The possibilities of CPU stacking are amazing. Imagine being able to have 2 physical CPU's on a consumer grade computer (each with 4-8 cores). Servers will get even more of a boost if this gets developed
Why are the opening sentences to PCGamesN articles always SO BAD?
[QUOTE=Humin;48865597]Why are the opening sentences to PCGamesN articles always SO BAD?[/QUOTE]
PCGamesN articles? As of today, they're nothing but lumps of antiquated, dunderheaded, progress-halting nonsense.
how useful would 2 separate 4 cores be anyways?
I know its useless for gaming at least
I'm surprised this hasn't been done. It would make the PC a whole lot louder though.
Anything that makes cpu cooling easier than now is good in my book.
Its annoying that you have to pay full price for a intel cpu only to have to pay some additional cash for that hypermastercooler 212 whatever.
They should be done like gpu's none of this hassle.
Its like little veins going through a metal muscle to clean it up :3
[QUOTE=J!NX;48865621]how useful would 2 separate 4 cores be anyways?
I know its useless for gaming at least[/QUOTE]
two gpus, two cpus, two monitors... two games, maybe more?
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;48867172]two gpus, two cpus, two monitors... two games, maybe more?[/QUOTE]
two monitors is easily possible anyways with just one
I suppose this would actually be extremely useful in recording w/o a capture card
use one CPU for the game, the other 100% dedicated to recording the game
[editline]9th October 2015[/editline]
it'd be amazing to have a CPU for gaming and another purely for calculating/programs, AKA, recording/editting
it'd probably let you record 4k at 60fps with 0 trouble
[QUOTE=Humin;48865597]Why are the opening sentences to PCGamesN articles always SO BAD?[/QUOTE]
It's better than 90% of their articles.
[QUOTE=spectator1;48865895]It would make the PC a whole lot louder though.[/QUOTE]
How do you figure? The only thing it sounds like it would do is make it a much bigger undertaking to setup in its current state than standard air or water cooling. The main things in a computer that make sound are the fans which aren't changing here. In fact things running cooler with less effort would only serve to make things quieter since your fans won't have to work as hard to keep the same temperatures.
[QUOTE=J!NX;48865621]how useful would 2 separate 4 cores be anyways?
I know its useless for gaming at least[/QUOTE]
Well, this could of course also be used for GPUs.
[QUOTE=paul simon;48867259]Well, this could of course also be used for GPUs.[/QUOTE]
you mean like two GPU's on one card? that would be [B]INSANE[/B]
[QUOTE=J!NX;48867180]it'd probably let you record 4k at 60fps with 0 trouble[/QUOTE]
5 minutes of gameplay and your new 3tb is full
[QUOTE=J!NX;48867271]you mean like two GPU's on one card? that would be [B]INSANE[/B][/QUOTE]
With better cooling performance for it's size than current ones, anyways.
[QUOTE=J!NX;48865621]how useful would 2 separate 4 cores be anyways?
I know its useless for gaming at least[/QUOTE]
There's not much of a difference between one octacore and two quadcore processors, and games are getting more multithreaded especially since current-gen consoles demand it.
2 cpu sockets are already a thing folks so its not like its untouched territory
[QUOTE=CrashLemon;48866125]Its like little veins going through a metal muscle to clean it up :3[/QUOTE]
I was thinking the same thing, how cooling systems should draw inspiration from nature. Namely the vascular system, although pumping blood does a lot more than help regulate temperature for living creatures.
That just gave me a weird idea, having a vein-artery sort of system for computer electronics that simultaneously carries energy in a liquid suspension and acts as a coolant too, bundling power supply and coolant into one. Though I imagine there would be complications in abundance with devising such a system in a safe manner.
[QUOTE=Map in a box;48875351]2 cpu sockets are already a thing folks so its not like its untouched territory[/QUOTE]
but having more than 1 cpu socket is usually reserved for professional/server hardware
[QUOTE=J!NX;48865621]how useful would 2 separate 4 cores be anyways?
I know its useless for gaming at least[/QUOTE]
Perhaps even separate parts of current CPUs to have more room for cores and cache, and the other layer being the graphics portion. I'm no engineer though.
[t]http://hothardware.com/ContentImages/NewsItem/34743/content/Intel-Skylake-Graphics-Gen-9-Block-Diag.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=J!NX;48867271]you mean like two GPU's on one card? that would be [B]INSANE[/B][/QUOTE]
This already exists and it's not that effective as you'd might think.
It's about the same as bridging two cards together.
[QUOTE=ironman17;48875391]I was thinking the same thing, how cooling systems should draw inspiration from nature. Namely the vascular system, although pumping blood does a lot more than help regulate temperature for living creatures.
That just gave me a weird idea, having a vein-artery sort of system for computer electronics that simultaneously carries energy in a liquid suspension and acts as a coolant too, bundling power supply and coolant into one. Though I imagine there would be complications in abundance with devising such a system in a safe manner.[/QUOTE]
i actually remember reading some futurologist stuff about how this will be how computers of the future may work
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;48876318]i actually remember reading some futurologist stuff about how this will be how computers of the future may work[/QUOTE]
Now you mention it, wasn't there an article on it or something?
On a slight tangent, thought still relevant, do you think it would be possible to integrate small water pipes into a motherboard, having a continuous water flow drawing away the excess heat? Or is that how water cooled hardware actually works?
One thought that's been running through my head during certain writing sessions is like the concept of a sort of steampunky water-cooled motherboard, based on all those capacitors and vacuum tubes but with little pipes snaking between the components to water-cool them. In concept, it'd be like a machine connected to both the mains and the plumbing, and probably be extremely dangerous.
[QUOTE=J!NX;48865621]how useful would 2 separate 4 cores be anyways?
I know its useless for gaming at least[/QUOTE]
Try to imagine it used on GPUs instead. Far more interesting for a personal computer. Alternatively imagine it used on a iGPU and chip solution.
[QUOTE=AJ10017;48875425]but having more than 1 cpu socket is usually reserved for professional/server hardware[/QUOTE]
London Drugs was selling dual CPU gaming rigs under their in-house Certified Data brand as far back as 2002. It wasn't that exotic.
Dual GPU is the same. We've had that for over 16 years now. Notable example is the Rage Fury MAXX from 1999.
[img]http://www.sg.hu/kep/2000_03/atiragefurymaxxbemutatokeplogoth.jpg[/img]
The issue is with milticore processing is that most programmers can't be assed to properly code for people who can take advantage of it so instead they add an abstraction layer that automagically makes their existing code scale to multiple cores at the expense of some performance.
Even for the card above with two GPU's the final in-game performace was so minimal it didn't really sell well.
[QUOTE=J!NX;48865621]how useful would 2 separate 4 cores be anyways?
I know its useless for gaming at least[/QUOTE]
It might make large Arma Co-op possible
[QUOTE=AJ10017;48875425]but having more than 1 cpu socket is usually reserved for professional/server hardware[/QUOTE]
Because it's very useless on consumer grade. Games can barely handle multi threading on the same cpu. Games actually taking advantage of 2 cpus is such a minority it does not matter. Why have 2 cpus when most games don't even utilize all the cores we got now?
And besides that, consumers have no need for 2 cpus. A quad core is more than enough for most of the computer users today.
Most prominent 2 cpu system I had was DL380 G5 with 2 Intel L5240.
[QUOTE=pentium;48877094]London Drugs was selling dual CPU gaming rigs under their in-house Certified Data brand as far back as 2002. It wasn't that exotic.
Dual GPU is the same. We've had that for over 16 years now. Notable example is the Rage Fury MAXX from 1999.
[/QUOTE]
It's a bit better now with SLI/crossfire and how ubiquitous it's becoming. This would allow you to essentially reduce the footprint of the card, since you can build in 3d much easier as opposed to plonking chips on a 2d plane as you have to now.
Alternatively you can make make a sli on one card solution as well (you just need to put it into two slots, since we don't have the bandwidth otherwise)
My heatsink IS my CPU [I]fuckers![/I]
[QUOTE=wraithcat;48879805]It's a bit better now with SLI/crossfire and how ubiquitous it's becoming. This would allow you to essentially reduce the footprint of the card, since you can build in 3d much easier as opposed to plonking chips on a 2d plane as you have to now.
Alternatively you can make make a sli on one card solution as well (you just need to put it into two slots, since we don't have the bandwidth otherwise)[/QUOTE]
The 7950 gx2 was the same way. Two cards internally sli'd together. I rember seeing the performance stats on the "single card" kit and it was incredible at the time. They didn't have two cards for the benchmarks but I am sure that if they linked two together for 4-way SLI the results would of been nothing short of majestic.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.