POST A COMMENT

14 Comments

Back to Article

  • jediknight - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    What encryption algorithm does the Seagate drive use? And is it firmware-upgradeable? Reply
  • smn198 - Thursday, August 25, 2005 - link

    I'd like moredetails on this. If you've got an OS installed and no key yet, could you then add a key and have it re-encrypt the data or would you need to pull the disk out and do this from another system? Shame Seagate won't ship software. Is there anything free? Reply
  • missleman - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    BONZI BUDDY?!?!?! WTF? I cant beleive intel was stupid enough to install that on their computers. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    Maybe it was a demonstration of malware getting installed on one virtual OS, and then another OS could detect it and remove it? I know Intel has talked about using virtualization for virus-related stuff before, so it's not too much of a stretch. Reply
  • Hacp - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    Also nice to see the Xbox360... I'm not gonna buy one. Reply
  • xsilver - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    is amd moving to ddr2 and then m2 sockets in a 2 stage process?
    if so that's pretty evil -- makes users upgrade twice
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    No, M2 is DDR2 for desktops. S1 is DDR2 for the mobile sectore. F is for the server/workstation market. All are DDR2-only solutions, and there will be no DDR2 support without a socket transition. Reply
  • IamTHEsnake - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    Mitosis looks promising indeed.

    It's technologies like this that intrigue me. This is more of what Intel should focus on, not just the brute computational strength of mhz or pipeline stages.


    I am also looking forward to hearing more about die-stacking and DRAM-on-die.
    Reply
  • Furen - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    Yes, mitosis sounds nice indeed (though I'd expect it to be worthless on tasks like gaming), hopefully the software overhead wont be too bad by the time we start seeing it. Reply
  • phaxmohdem - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    One has to wonder in Re: to Mitosis...

    They say that it is just started in Research and Development, and that we may not see if for 5-10 years..... By then wouldn't all apps be written to take advantage of multithreading? Thus rendering Mitosis a day late and a dollar short?
    Reply
  • Questar - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    The 5-10 year part is speculation of Anand. Intel never said it would take that long. I'll bet two years. It doesn't take 5 years to write a compiler or add a chip feature. Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    The Intel rep that did the demo was the one that provided the 5 - 10 year estimate. This research is in its very early stages, but the promising first results means it will probably get more support.

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • drpepper128 - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    Is it just me or are we missing something here?
    To me it seems that the real power of Mitosis is that companies would not have to worry about writing code that is mult-threaded. Instead they can have single-threaded code and use the compiler to multi-thread it. This is where the real power of multi-core processors could come from. Some day when we have 100 core processors we will need something like a compiler to figure things out for us; otherwise a company's costs would skyrocket. Think somewhere along the lines of graphics cards.
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - link

    I was thinking if they could get Mitosis into the chips (rather than required compiler support) then it would benefit practically *any* application. The only time it wouldn't help performance would be when your CPU was either fully loaded on every core, or perhaps if the multiple threads start using up resources that could be better used on stuff other than speculative execution. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now