Intel, IBM discuss 8-core 'Nehalem' server chip

Intel on Tuesday said it will ship a server chip that contains up to eight processing cores later this year, while IBM showed off a high-end server in the works that uses eight such chips, yielding 64 cores.

Intel's Nehalem-EX architecture supports up to eight processors and each processor can integrate up to eight cores.

(Credit: Intel)

Intel's Nehalem-EX processor, in production later this year and expected to be shipping in high-end server systems by early 2010, will feature up to eight cores inside a single chip that supports 16 threads, according to Boyd Davis, Intel's general manager of the Server Platforms Marketing Group, speaking at a teleconference on Tuesday.

Using threads, Intel essentially doubles the amount of work that can be done on each processing core.

IBM, which participated in the conference, discussed a server currently under development that uses 64 Nehalem-EX cores (eight processors) and can handle 128 threads, according to Alex Yost, vice president IBM BladeCenter. "We're very excited today to be the first to demonstrate Nehalem-EX," Yost said.

Nehalem-EX will also double the memory capacity with up to 16 memory slots per processor socket, and offer four high-bandwidth "QuickPath" Interconnect links.

Intel also said the currently-shipping Nehalem server chip is making market gains. Intel's currently-available Xeon 5500, the first server processor based on Intel's Nehalem architecture, will be "greater than half of shipments" for Intel's high-volume two-processor (aka, "two-socket") server shipments by August, according to Davis.

"Customer acceptance has been quite strong," Boyd said. "From an introduction at the very end of March to representing the majority of our shipments in the market for two-processor servers by the August time frame," he said.

Intel showed off a prototype server that can accommodate four eight-core Nehalem-EX processors.

(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET)

Intel's prototype Nehalem-EX server accommodates eight of these memory cards. They'll use relatively conventional DDR3 memory rather than the FB-DIMM technology Intel's current Xeon 7300 systems.

(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET)

[Mr. Dee]

I want to see a picture of the Blade Center Server. :) "64 Nehalem-EX cores (eight processors) and can handle 128 threads", when you say 128 threads, do you mean per core or overall?

[timber2005]

Overall. Each supports 16. <br /> <br />"...will feature up to eight cores inside a single chip that supports 16 threads"

[Otto Holland]

They mean overall...128 threads.That's technically, because each core use 16 threads (times) 64 cores and as they say "approximately"

[ikramerica--2008]

The 4-core Xeons do the same thing. When you use "menumeters" on an 8 core Mac Pro, 16 core readings show up in your menu bar, pretty much taking up the entire space. So OS X sees 16 virtual cores. I'm interested to see how Snow Leopard deals with 32 threads on next years Mac Pro. I know this is an article about IBM and Intel, but Apple ends up using the a lot of the same technologies for their Mac Pro.

[jabberwolf]

Um Ikramerica Sorry but this isnt quite for your mac, its much beefier and probably wont wont on your mac pro. Apple is the last to use technology and the last to apply it well. This is why they are the last in the server market..almost.<br /><br />This is awesome for BUSINESS users who will be running vmware ESX servers, XEN servers, and Windows 8 hypervisor.<br /><br />Im curious what Vmware's pricing will be now that there are more cores and they will be charging per chip while XEN will still only charge per physical CPU. Meaning Xen will now only charge for 1 server, even if it has 4 CPU's and 32 cores.<br /><br />Imagine running about 32 servers (2 cores each) with only 2 physical servers... fricken awesome!<br />or 1 of these servers running VDI for about 1000+ users!

[Peter Glaskowsky]

Um jabberwolf Sorry but you haven't been paying attention. Apple's Mac Pro was the FIRST system, not the "last", to use Intel's current high-end Xeon processor for two-socket systems, and it's inevitable that Apple will use these new eight-core chips as soon as they're available. Next time, work on your facts before you work on your patronizing attitude.

[pithenumber]

@Peter<br />I think jabberwolf was talking about servers<br />Apple will probably not use the 8 core chips as soon as they are available since they do not compete in the high end server market. Nehalem EX is a high end server chip, not a workstation chip. If Apple really wanted to compete in the high end server market, they would have an 8x Opty server right now like most other companies that do high end servers

[ikramerica--2008]

Look pith, and especially jabber, stop posting FUD if you don't know what you are talking about.<br /><br />Apple currently uses the Xeon 3500/5500 in the Mac Pro, either as in a 4-core/8-thread (single 3500) or 8-core/16-thread (dual 5500) layout, which, last time I checked, is Intel's first chip in this particular line of processors, and last time I checked, Apple was the first one using it. On the Mac Pro. I never mentioned servers. Apple uses these Xeon chips (3520/3540/5520/5550/5570), NOT the "workstation" chip Core i7, on the Mac Pro. They give great performance on the tasks people buy Mac Pros for, and they will give even better performance under Snow Leopard.<br /><br />This is why my money is that considering the "early 2010" hint above, Apple will again be the first or among the first to use the -EX model listed above in the Mac Pro. And for anyone who's seen the inside of a MacPro, it's way better designed than the prototype server box Intel shows above. Under Snow Leopard, the true power of these machines and processors will be unleashed.<br /><br />I get so tired of Windows people who dismiss all Apple products without even knowing the facts. There is a reason the Mac Pro is so expensive. It uses the latest components including 3-channel memory addressing, in a very well designed enclosure with innovative cooling that has taken years to perfect. The design is expensive to build. It's not off the shelf. Having had the opportunity to use one for a few days a couple of weeks ago, I covet one. I can't justify it for my uses, but if I had the money, it would be under my desk.

[ikramerica--2008]

Look pith, and especially jabber, stop posting FUD if you don't know what you are talking about.<br /><br />Apple currently uses the Xeon 3500/5500 in the Mac Pro, either as in a 4-core/8-thread (single 3500) or 8-core/16-thread (dual 5500) layout, which, last time I checked, is Intel's first chip in this particular line of processors, and last time I checked, Apple was the first one using it. On the Mac Pro. I never mentioned servers. Apple uses these Xeon chips (3520/3540/5520/5550/5570), NOT the "workstation" chip Core i7, on the Mac Pro. They give great performance on the tasks people buy Mac Pros for, and they will give even better performance under Snow Leopard.<br /><br />This is why my money is that considering the "early 2010" hint above, Apple will again be the first or among the first to use the -EX model listed above in the Mac Pro. And for anyone who's seen the inside of a MacPro, it's way better designed than the prototype server box Intel shows above. Under Snow Leopard, the true power of these machines and processors will be unleashed.<br /><br />I get so tired of Windows people who dismiss all Apple products without even knowing the facts. There is a reason the Mac Pro is so expensive. It uses the latest components including 3-channel memory addressing, in a very well designed enclosure with innovative cooling that has taken years to perfect. The design is expensive to build. It's not off the shelf. Having had the opportunity to use one for a few days a couple of weeks ago, I covet one. I can't justify it for my uses, but if I had the money, it would be under my desk.<br /><br />And just to be clear, Apple is often the first to use the latest chips on their PRO line, be it MacBook Pro or Mac Pro. They are not the first to use the chips on the "consumer" line: MacBook and iMac, because doing so is too expensive. Although IIRC, my iMac 24" from last April was one of the first computers on the market using the 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo penryn with 6MB level 2, a chip at the time specifically built faster with more level 2 cache for Apple (or, for me, it seems ;) . Oldest technology indeed...

[Peter Glaskowsky]

Brooke--<br /><br />The two-way multithreading doesn't "essentially double the amount of work that can be done on each processing core." It doubles the number of simultaneously active threads, but the amount of _work_ that gets done only goes up by about 25%, and even that result is only achieved with certain kinds of applications.<br /><br />I'm also not sure about the statement that "Nehalem-EX will also double the memory capacity with up to 16 memory slots per processor socket". The existing Nehalems support up to 9 slots, so "double" certainly isn't the right word here. Nehalem-EX has four memory buses vs. three on current Nehalems, and it looks like Intel is supporting four DIMMs per channel on this chip.<br /><br />I'm curious to know if there's a speed penalty for that configuration, and if Nehalem-EX supports higher-capacity DIMMs than current Nehalems-- if there's just one more address bit coming out, the memory capacity could in fact be more than tripled.<br /><br />This chip is likely to kill off the last of AMD's high-end workstation and server business, leaving those poor guys scraping the bottom of the barrel for the very cheapest servers.