Both Intel and AMD are predicting 80 to 120 cores being the max for the x86 architecture. But this is the way it's going to be for a while and eventually we'll hit a core barrier, just as the MHz barrier popped up.

They have been resisting it for years as anyone who has run multiprocessor systems over the years will attest to.

I don't think the software industry has really warmed-up to the multi-core paradigm just yet. And then the cycle starts again in 18 months when 12 or 16 core chips start shipping. Once a new system is released, it should be a minimal effort to test and tweak the software for the new system and quickly release an update, thus making their customers only wait a week or two from when the systems first ship as opposed to several weeks/months while much of an application is re-written to accommodate 8 cores since the last version was hard-coded to handle 4. Programmers should make the effort to accommodate upcoming multi-core designs into their software development cycle. Too bad Apple doesn't make pre-release hardware available via higher-level ADC programs, only a select few get the priviledge. Engineering samples started shipping several months ago (early september, IIRC). In other words, it's no secret that this hardware is coming, we've known about quad-core clovertown CPUs for nearly a year. There's no reason software isn't being planned for the upcoming CPU architectures and newer versions being developed to handle such. What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!īeing a developer with a fair bit of graphics programming and multithreaded development experience, I would say the solution is somewhere in-between. Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?

Cecak tokek