New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus • Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts • Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Schweb's Lounge Forum for general conversation, chit chat, or most topics that don't fit in another forum.

What company created the first processor with more than 1 core?


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
iggibar

 
iggibar's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 20, 2009
Location: C-Town
Posts: 4,065
iggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to behold
Mac Specs: Mac Pro 4.1 15" MBP. 13" MBP. 17" PB. Power Mac G5. iPhone 5s 64gb

iggibar is offline
As the title says, what company created the first processor with more than 1 core that was available on a computer? I've been looking it up online, but can't find a solid answer. Anyone know on here? I keep getting answers between intel, IBM, and even AMD.

“If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself but to your own estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.” Marcus Aurelius
QUOTE Thanks
Raz0rEdge

 
Raz0rEdge's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 17, 2009
Location: MA
Posts: 7,576
Raz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant futureRaz0rEdge has a brilliant future
Mac Specs: 27" i7 iMac, 24" iMac, 13" Macbook Air, iPhone 5 & 5S, iPod Nano 7th Gen, iPad 2 16GB WiFi, iPad 3

Raz0rEdge is online now
POWER4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regards
QUOTE Thanks
XJ-linux

 
XJ-linux's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 02, 2007
Location: Going Galt...
Posts: 3,357
XJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: MacBookAir5,2:10.9.4-MacMini3,1:10.9.4-iPhone6,1:7.1.2

XJ-linux is offline
The good folks at IBM introduced the first true multi-core processor with their Power4 systems. These were based on PowerPC instructions.

Raz0rEdge beat me too it.

Note: the IBM Power7 blade system I'm building this morning has:
4 Cores
4 Virtual processors per core
4 Logical processors per virtual processor
Totalling 64 logical CPUs worth of processing functionality all running on AIX 6.1.6 with live partition mobility. Fun stuff!

"Those who don't understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." – Henry Spencer
QUOTE Thanks
Chris H.

 
Chris H.'s Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 03, 2009
Location: Rio Rancho, NM
Posts: 2,605
Chris H. is a jewel in the roughChris H. is a jewel in the rough
Mac Specs: late 2009 MacBook - 10.9

Chris H. is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by XJ-linux View Post



Note: the IBM Power7 blade system I'm building this morning has:

CPUs worth of processing functionality all running on AIX 6.1.6 with live partition mobility. Fun stuff!

Huh? *Scratches head*

 iPad mini 1st gen - iOS 8.0.2
 iPod touch 5th gen - iOS 8.0.2
 Mac mini Server M10 - OS X 10.9.5
 MacBook Uni L09 - OS X 10.10 PB4
QUOTE Thanks
iggibar

 
iggibar's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 20, 2009
Location: C-Town
Posts: 4,065
iggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to beholdiggibar is a splendid one to behold
Mac Specs: Mac Pro 4.1 15" MBP. 13" MBP. 17" PB. Power Mac G5. iPhone 5s 64gb

iggibar is offline
Thanks a bunch for the links. I was talking to a friend who mentioned that the powerpc was a processor on the power mac that was a breed of processors based off of one of the first multi-core systems that were used as servers/super computers. I didn't believe it, but I guess it's true. Nice thing to know. That's one more reason for me to like IBM and Apple

“If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself but to your own estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.” Marcus Aurelius
QUOTE Thanks
the8thark

 
Member Since: Jan 27, 2007
Location: *Brisvegas*
Posts: 5,658
the8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to allthe8thark is a name known to all
Mac Specs: 17 inch 2 GHz C2D imac (5,1) with 3GB DDR2 RAM, X1600 (128MB memory) GPU - OSX 10.6.3

the8thark is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by XJ-linux View Post
The good folks at IBM introduced the first true multi-core processor with their Power4 systems. These were based on PowerPC instructions.

Raz0rEdge beat me too it.

Note: the IBM Power7 blade system I'm building this morning has:
4 Cores
4 Virtual processors per core
4 Logical processors per virtual processor
Totalling 64 logical CPUs worth of processing functionality all running on AIX 6.1.6 with live partition mobility. Fun stuff!
What's the point of 64 processors when 58 of them sit idle?
My point is can you utilise all of them? of it is just massive over kill "just case you can"?
QUOTE Thanks
DarkestRitual

 
Member Since: Apr 09, 2009
Location: Ithaca NY
Posts: 2,073
DarkestRitual is just really niceDarkestRitual is just really niceDarkestRitual is just really niceDarkestRitual is just really nice
Mac Specs: 13 inch alMacBook 2GHz C2D 4G DDR3, 1.25GHz G4 eMac

DarkestRitual is offline
If it's a server, yes, he is more likely to use them all, and not need a whole lot of speed per process, just the ability to run ridiculous numbers of simultaneously processes.
QUOTE Thanks
cwa107

 
cwa107's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 20, 2006
Location: Middletown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 26,571
cwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15" MBP, Core i7/2GHz, 8GB RAM, 480GB Crucial M500 SSD

cwa107 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by idrinorbarsaku View Post
Thanks a bunch for the links. I was talking to a friend who mentioned that the powerpc was a processor on the power mac that was a breed of processors based off of one of the first multi-core systems that were used as servers/super computers. I didn't believe it, but I guess it's true. Nice thing to know. That's one more reason for me to like IBM and Apple
Hmmm... single core PPC was around long before the multicore variants. Also, it was a joint venture between Motorola and IBM -- although Apple was one of the earliest adopters, mostly because they relied upon Motorola's earlier CPU architecture. It essentially superseded the 68K line of 16/32-bit CPUs and was entirely RISC-based. In a perfect world, it would have also superseded x86, which it was vastly superior to upon release. Alas, the Wintel world prevailed and the PPC eventually faded mostly into the embedded market. But for a time in the mid-90's, it looked like PPC was the future - and it should have been. Even Microsoft produced variants of Windows NT that ran natively on PPC.

Liquid and computers don't mix. It might seem simple, but we see an incredible amount of people post here about spills. Keep drinks and other liquids away from your expensive electronics!
QUOTE Thanks
DarkestRitual

 
Member Since: Apr 09, 2009
Location: Ithaca NY
Posts: 2,073
DarkestRitual is just really niceDarkestRitual is just really niceDarkestRitual is just really niceDarkestRitual is just really nice
Mac Specs: 13 inch alMacBook 2GHz C2D 4G DDR3, 1.25GHz G4 eMac

DarkestRitual is offline
Haven't GPUs been multicore for a looong time? Or were they multichip and some how voodooed together on the main board?
QUOTE Thanks
DarkestRitual

 
Member Since: Apr 09, 2009
Location: Ithaca NY
Posts: 2,073
DarkestRitual is just really niceDarkestRitual is just really niceDarkestRitual is just really niceDarkestRitual is just really nice
Mac Specs: 13 inch alMacBook 2GHz C2D 4G DDR3, 1.25GHz G4 eMac

DarkestRitual is offline
It was ARM, 1983. 1986 was the date the first real ARM cores hit the market though, with the ARM2
QUOTE Thanks
XJ-linux

 
XJ-linux's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 02, 2007
Location: Going Galt...
Posts: 3,357
XJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond reputeXJ-linux has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: MacBookAir5,2:10.9.4-MacMini3,1:10.9.4-iPhone6,1:7.1.2

XJ-linux is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by the8thark View Post
What's the point of 64 processors when 58 of them sit idle?
My point is can you utilise all of them? of it is just massive over kill "just case you can"?
The point is to put an entire SCM (Supply Chain Management) solution on a single box so hardware assets can be shared. We virtualize many different servers and run them concurrently on the same box. The system uses on average about 75% of the CPUs when I tune it correctly. It hits 90% at month end audit time. By having so many, certain components can dynamically borrow spare CPU cycles from other systems on the same box and run at 200%, 500%, 900% of their entitled capacity if needed. This one will have 4 SAP SC application servers, 2 IBM virtual I/O disk servers, 2 IBM virtual I/O network servers, a SAP central instance, and an Oracle 11g database server all virtualized and plugged into our Nexus core via an aggregated 40Gb/Sec ether-channeled connection.
Then we will build another identical system for fail over purposes.

"Those who don't understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." – Henry Spencer
QUOTE Thanks
cwa107

 
cwa107's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 20, 2006
Location: Middletown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 26,571
cwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond reputecwa107 has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15" MBP, Core i7/2GHz, 8GB RAM, 480GB Crucial M500 SSD

cwa107 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by XJ-linux View Post
The point is to put an entire SCM (Supply Chain Management) solution on a single box so hardware assets can be shared. We virtualize many different servers and run them concurrently on the same box. The system uses on average about 75% of the CPUs when I tune it correctly. It hits 90% at month end audit time. By having so many, certain components can dynamically borrow spare CPU cycles from other systems on the same box and run at 200%, 500%, 900% of their entitled capacity if needed. This one will have 4 SAP SC application servers, 2 IBM virtual I/O disk servers, 2 IBM virtual I/O network servers, a SAP central instance, and an Oracle 11g database server all virtualized and plugged into our Nexus core via an aggregated 40Gb/Sec ether-channeled connection.
Then we will build another identical system for fail over purposes.
In our case, we run Citrix servers with many cores because they host a full desktop environment for hundreds and sometimes thousands of employees. The servers are grouped together in a farm. Sometimes a single server will play host to 50+ users, connecting from thin client terminals or desktop PCs running a Citrix client. As you might imagine, add a few dozen power users onto a server and they can eat up those resources pretty quickly.

Our newest iteration is virtualized, with lots of small virtual servers running on a few very large physical servers. In this way, we can scale up by adding virtual servers to the load, but that comes at a cost to the host server's cores.

Liquid and computers don't mix. It might seem simple, but we see an incredible amount of people post here about spills. Keep drinks and other liquids away from your expensive electronics!
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« Got bored today in Bio AP lect...my masterpiece! | Video Camera Distance »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Finder gives odd search results for created date danitaz OS X - Operating System 1 12-10-2008 02:30 PM
imac 20" core duo CPU upgrade? grillbiller Other Hardware and Peripherals 0 10-16-2007 04:35 PM
Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo? kuklachica Switcher Hangout 17 07-17-2007 03:17 PM
Big Difference between Core Duo and Core 2 Duo Performance? StevenH Apple Notebooks 6 02-11-2007 05:36 PM
Core Solo or Duo Pierre Apple Notebooks 5 04-21-2006 11:47 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?