60 cores?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Who uses something like this??
Ur mom
>>54145824
why not just get another cpu?
Servers maybe
>>54145824
can it even work with 60 cores over pcie bus speed?
If they are actual proper cores, the price seems very fair for a product like that.
>>54145949
Yeah but it's a "coprocessor". Will it run next to a regular processor?
>>54145824
People who need to perform very parallel tasks but are too lazy to port their code into CUDA, or want to use x86 for some reason.
>>54145959
Now that I think about it, there's no way it can be properly integrated into a system as 60 new cores with just PCIe. It could be a videocard that is only capable of OpenCL. If that's the case, it's horribly overpriced.
>>54145959
>>54145974
It's a complete system on a card that runs on Linux and interfaces with your computer as though you were on a network (but with the connectivity speed of PCI-E), so it only works with distributed compute, that is you send chunks of data that need to be processed and it sends back the result.
>>54145985
Cute. Can you like ssh into it and access internal filesystem?
The Xeon Phi cards are like a GPU, except for full CPU instructions. They handle highly parallel instructions like large vectors for particle simulation. The thing is basically a dedicated AVX cruncher.
Keep up with the times, guys.
>>54145824
At the moment... nothing even uses more than 8 cores at once. Even more than 6 cores you don't really see any gains.
60 cores is just retarded shit since nothing will make use of it. Waste of money for the average computer user.
You'd have to be building a VPS and having tons and tons of users to make decent use of this Coprocessor or it's just a waste of money.
There's supercomputers that use them. Some other research and compute-heavy business stuff too.
>>54145960
That's it's selling point actually, "it's like a GPU, but you don't have to use CUDA, you can use anything that will speak x86"
>>54146025
>I have literally no idea what I'm talking about: The Post
>>54146025
>you mean people do other things with computers than vidya gaems?
You baka-ass motherfucker. Yes, that's why Intel is making 22-core Xeons, in addition to these massively parallel accelerator cards. A lot of server tasks can use as many cores and as much memory as you can throw at them, and scale linearly.
Do *you* have any use for this card? Nope. Neither do I. But plenty of people do.
>>54145994
The only way to do anything with the Phi is by accessing it remotely, there are no programs that have native access, except the custom ones you write yourself. Intel does however provide all of the tools needed to get you started.
>>54146015
Can't really be compared to GPUs, a Telsa card you just slot in and any program that supports CUDA will recognize it and away you go, even a complete retard can take advantage of one if they like render shit.
>>54145939
just like GPU.
>>54146057
>>The only way to do anything with the Phi is by accessing it remotely, there are no programs that have native access, except the custom ones you write yourself. Intel does however provide all of the tools needed to get you started.
So the answer is yes then?
It's a proper computer that you have full access to? With 60 cores?
Wonder why they are selling this for 3k.
>>54146073
>Wonder why they are selling this for 3k.
Enterprise hardware. The outfits that are in the market for hardware like this don't blink at filling a whole rack with $20k+ servers.
>>54146107
I mean, 3k is too cheap for a proper machine with 60 core.
>>54146073
>It's a proper computer that you have full access to? With 60 cores?
Not really, No.
Think of it like this:
You have a business doing screen printing and custom shirts and merchandise for companies. Like, putting their names on pens and shit using your machines and their design.
However, due to where you live, you don't actually have room for a large production facility, you mostly just have a warehouse, and a show-room. The majority of the machines, ink, and such are at a facility 2 cities over that worka with you, exclusively, on contract since they already had workers and equipment, but no warehouse and no buyers. Orders are placed with you in, designed, then sent to the Facility where the dudes over there manufacture it all, then send it back to you.
This remote facility is like the Xeon Phi. It's a part of your business, but separate. These dudes could probably do stuff on their own, but they lack vital, business-necessary things you have. And all you're doing is issuing orders, that they fill, and send to you. You could technically do the work, with your smaller production room, but obviously is far more efficient to send the orders to their facility, to have them fill it much quicker, cheaper, and more efficiently, before sending it back to you.
>>54146163
Well, remember that those are very small and cheap cores, not really comparable to modern x86 designs.
So this a X86 co processor thats similar to a GPU?
>>54146057
It is directly comparable to a GPU. Both Xeon Phi and GPUs are an array of many execution units. The difference is that a GPU uses more simplistic separate units, and Xeon Phi uses complete independent X86 cores.
They are the exact same thing, doing the same kind of processing, only with different approaches. GPUs cannot handle large vector ops, Phi does. They're each massively parallel in nature.
>>54146253
Your analogy is so long people will get lost trying to make sense out of it.
You don't need to explain this to me. I am a developer. We already have CPU-iuntensive tasks we offload to other machines on the network. Those tasks could be instead offloaded to this 3k machine with 60 cores.
>>54146290
It's not right to compare those to GPUs. x86 cores work separately, while GPU cores all execute same instruction at a time. x86 cores support a well-known binary format for code. GPUs support god knows what and you simply don't execute binaries on GPU - you get the driver to compile cuda or opencl code for you.
>>54145824
>PCIe bus
>CPU
retard
>>54146350
>doesn't say CPU anywhere
were you referring to your own post when you wrote ``retard''?
>>54146284
ayy lmao.
>>54145960
This.
Lots of finance sector companies (insurers, banks, funds) use really ass-backwards archaic stuff coded in COBOL from the 90s 'cause it still works and is stable.
Welcome to my personal nightmare.
>>54146253
are you fucking retarded?
>>54146361
It doesn't explicitly say anywhere on that page that the item actually exists, therefore it doesn't.
>>54146400
>from the 90s
try the '60s. Not memeing you, a lot of financial institutions core systems go back that far.
>>54146417
Not sure where you are going with this.
The item is explicitly mentioned to be a coprocessor, and not a central processor unit.
>>54145824
>5.49$ shipping fee
Lol muricans
>>54146424
I know. It's crazy. Stuff I work on is all 1990/91 re-dos of super old stuff. I've never had to work on the ancient stuff though.
>>54145824
My university bought 5 of these for a neural network project I'm helping to work on.
Each core is essentially a 1024-bit AVX (in the newest, 1st and 2nd gen are 512AVX) unit with 4-way SMT and only basic integer functions, it is not your desktop x86 nor is it (entirely) like the Pentium core it is based on.
>>54145824
That's cute and all
But can it run Crysis in 4k at 120fps?
>>54145911
>checked
mind you if i add this magnificent pepe to my collection?
>>54146722
Checked, just do it.
>>54145824
bitcoin miners?
>>54146720
>>>/v/
Computers are more than "consoles on steroids"
>>54145824
Chrome users
>>54145824
It's for fags who dabble in scientific computing yet cannot bring themselves to learn OpenCL or CUDA.
Which kind of explains why this is mostly dead/irrelevant.
>>54146761
Is that a no? Shit
video games are technology ;^)
>>54146776
No. Doesn't run your shitty attempt at cinema with predefined intervention at 4k.
Can it mine coin?
>>54145824
No one really.
Intel wanted Larrabee to be a big third contestant in the GPU, but they couldn't into drivers (even worse than AMDATI)
So they repurposed it as a compute card (essentially just a GPU without the video output) and hoped it would take off for compute, but it was slower than AMD at OpenCL and didn't support CUDA, so no one cared.
>>54146748
>bitcoin mining on x86
Just no.
>>54146802
According to posts in this thread, it's something entirely different.
Intel to generate redundancy letters on a large scale
>>54146804
LRB is a lot faster than you think, of course it's also fairly old now too.
Beats any Fermi based Tesla card in OpenCL compute but can't hold a candle to AMD (TeraScale or GCN...)
>>54146859
That's because people in this thread think that 'x86' means it has to be regular processor.
Most of the posters on /g/ are fucking retarded.
But here, have some old news:
>Story about the rise and fall of LRB as a GPU, this is prior to it's repurposing at Xeon Phi and prior to the nVidia vs Intel lawsuit.
http://vrworld.com/2009/10/12/an-inconvenient-truth-intel-larrabee-story-revealed/
>LRB repurposing into Xeon Phi
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/131699-larrabee-lives-50-core-intel-xeon-phi-unveiled-lures-supercomputers-away-from-nvidia-tesla
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/xeon-phi-larrabee-stampede-hpc,3342.html
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/many-integrated-core/intel-many-integrated-core-architecture.html
>More Fun, nVidia vs Intel
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4122/intel-settles-with-nvidia-more-money-fewer-problems-no-x86
If you read all of that, (you should!) you'll probably have some insight into how uttely FUCKED Intel is right now.
>nVidia graphics IP agreement is coming to an end
>Intel needs to license graphics IP or they're up shit creek and can't sell any consumer/mobile CPUs with Intel Graphics
>AMD has no reason to license that to them and it would be better for AMD not too (except for maybe HUGE bank, they could use it)
>nVidia will likely only relicense in exchange for Intel's worst nightmare - nVidia with x86
>>54146933
So do those 60 cores operate in lockstep mode?
>>54146859
Sort of. Basically Intel was like what if we cludged a bunch of cut down x86 cores together and called it a GPU then obviously it failed but they like whoring it out at every opportunity meanwhile everyone else politely ignores it andnhopes they go away.
