Foo_ (foo@nomail.com) on 12/5/07 wrote:
---------------------------
>DaveC (davecuny@gmail.com) on 12/5/07 wrote:
>---------------------------
>>
>>Okay, now I'm confused. Sun just went crazy telling everyone and their brother
>>that Niagara II needs every bit of 64 threads, and now Niagara III will go back
>>to 32 threads? Is Niagara III just Rock mini?
>
>The article says "Both processors feature 16 cores and Niagara 3 has 32 threads".
>Since Rock cores are supposed to be much fatter than Niagara's, perhaps Niagara
>is being drastically shrunk so as to efficiently target the low-end?
>
>

Niagara 2 has 8 cores , 64 threads and takes 342mm2 on 65nm.
Rock has 16 cores , 32 threads and takes 396mm2 on 65nm.

To me , Rock cores will be simpler than Niagara 2 ones , how can you explain doubling the core count with only a 16% increase in die size ?