saw a rendered 3D character made with 10million polygons all rendered in real time. absolutely scary.

before i lost my xbox360 i once hooked it up to a mate's Regza HDTV. i didnt know i wasnt really gaming until i saw the unbelievable hi-res of Assassins creed.

that sold me on extreme pc gaming.

so far Crysis is Pc only (needs Direct X 10) and so is Alan Wake.

dude, im willing to sacrifice kaduna to get my HD fix.

PS: Intel is knocking ATI a serious blow every single day.

The future is Fusion and that's only possible with AMD.
I do not agree with the fact that AMD is asleep cos they're really working in the LABS and will "blow up" next year.

After the merger between AMD and ATI, an initiative codenamed Fusion was announced that merges a CPU and GPU on one chip, including a minimum 16 lane PCI Express link to accommodate external PCI Express peripherals, thereby eliminating the requirement of a northbridge chip completely from the motherboard. AMD will move to a modular design methodology named "M-SPACE", where two new processor cores, codenamed "Bulldozer" and "Bobcat" will be released in the 2009 timeframe.

Both cores are to be built from the ground up. The Bulldozer core focused on 10 watt to 100 watt products, with optimizations for performance-per-watt ratios and HPC applications and includes newly announced SSE5 instructions, while the Bobcat core will focus on 1 watt to 10 watt products, given that the core is a simplified x86 core to reduce power draw. Both of the cores will be able to incorporate full DirectX compatible GPU core(s) under the Fusion label, or as standalone products as a general purpose CPU.

@EX since u've got more interest in GPUs then u'll definitely be more interested in FUSION, the first of it kind. Bringing imagination to reality. Combining the two most powerful elements in a system into one, i'm still studing the technology, but check out some of the features.

A heterogeneous multicore microprocessor architecture, combining a general purpose processing core(s) and basic graphics core(s) into one processor package, with different clocks for the graphics core and the central processing core

Four platforms focus on the four different aspects of usage
General Purpose
Data Centric
Graphics Centric
Media Centric
The Fusion series processor will see new modular design methodology named "M-SPACE", such that design of future multi-core processors will have a wider range of combinations, as well as gaining enhanced flexibility, thus to minimize the architectural changes for different combinations of components. Benefitted from this initiative by AMD, graphics core can be changed without much re-design of the whole core

Fusion products will include at least 16 PCI Express (presumably version 2.0) lanes
The implementation of UVD in silica for full hardware decoding of MPEG2, VC-1 and H.264 video streams on supported software

The first Z-RAM design on a 45 nm fabrication process node was completed in 2006, together with the renewal of Z-RAM license. This coincides with the process node that Fusion processors are expected to be fabricated around the timeframe. This also coincides with the AMD official roadmap for larger L3 caches after 2009. Thus it was rumoured that AMD will likely to feature Z-RAM for larger L3 cache in Fusion products.
A new set of instructions and development libraries for Fusion were being developed, and was revealed to be a new iteration of SSE, named SSE5, which is announced on the August 30, 2007.

According to Dave Orton, Fusion will have 10% more pins than a "normal CPU" but he failed to further elaborate on what is a "normal CPU".

Employ Socket FS1, and two other sockets so that each targeted at different products, Socket FS1 is for mobile parts, another for desktop products and the other server processors.
Expected to come in 2009 to replace the AMD Turion Ultra mobile processor for laptops. More info later.

Yeh, the fight is not only between AMD and Intel, IBM is a guy in the cover, they went live last week to make this announcement that will likely cause intel to redesign its roadmap.

They have overcome the obstacles to the production of a 22nm chip. That sounds wow!!! They want to be the first. Our dear intel hopes to release 32nm chip by 2009 if possible. Let the guys rock it out. More info later guys, got some serious jobs to do and cant watch my scientific channels.

http://www.amd.com/us/fusion/Pages/index.aspx

IBM's 22-nanometer processor manufacturing is moving a step closer to reality after IBM, Mentor Graphics and Toppan Printing announce that they have come up with new ways to overcome the limitation of etching circuitry onto chips that are this small. In developing new methods for 22-nm chip manufacturing, IBM is looking to beat Intel to the market when it comes to smaller and smaller processors.


IBM is claiming a significant breakthrough in the race with Intel to produce the first 22-nanometer microprocessors for use in an array of products from large-scale server systems to smaller, more power-efficient cell phones and PDAs.

With current technology, companies such as Intel, Advanced Micro Devices and IBM are pushing their way toward producing processors at 45 nanometers—Intel is already selling 45-nm chips—that will then be followed by 32-nm microprocessors but yet to produce any.

However, the methods used to produce 45- and 32-nm chips have their limits and at 22 nm, new techniques are needed to etch the integrated circuits onto processors that are this small in scale, a nanometer being 1 billionth of a meter. "This is serious Litography"

On Sept. 17, IBM announced that it had overcome some of the obstacles to producing such small microprocessors. The technique, which IBM called Computational Scaling, overcomes the limitations of current lithography methods by using mathematical techniques and software to manipulate the shapes of the masks and the illuminating source during the etching process.

The result is that IBM will not have to radically change its manufacturing process in order to create these 22-nm processors. In this way, IBM is keeping up with Moore's Law, which states that computer processing power doubles every 18 months, without changing the essential equipment it will use for 45- and 32-nm processors.

At the same time, IBM will be able to keep up with the chip manufacturing breakthroughs being developed by Intel. Intel's road map calls for 32-nm processors in 2009, with new microprocessor architecture arriving in 2010 and 22-nm chips in 2011.

For all these chip makers, 22-nm processors will allow for chips that use less power and offer more performance for a range of devices, including giant server systems and small, more mobile devices such as notebooks and other mobile devices. In laptops, for example, 22-nm chips could potentially increase battery life while allowing OEMs to experiment with different form factors that are smaller and weigh less.

IBM is also looking to integrate these chips into its cloud computing strategy. In this case, IBM said it believes it will have to build new types of servers to allow for the flexibility and compute power needed in a cloud computing infrastructure that requires resources on demand.

The fire gets hotter

@Djcn

thanks for the info, actually the BBC Click episode i mentioned earlier allready talked about the integration of Cpu and Gpu cores on one die. however they didnt mentiion further specifics. mind you, i said AMD went to sleep not for lack of having heady plans on the drawing board (which im sure intel has lots) but because of their losing grip on their market share. intel has cornered the laptop market, and the server market (with Xeon) while Atom is set to rock the mobile/embedded market.

also note that the Fusion development is made possible beacuse of ATI and its intelectual assets; on its own AMD will do less perhaps. and dont forget that ATI's main competitor, Nvidia, wont be resting on its oars. its a two-front war for AMD/ATI so they best innovate quick.

meanwhile it seesm Apple is gearing up to design and build its own CPUs very soon.