Sign up for a new account or log in here:
also @ TechSpot: Microsoft Surface RT drops to $199... for schools and colleges
Researchers at Intel envision a future where smartphones are powerful enough to perform tasks typically delegated to full-size computers today. And it’s not just a pipe dream either - they’re already working on a 48-core processor for smartphones and tablets designed to replace your desktop or laptop completely.
Intel’s focus on the project at this point is finding new ways to manage and use multiple cores in a mobile device. Smartphones and tablets already exist with multiple cores (up to four, typically) but a system with 48 cores would be a real game changer.
The advantage of having multiple cores, of course, is the ability to divide the workload up among each core. This has several benefits, just as it does today. For one, heavy computational tasks can be completed much more quickly. A system with dozens of cores would be able to multitask much more efficiently than today’s chips that often struggle to complete several tasks at once.
Multimedia would also benefit greatly as multiple cores could be used to decode different video frames simultaneously, resulting in a smoother and more seamless experience. Furthermore, by reducing the strain on a single core and spreading the workload among many parallel cores, less energy would be consumed overall.
Researchers anticipate having such a chip ready for prime time within five to 10 years although Intel CTO Justin Rattner said it could hit the market much sooner than forecasted. He believes that advanced features and functions like speech recognition and augmented reality will accelerate the drive for more processing power.
User Comments: 45
Got something to say? Post a comment-
8 core processor for PC is still new, now they're developing 48-cores processor on smartphone and tablets? from 8 (PC) to 48 (smartphone/tablet) that's what we call it quantum leap in technological advancement
-
48-cores huh? This sounds like Single-chip Cloud Computer that Intel has been working on for about 4 years or so. Maybe they just managed to shrink it small enough to be useful in phones or tablets and refocused its use.
-
---> Guys... Did you miss the "ready in 5 to 10 years" part?
unfortunately, you'll see plenty much of these people nowadays. Some of them trolled others without reading carefully, don't know what happen with their eyes or maybe they just can't read.
-
What they need is to increase the speed of the processor. Intel isn't even in the phone market now. Why don't they increase ghz again?
Where is the improvement in just your overclocking? Sure you're processing a lot faster, but also note the larger toll it is on a battery. Sure in 5-10 years batteries will improve most likely, still how is a higher clock speed useful? Ever note how even a blazing fast PC at current core count, will eventually choke trying to process too much? That's the reason for the extra dense core structure, so you can multi-task without loss of performance.
I might be slightly wrong here, but doesn't a quad-core usually beat a dual-core? When it comes down to multi-tasking, dual-cores eventually struggle. Throw in a HT and it can still perform, but you see the point I hope. Cores do matter in the long term goal, video especially can really use those cores. So sure a speed boost can help, even when it's a dual vs quad kind of competition. Just eventually speed alone won't matter, and the system starts to slowly die under it's work load.
-
"Oh no technology is advancing and improving! I better complain!"
Seriously guys?
-
nzm0n5t3r said:
Nothing's overkill.
-
2 people like this |R3DP3NGUIN said:
If I could connect a high powered phone to my 23" monitor with keyboard and mouse support, through some kind of dock whilst having a choice of my favorite OS, and then having the ability to play BF3 level games. I would be happy!
-
license27kill said:
..because Quad-core is too mainstream... lol
-
VitalyT said:
As Intel gets behind in the mobile market, losing its position quickly, they came up with this lame idea to boost public's attention to themselves.
The article, of course, is absurd, same as the idea itself. Our desktops fail to take full advantage of 8-core systems, nevermind 12-core ones that one gets from Intel today (counting the Hyper-Threading).
-
As Intel gets behind in the mobile market, losing its position quickly, they came up with this lame idea to boost public's attention to themselves.
The article, of course, is absurd, same as the idea itself. Our desktops fail to take full advantage of 8-core systems, nevermind 12-core ones that one gets from Intel today (counting the Hyper-Threading).
I am very sure this isn't even standard Intel R&D making this, it seems like Intel's Tera-Scale R&D Program which has been working on things like this for years now. Their entire goal since they started was to make CPUs that can scale to huge amounts of cores (I think 1,000 cores is a goal for them) and this might just be a side thing for them. As for software, well if the hardware isn't seen as coming eventually then why would software makers make their software work with many cores? This is proof of concept stuff that will lead the way for better OSes eventually that can make use of all these cores.
-
PC nerd said:
Why? Seems a bit over the top.
-
PC nerd said:
Maybe they've decided to take the AMD route: MOAR CORES!
-
1 person liked this |spydercanopus said:
I have 16 threads (8 hyper thread cores) on my workstation. It's kinda silly unless you're running threaded applications because otherwise I might as well just have 1 core. But if Windows could dynamically assign processes to threads I could see a benefit.
-
Need moar cores for playing crysis!!
-
treetops said:
When they came out with duo core phone processors I was thinking facepalm why not just skip to 8 or even 4? I suppose they need to squeeze every last cent out of the consumer.
-
In all seriousness and joking aside, I believe we will eventually be able to run crysis on our phones.
-
Have you heard of the Ubuntu on Android project, that could really use some more powerful cpu's in phones
-
When they came out with duo core phone processors I was thinking facepalm why not just skip to 8 or even 4? I suppose they need to squeeze every last cent out of the consumer.
If you remember Intel's first dual core CPU was just 2 normal CPUs glued together so putting 6 or 8 of them together would not have worked out well. Even their Core 2 Quads were just 2 dual cores on top of each other, these types of things work in stages you can't jump to 16 core without making sure that 2 cores work without blowing up.
-
I want a 48 core desktop or laptop before I want a 48 core phone or pad.
48 cores in a desktop/laptop allows for running lots of background apps, eg virtual machines. You could implement your own private cloud using 48 cores. Great as a development server or small business server to host an entire business. Cloud in a box.
-
I just hope it isn't the Larrabee team...
ROFL
Most Popular
| Trending | Featured |
-
PlayStation 4 is destroying the Xbox One in Amazon customer poll
-
In Win D-Frame Case Review
-
Noise cancellation technique harnesses magnets to silence CPU fans [video]
-
Intel Haswell-E enthusiast chip to carry eight cores and support DDR4
-
Cookie-blocking browser plugin Ghostery feeds data to the ad industry
Subscribe to TechSpot
Get free exclusive content, learn about new features and breaking tech news.