Intel hints at 48-core mobile processors, to materialize within 5 to 10 years
Share:
So can you imagine what the state of mobile processors will be in, let's say, five to ten years? Intel is already visualizing that and it sees 48-core processors powering both smartphones and tablets. That's twelve times as many as there are in a high-end chip available today! Needless to say, having so many cores on a single piece of silicon would allow smartphones and tablets to handle CPU-intensive tasks with ease by splitting the workload. For example, if someone is watching a high-resolution video, each frame could be decoded by an individual core. Advanced tasks that currently require processing to be offloaded to a computer in the cloud will be performed offline. All the while, Intel promises that such chips will be energy efficient.
However, there are a few obstacles in the way, and one of the most significant ones is the software used on smartphones and tablets today. Simply put, the code is not yet optimized to distribute tasks among so many cores. In fact, even consumer-grade desktop operating systems aren't ready for such chips. That's why we'll have to settle down with what we have today and wait patiently for researchers to finish their work. In the meantime, what cool uses of that processing power can you think of? 3D object recognition? Augmented reality? Protein folding simulations? Let us know down in the comments!
source: Computer World via Electronista
Share:
After Jessica Alba, Lumia is now endorsed by regular people in Nokia ads 
Windows Phone Italy reveals the features for Windows Phone 7.8 and when 
-
Parting images and wrap-up from the last day of Google I/O
-
PhoneArena's John Velasco talks about the geek life
-
Up close demo of Epson Moverio glasses and YouTube functionality
-
Android talks and does Braille
-
Samsung officials confirm 5.9-inch Note III will come at IFA
-
Images and summary from day 2 of Google I/O
31 Comments
25. I_KNowBetter posted on 31 Oct 2012, 14:00 2 7
seeing how clunky android is- in they need all the help they can get just to not lag...LOL Intel knows this!
28. Nadr1212 posted on 31 Oct 2012, 23:41 0 0
If intel forgot, 48 cores needs a battery that'd charge at about 50% capacity, SO IM NOT CARRYING A 1/2 CHARGED CAR BATTERY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
29. Dr.Phil posted on 01 Nov 2012, 00:31 0 0
The amount of cores does not automatically equal battery hog. Actually, quite the opposite is true. For instance, the Tegra 3 processor uses the same A9 cortex architecture as the Tegra 2, but is more battery efficient. Part of the reason for that is because the quad-core processor evens out the energy intensive operations over four cores instead of two cores.
Best summation of what I'm trying to say is actually in that article:
"Ramirez also said that instead of one core working at near top capacity and using a lot of energy, many cores could run in parallel on different projects and use less energy.
'The chip also can take the energy and split it up and distribute it between different applications,' he added."
3. Jamus posted on 31 Oct 2012, 08:17 4 4
Will that come with a car battery to power me through the day?
8. g2a5b0e posted on 31 Oct 2012, 08:24 16 1
When will people start to understand that more cores does not necessarily equate to higher battery usage?
12. Captain_Doug posted on 31 Oct 2012, 09:07 1 0
Hopefully before we find a better way to make batteries. Hard to move onto level 2 when level 1 just never stuck.
15. OptimusOne posted on 31 Oct 2012, 09:19 1 0
it might not relate exactly, but phone batteries do need to get bigger.
Im sure a 48 core processor uses more power than a single core processor, but not 48 times the amout
17. g2a5b0e posted on 31 Oct 2012, 09:27 1 0
There are so many factors that go into this, but yes, a 48-core processor will more than likely use more power than a single. However, if used efficiently & threaded properly, a quad-core processor could easily use less juice than a single.
20. phonemonkey posted on 31 Oct 2012, 10:26 1 3
Post a picture of your CPU degree please
24. Captain_Doug posted on 31 Oct 2012, 12:36 4 0
You don't need a degree to know stuff moron. Do research. Learn.
26. thief-thief posted on 31 Oct 2012, 16:02 0 1
oh yeah you guys are all engineers and experts because you read from blog sites and post your crappy opinions
30. Captain_Doug posted on 01 Nov 2012, 08:05 1 0
Did I say we were professionals? No. I only said it doesn't take a piece of paper to know things. Especially something as simple as CPU scaling. If this seems over your head then just leave it be to those who are interested. You don't have to be here, you don't have to read comments.
4. takay0 posted on 31 Oct 2012, 08:17 1 4
its just to much.... unless they will have a verey uniq UI that need all that cores
6. MeoCao (unregistered) posted on 31 Oct 2012, 08:20 4 1
I think Intel must intrduce viable competitor to ARM based 4-core CPUs first, and worry about 48 core wonder later.
7. Cyan3boN posted on 31 Oct 2012, 08:21 4 1
Why dont they come up with a revolutionary battery with a 20 day talktime. i dont see the point of haveing a 50 core processor when the phone can last for a day with only mild usage.
9. Bluesky02 posted on 31 Oct 2012, 08:31 2 1
48 cores then you will have avatar like animations
10. harsh_doshi posted on 31 Oct 2012, 08:36 1 1
the code is not optimized to handle so many cores? i thought wp8 can run on upto 64cores...
11. Captain_Doug posted on 31 Oct 2012, 09:04 1 0
I think mobile developers are more apt to adapt. The market is quicker and so they have to too. While 48 cores seems doubtful since PC's have been sitting at 4-8 for a few years, I get that maybe eventually it'll happen but not in the time frame Intel gave. I really would like to see more apps and more so the OS take advantage of multiple cores and hyper-threading. Intel's new processors will have HT and I'm sure won't do as well as they could because the software just isn't there yet. Hopefully soon though.
18. OpTiMuS_BlAcK posted on 31 Oct 2012, 09:29 0 0
Battlefield 3 ULTRA graphics on smartphones? Yes please!
19. nobelset posted on 31 Oct 2012, 10:15 0 0
You guys don't know what you are talking about. For example, in the 2000s. 1ghz pentium 4 was like so freaking high tech. Then came dual cores, which could make UIs run on more resources, better game graphics with better graphic cards. As hardware improves, so does software.
23. legend1 posted on 31 Oct 2012, 12:33 0 0
So we won't need computers and laptops in the near future??????
27. SmartPhoneStream posted on 31 Oct 2012, 16:12 0 0
Does this mean we have to carry around liquid coolers attached to our phones
