Friday, April 21, 2006

AMD and NetLogic doing something interesting

As reported here, AMD and NetLogic will announce a design monday. I guess it will be a NetLogic co-processor for security stuff while Opteron chews network traffic data via 2 HTT links, total 16GB/s of bandwidth.

CISCO, JNPR and FDRY are customers of NetLogic.

9 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

another nail in Intels coffin. Some one at Intel needs to take the bull by the horns and get on the HyperTransport bandwagon like now! otherwise its definitely over for Intel.
these innovations will be the tip of the iceberg for speciallist accellerator CPU's
all driving big business servers, no room for struggling P3 wannabees?

11:04 PM, April 21, 2006  
Anonymous Jeach! said...

There has got to be *some* reason why Intel refuses to use HyperTransport or a similar technology/architecture.

This decision to stay with what they have can't possibly be based simply on the stupidity and incompetance of Intel's management team? Theres no way!

If I'm not mistaking, HT is 'open', thus royalty free.

9:38 AM, April 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree. And yet, I expected this to be a nail in AMD's coffin too.
The future will probably setups with multiple giant FPGAs with one single CPU remaining as a control unit, especially in the supercomputing range, but also in common server business.

9:40 AM, April 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is another interesting news:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/21/drc_fpga_module/

11:07 AM, April 22, 2006  
Blogger Sharikou, Ph. D said...

Only the non coherent Hypertransport for I/O is open. The cache coherent for IPC is not. AMD has just begun to license ccHT to these co-proc makers.

1:13 PM, April 22, 2006  
Anonymous nonworkingrich said...

Thanks for the FPGA link, it supports my expectations. In short terms this means a clear advantage for Opteron, but in the long run it is is clear that less and less CPU bound computing power is required as specialized hardware is becoming cheaper (in fomrs of FPGA modules) und as efficient integrated into the computing system as the CPU itself.
This must result in a drop of classic CPU sales. Time will tell how well different CPU bakers can react to such challanges.

3:03 PM, April 22, 2006  
Blogger DBA said...

mm... I am more optimisstic about this. Not many people are interested in high-performance FPGA. My guess is like 10% of corporate users required this.

I see this as up site to AMD, rather than the down side.

3:28 AM, April 23, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

so the idea is that a general processor is just a framework to farm out specialised work to the FPGA?

i think AMD should quickly either merge or invest in this firm.

4:14 AM, April 23, 2006  
Anonymous nonworkingrich said...

@dba:
Most people are maybe not interested in high-performance FPGA, possibly because they never heard of it. But many people are interested in high performance, no matter where it comes from.
Today FPGA often is of limited use because of bandwidth issues - PCI-X is simply not up to the task to feed such processing monsters. HT should solve this problem as well as problems of CPU<->FPGA communication.
With FPGA on an Opteron board, it should be easy to destroy every SuperPi result an Intel Conroe can deliver - and afterwards you reconfigure the FPGA to make a big ScienceMark washing up ;)

10:53 AM, April 23, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home