Intel shows off first x86 quad-core processor

By Derek Sooman on February 13, 2006, 9:00 PM
Multi-core processing for the PC took a leap forward when Justin Rattner (Intel's chief technology officer) made a demonstration of the company’s first quad-core processor. An early production sample of the "Clovertown" processor, the final version of the chip is due for introduction in early 2007. The demonstration showed two Clovertown processors running commercial and experimental software.

Clovertown will be succeeding the Intel's "Woodcrest" processor, which is derived from the upcoming "Merom" mobile processor. Woodcrest (Xeon 5100) will be the last dual-core processor in Intel's performance volume server segment; Clovertown will be ringing in the "multi-core" era for Intel as a multi-die chip with 4 MB of L2 cache, according to industry sources. Clock speeds of Woodcrest and Clovertown are unknown at this time, but the alignment with Merom/Conroe suggests that we can expect speeds that top out well above 2.5 GHz.
Intel has a range of other quad-core processors in development, including the 65 nm desktop processor "Kentsfield" and the 65 nm server CPU "Whitefield". These are scheduled for introduction in 2007 and 2008 respectively.

The 45 nm production process will bring the quad-core single-die desktop chip "Bloomfield" as well as the first eight-core processors "Yorkfield" (desktop, 12 MB) and "Harpertown" (server, 12 MB) in late 2008 or early 2009.

User Comments: 6

Got something to say? Post a comment
DragonMaster said:
We still have problems running software with dual core and they want to release 4-cores?
buttus said:
Ah the dwindling amount of comments post contest. Sigh. I suppose everyone is hung over.Anyways. WOW. Quad Processors. Now to me, this positively SCREAMS VMWare. The sheer power in this system would replace probably about 10 servers in a rack."More with less" was the mantra in IT last year and that strong message is carrying forward. Realistically the IT industry is shooting itself in the foot here. I see similarities now to companies in the 20's right before the great depression.See, back then companies built products that were well made and lasted. For example, washing machines and refridgerators. Unfortunately however for these companies available markets were small indeed, and they made their products TOO well. What ended up happening was that people would puchase these products and then there were virtually no mechanical purcahsed there would be no need to buy another one anytime soon.Companies were left with surpluses of products simply because they satisfied and saturated the market.Currently (and for the forseeable future) there are NO killer Apps, nor have there been for a number of years now. Hardware is so unbelievably far ahead of software that it isn't funny and that gap merely widens every day.There will come a point where IT departments will have consolidated infrastructure, tweaked and trouble shot their networks, and will have all necessary upgrades in their infrastructure. What will be left to purchase?
Cartz said:
Well buttus, the difference between the 20's and today is that, in the 20's they didn't have farmers(programmers) growing crops(apps) that in 2 to 3 years would overwhelm their current refridgerators abilities to freeze.The hardware technology needs to come before the software, if software is ahead of its time, it's unsuccessful, because it's unusable. If hardware comes first, it's adopted early because it makes existing software better.I wouldn't worry to much about a Black Tuesday for the IT world, I'm sure by this time next year, there will be plenty of demand for quad and octa core, and there will also be a hunger for the next biggest and best thing out there.I'm excited about this beast for gaming, can you say dedicated physics core and dedicated AI core, with a dual core processor left to do the rest? I can, and it sounds sweet...
phantasm66 said:
Multi-core and VMs will allow us to run operating systems in windows, so that we can do stuff like play games at the same time as capturing video, etc without performance loss.This compares with the launch of the pentiums, which made it possible to run windows along with CPU intensive DOS games.
DragonMaster said:
[quote] Multi-core and VMs will allow us to run operating systems in windows, so that we can do stuff like play games at the same time as capturing video, etc without performance loss. [/quote]That's an interesting option! But it's not 9 cores ;-)[quote] Ah the dwindling amount of comments post contest. Sigh.[/quote]I was posting comments -before- the contest to about every headlines, and should continue.
crossfire851 said:
Wow, (as I pick my mouth of the floor)mega multi-thread games. Just think today as we veiw are monitors today as we put on are virtual headsets of tomorrow.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.