Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Intel Hardware

Intel Unveils New Atom and Xeon Processors and Future Rack Scale Architecture 73

Posted by samzenpus from the take-a-look dept.
MojoKid writes "Intel recently revealed a number of details regarding future Atom and Xeon processors and proposed server rack-level enhancements to improve efficiency and ease upgrades. The company will soon refresh its Xeon and Atom processor lines with new products manufactured using Intel's 22nm process node, which offer improved performance per watt characteristics and expanded feature sets. In total, Intel revealed details of three new low-power, Atom-branded SoCs for the data center, all coming in 2013. Intel is also updating the Xeon E3, E5, and E7 product lines. The Atom processor family will see new SoCs based on designs codenamed Briarwood, Avoton, and Rangeley, while the more powerful Xeons will be updated with Haswell, Ivy Bridge EP, and Ivy Bridge EX-based designs. Xeon E3s will leverage the increased graphics performance of Haswell to improve performance in multimedia-related workloads, like HD video transcodes. OHaswell-based Xeon E3 processors will also offer improved performance per watt over existing Sandy and Ivy Bridge-based designs and Intel will offer Xeon E3 processors with TDPs as low as 13 watts, approximately 25% lower than the prior generation."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel Unveils New Atom and Xeon Processors and Future Rack Scale Architecture More

Intel Unveils New Atom and Xeon Processors and Future Rack Scale Architecture

Comments Filter:

  • Compatible with Windows 7? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Thursday April 11, 2013 @12:42AM (#43419503) Journal

    If not then I am not interested.

    Rumor has it the new Atoms with Clovertail are not Windows 7 compatible. [neowin.net] As Microsoft wants us to be testers first rather than customers so they can sell more phones as we get used to the UI.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Windows 7 requires legacy (PCI) components to boot. Windows 8 doesn't. /conspiracy

      • Sounds like a good chore for a foss project:

        Build a custom HAL to be invoked by NTLDR that makes virtual surrogates for win7 to be happy with at kernel init, then proper kernel drivers after that.

        Could probably fork and share code with the ReactOS project, actually.

        • Sounds like a good chore for a foss project:

          Build a custom HAL to be invoked by NTLDR that makes virtual surrogates for win7 to be happy with at kernel init, then proper kernel drivers after that.

          Could probably fork and share code with the ReactOS project, actually.

          Sounds like a huge undertaking. The PCI bus and architecture is so finely ingrained in the Windows 7 kernel that I do not know if it would be easy or even possible to do?

          I guess the move to share the same kernel with Windows Phone is what MS had to do to rid the old code.

    • Re: Compatible with Windows 7? (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Windows 8 is fine. Either install a start menu or learn to use all the keyboard shortcuts to use Metro as little as possible.

      It's better than windows 7 if you can manage for the whole week it takes to get used to the UI.

      • Re: Compatible with Windows 7? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by epyT-R ( 613989 ) on Thursday April 11, 2013 @02:04AM (#43419863)

        If you gotta hack it like that to make it usable, it's NOT better than windows 7.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Rockoon ( 1252108 )
          Heaven forbid you might have to choose a window manager too...

          Don't bother with the Linux world if you don't want to 'hack it' -- so your only alternative is OS/X -- enjoy the overpriced bullshit.

          • Only Windows 7 has IE 8.

            That is a must for my job if I get a netbook and Windows 8 comes with IE 10 so that is a no go. Windows 7 support is a must for me

            • Well, you could try VirtualBox, VirtualPC, VMWare, Parallels, or any number of other virtualization platforms... Most of which are available in windows, osx and linux.

              I use Windows 7 because it's my favorite UI... I have a mac laptop because it was the best option at the time, and I run linux in VMs... VMs are great, setup dev environments, clone, snapshop, drop back.. even take a look at what that virus payload actually does...

            • Re: Compatible with Windows 7? (Score:4, Informative)

              by PixetaledPikachu ( 1007305 ) on Thursday April 11, 2013 @05:55AM (#43420729)

              Only Windows 7 has IE 8.

              That is a must for my job if I get a netbook and Windows 8 comes with IE 10 so that is a no go. Windows 7 support is a must for me

              You can run IE10 on compatibility mode, and it can go down to at least IE7 mode. http://techathlon.com/internet-explorer-10-run-compatibility-mode/ [techathlon.com] . I think you can even enforce the compatibility mode via GPO

            • Only Windows 7 has IE8

              Turn in both your geek and nerd card noob. MS Has already released IE10 for Win7 - It's now installed on all 3 Win7 systems here (personal uses linux) and MS will be pushing it as a Critical update by Sept/Oct of 2013 - everyone who's already installed it are the beta testers

              • Turn in both your geek and nerd card noob

                Turn in your reading comprehension card.

                They said they needed IE8 - not that IE 10 wasn't available for Windows 7. I'm not sure how you could misread that so badly.

            • And only Windows 8 has hyperV.

              Hey look I solved your problem.

          • Enjoy wasting your time hacking around. I guess your time is worth $0/hour?

            • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

              by serviscope_minor ( 664417 )

              I guess your time is worth $0/hour?

              Ah the classic piece of anti-Linux FUD. I haven't seen this one here in a while.

              Your comment implies that Linux takes up more time than Windows. It doesn't. Not only is the OS free, but you waste less of your valuable time messing with it and get a more efficient environment. A net win in every way.

              Also, your attitude is, frankly, baffling. It's part of "the computer is a tool and should get out of my way" attitude which is so wrong it's hilarious. A computer certainly is

              • Re: Compatible with Windows 7? (Score:4, Interesting)

                by Gadget_Guy ( 627405 ) on Thursday April 11, 2013 @05:19AM (#43420595)

                Ah the classic piece of anti-Linux FUD.

                I'm not sure that the original poster was making an anti-Linux statement there. I read it as having to do with having to hack around the Windows 8 "improvements".

                • I'm not sure that the original poster was making an anti-Linux statement there. I read it as having to do with having to hack around the Windows 8 "improvements".

                  Sorry yes: I realise that my reply was badly written and rather easy to misunderstand.

                  It's the classic piece of anti-Linux fud, which has now been turned around to point elsewhere. Rather ironically.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Ed Avis ( 5917 )
          IMHO Windows 7 requires Classic Shell and some messing around in Control Panel to make it usable. Essentially, with each new Windows release there is another half hour of setup you must do to get rid of the latest bright ideas from Microsoft and get back to the basic but usable interface circa 1999.
          • Funny, Windows 7 was the first version I wasn't compelled to revert to another desktop environment (used to love litestep).

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by rbprbp ( 2731083 )
            (Posting to undo mistaken mod) At least for me, in Windows 7 I didn't need any shell replacement (or much in the way of tweaking, really) unlike I needed in XP. In fact, whenever I use XP (I have some virtual machines for ancient software) I miss the Windows 7 interface.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by DrXym ( 126579 )
          I use Windows 8 on a "classic" laptop. I feel it is a step down from Windows 7 and metro can be very clumsy in some ways especially with a mouse and keyboard. So it has obvious shortcomings but it's not unusable. It needs a lot of refinement however and I hope when 8.1 turns up that it gets a dose of that.

          I fully expect that my next PC will be a tablet with dock running Windows 8.

          • tablets don't really have the GPU or CPU power to replace a PC and a DOCK can't really add a CPU maybe a GPU but it will need at least a X8 pci-e link to make it work good thunderbolt is to slow even more so if you also put networking / usb / ect on it as well.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by DrXym ( 126579 )
              I wouldn't be replacing a desktop PC with a 10-11" tablet. I was think more of replacing my netbook with it reducing the need to haul around my larger laptop. The Atom processor might not be much but it's still dualcore and probably 2-3x more powerful than my existing netbook. Enough to browse the web, write some apps and mess around with and small enough to throw in a carry on bag.
        • I had to hack Windows 7 to make it usable for me. In fact, I've had to hack every single OS I have ever used to make it usable. How is this different?

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        No its not. It's unpleasant to use and adds nothing of value.

      • WinKey+X brings up a menu of all the OS admin utilities I use frequently. Hitting the WinKey and typing the first few letters of an application name works for everything else. No hacking required.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by D1G1T ( 1136467 )
          Unless it is in a virtual/remote window, in which case getting the mouse into one of the corners is frustratingly fiddly and your Win-C etc. keybinds are mapped to something else depending on your environment. WS2012 is fantastic. Win8 is an abortion.

    • Actually it's probably not the CPU core, but the GPU included. The last Atoms to be produced (N570) had a GPU still largely based on the i945G chipset, and the other crop had a GPU done by PowerVR (no Linux support). Either way, great for 2D, no good for 3D. IIRC, the new Atoms will have a newer GPU core based on the same GPU core as SB? (could be horribly wrong, but it's a new GPU based on an existing Intel design).

      Let's not forget most netbooks have a 1024x600 display, and MS mandated displays with at lea

      • If that's all, it should be possible to boot Win7 in some VESA mode and load the proper driver afterwards.
        Unless someone has decided to drop such unimportant ways of ensuring backwards compatibility ;-)

    • Most of the system that came with third generation core chip from Intel are no longer Win 7 compatible

      In our company we have tried to re-format a machine that was preinstalled with Win 8, then re-install Win 7 on it

      No go --- it just won't start

    • So, Cedar Trail only works on Windows 7 and Clover Trail only works on Windows 8. I assume AMD's brazos works on both systems. The could be a selling point.

  • In a world where information is key, and where it's getting to be overwhelming in its capacity, these more powerful processors will play a key role in analyzing data to retrieve the meaningful and management portions.

  • Far Cry 3!!!! (Score:4, Funny)

    by RudyHartmann ( 1032120 ) on Thursday April 11, 2013 @01:26AM (#43419721)

    Hey, I want a pair of these new CPU chips from Intel with 10 cores each and 30M of cache in my next PC. These CPU's will now directly access a measly 12TB of ram. Heck, they're only $4616 each. Why not use them to run Far Cry 3 real fast? ;-)

    http://ark.intel.com/products/53580/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E7-8870-30M-Cache-2_40-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI [intel.com]

  • Graphics Capabilities? (Score:3)

    by im_thatoneguy ( 819432 ) on Thursday April 11, 2013 @01:47AM (#43419799)

    Is this increased multimedia capability simply an improved crappy integrated GPU or is this improved x86 multimedia processing like AVX? I would be very interested in improved x86 processing for tasks like rendering and raytracing. I could care less about the integrated GPU being slightly better.

  • I had a wish years ago, (Score:3)

    by pecosdave ( 536896 ) on Thursday April 11, 2013 @02:27AM (#43419957) Homepage Journal

    Back when we were in the 800 MHz to 1.5 GHz as common range I had a wish. I wanted something akin to a Pentium Pro 200 build on - at the time - modern processes for a simple server or put around machine. Nothing high performance, just reliable and low power.

    The Atom was an answer to that wish, I love it. I've been an AMD guy most my life, but considering I hated ATI, I love nVidia, and Intel is producing great stuff like the Atom and playing nice with the FOSS community I'm about ready to become a turncoat. AMD processors of all types are great, but especially when it comes to mobile it's hard to find one with a good system around it.

    • A wish almost come true, but no ECC (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ControlFreal ( 661231 ) <niek AT bergboer DOT net> on Thursday April 11, 2013 @02:40AM (#43419997) Journal

      I agree with the power-consumption part, but the reason I would still not buy the Atom line is the simple fact that they do not support ECC RAM; when you say "reliability", you do want to know when your RAM walks out on you.

      Supermicro sells a couple of mini-ITX board for mobile Core i7s, though, that will still allow you to build an under-30W-idle system with ECC RAM.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        atom s1200 series hass ecc

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward
        The Atom S1200 series (introduced Dec 2012) includes support for ECC.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Shinobi ( 19308 )

        You don't need to use the mobile chips for that, there are even Xeons with under 20W, and ECC+virtualization support..

  • Is the rest of the industry still stuck at 32nm for ARM processors? I haven't seen anything yet that suggests that TSMC can meet 28nm demand on the various ARM chips they have contracts for.

    At some point, the x86 Atom at 22nm or 20nm (or whatever is next) is going to be more powerful and more energy efficient than a real-world ARM chip.

    • You can see the Antutu benchmark of the Clovertrail+ Atom chip that is in the process of being launched.
      Clovertrail+ gets a benchmark score of 25k. To put this in perspective, Galaxy S3 gets a score of 16k, and a decent mid-level phone like the HTC One S gets a score of 10k, and Tegra3 in the HTC One X gets 14k.

      Galaxy S4 might beat the Clovertrail+ (it is supposed to be 28k), but not by much. They are pretty much head to head, and in both cases, you are talking about the latest and greatest from Intel and A

      • That benckmark seems to be quite usefull for the porpouse it was built, that is knowing if a program will run well in a phone. But power consuption is missing from the gathered data, thus it's completely useless for comparing processors.

  • Sounds like Intel has invented the mainframe.

Slashdot Top Deals

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Close