Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [ExtremeTech]An end to scaling: Intel’s next-generation chips will sacrifice speed to reduce power
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[ExtremeTech]An end to scaling: Intel’s next-generation chips will sacrifice speed to reduce power - Page 13

post #121 of 161
Maybe this is why Intel is calling everything a lake from here on out, it's all going to be Skylake in one form or another. Kaby Lake, Cannonlake, Icelake...
X9969X
(7 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6950X @ 4.5GHz (Silicon Lottery 4.4 delid) Asus Rampage V Extreme  Nvidia Titan X Pascal Corsair Dominator Platinum 16GB DDR4 @ 3200MHz 
Hard DrivePowerCase
Intel 750 1.2TB SSD Corsair AX1200i Corsair Obsidian Series 900D 
  hide details  
Reply
X9969X
(7 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6950X @ 4.5GHz (Silicon Lottery 4.4 delid) Asus Rampage V Extreme  Nvidia Titan X Pascal Corsair Dominator Platinum 16GB DDR4 @ 3200MHz 
Hard DrivePowerCase
Intel 750 1.2TB SSD Corsair AX1200i Corsair Obsidian Series 900D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #122 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liranan View Post

Then demand developers scale their software to many cores rather than a few. Regardless of what you like multi core processing has been the future for years but developers aren't making use of them. It is hard but it's inevitable.
Developers ARE making use of them, but you're still limited by single thread performance even if you're using 4 cores, because some computations depend on each other and must be made sequentially, Second, it's usually easier to decrease the amount of computation needed than to spread the computation over more cores/threads, this comes with the added benefit of not alienating the large chunk of potential customers still using 2 core processors(like half of them, according to the steam hardware survey). Third, CPU optimization doesn't really translate to sales driving eye candy, so it's usually left to low hanging fruit or the people developing game engines.

Then there's avoiding refactoring, basically, you need to encourage devs to consider multicore scaling from the outset of every piece of code they write, and I don't think there will be enough motivation for that until a few years after Intel stops selling 2 core processors.
1
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 930 @ 3.6 Gigabyte x58a ud3r Gigabyte GV-R6870C-1GD Mushkin Redline 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorKeyboard
2x 1TB Spinpoint samsung dvd burner Samsung p2370 + Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 930SB WASD keyboards v1 semi custom w/ cherry browns 
PowerCaseMouse
Antec CP-850 Antec P183 CM Storm Spawn 
  hide details  
Reply
1
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 930 @ 3.6 Gigabyte x58a ud3r Gigabyte GV-R6870C-1GD Mushkin Redline 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorKeyboard
2x 1TB Spinpoint samsung dvd burner Samsung p2370 + Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 930SB WASD keyboards v1 semi custom w/ cherry browns 
PowerCaseMouse
Antec CP-850 Antec P183 CM Storm Spawn 
  hide details  
Reply
post #123 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuhfhrh View Post

Maybe this is why Intel is calling everything a lake from here on out, it's all going to be Skylake in one form or another. Kaby Lake, Cannonlake, Icelake...

Well... throughout history, lakes have been known to sacrifice speed to reduce power biggrin.gif.
 
QUEEN OF BLADES
(15 items)
 
ASUS U6Sg
(15 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 920 REV D0@4.2 HT Asus Rampage II Extreme CFX: ASUS R9 270X DCUII 6GB DDR3 XMP CL6 TRIDENT 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Vertex 2 180 GB+RAID 0 2 * 1 TB SAMSUNG Sony Optiarc Labelflash Thermalright Venoumous X W7 X64 Ultimate RETAIL 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell U2410 IPS Logitech Corsair CMPSU-850TX Antec 1200 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech HAMA Xonar STX / Auzen Forte 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
XEON 5650X @4.45 GHz  Rampage III Formula PCGH CFX: ASUS R9 280X DCUII 16GB G-SKILL CL9@ 1643 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
1x 850 Pro 256 GB + 1xWD 500 GB + 2x3TB WD RED Plextor PX-L89OSA Thermalright VX W10 X64 Ultimate RETAIL 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ACER B203W Razer Deathstalker Corsair CMPSU-750TX Antec 902 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G800S Logitech Gaming  Creative Titanium HD + FiiO E17 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Duo : T8300 Asus U6000Sg Series Notebook NVIDIA 9300 GS 4GB Kingston CL4 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi Ultrastar Asus POS Stock Asus with MX3 W7 x64 Ultimate RETAIL 
MonitorAudio
Asus 12.1 " LED Creative X-Fi EX54 
  hide details  
Reply
 
QUEEN OF BLADES
(15 items)
 
ASUS U6Sg
(15 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 920 REV D0@4.2 HT Asus Rampage II Extreme CFX: ASUS R9 270X DCUII 6GB DDR3 XMP CL6 TRIDENT 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Vertex 2 180 GB+RAID 0 2 * 1 TB SAMSUNG Sony Optiarc Labelflash Thermalright Venoumous X W7 X64 Ultimate RETAIL 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell U2410 IPS Logitech Corsair CMPSU-850TX Antec 1200 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech HAMA Xonar STX / Auzen Forte 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
XEON 5650X @4.45 GHz  Rampage III Formula PCGH CFX: ASUS R9 280X DCUII 16GB G-SKILL CL9@ 1643 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
1x 850 Pro 256 GB + 1xWD 500 GB + 2x3TB WD RED Plextor PX-L89OSA Thermalright VX W10 X64 Ultimate RETAIL 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ACER B203W Razer Deathstalker Corsair CMPSU-750TX Antec 902 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G800S Logitech Gaming  Creative Titanium HD + FiiO E17 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Duo : T8300 Asus U6000Sg Series Notebook NVIDIA 9300 GS 4GB Kingston CL4 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi Ultrastar Asus POS Stock Asus with MX3 W7 x64 Ultimate RETAIL 
MonitorAudio
Asus 12.1 " LED Creative X-Fi EX54 
  hide details  
Reply
post #124 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishmaker View Post

Well... throughout history, lakes have been known to sacrifice speed to reduce power biggrin.gif.

There is lake deep wisdom in this statement. wink.gif

Seriously tho, I couldn't care less about xxx of GHz. If it is (noticeably) faster than previous generation it can clock at 0.1 Hz as far I'm concerned. With silicon EOL just around the corner (funny 10 years ago it was 'only' on the horizon) not much can be squeezed out of the technology anyway.
post #125 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by TranquilTempest View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liranan View Post

Then demand developers scale their software to many cores rather than a few. Regardless of what you like multi core processing has been the future for years but developers aren't making use of them. It is hard but it's inevitable.
Developers ARE making use of them, but you're still limited by single thread performance even if you're using 4 cores, because some computations depend on each other and must be made sequentially, Second, it's usually easier to decrease the amount of computation needed than to spread the computation over more cores/threads, this comes with the added benefit of not alienating the large chunk of potential customers still using 2 core processors(like half of them, according to the steam hardware survey). Third, CPU optimization doesn't really translate to sales driving eye candy, so it's usually left to low hanging fruit or the people developing game engines.

Then there's avoiding refactoring, basically, you need to encourage devs to consider multicore scaling from the outset of every piece of code they write, and I don't think there will be enough motivation for that until a few years after Intel stops selling 2 core processors.

Developers are NOT making full and proper use of multiple cores. A paradigm shift in programming is required but developers and publishers only care about how much they can make in as short a time, which is not helping. That will come to an end as muticore processing has been the future since AMD released the first consumer dual core chip. Software developers expect hardware developers to keep increasing IPC just because they can't be bothered to change their coding.

 

Their mantra is: it's too hard so we're not doing it. The horse shoe is too hard to make, stick to walking. Refining oil is too hard, stick to horse riding. Making proper multi piston engines is too hard, stick to single piston. They all took years to develop but were inevitable. The sooner software developers and coders adapt the better.


As for gaming, we have seen how making proper use of multiple cores can seriously benefit gaming as Just Cause 3 (and another game released lately whose I can't remember) has shown.

The girlfriend.
(15 items)
 
The Mistress
(13 items)
 
Media Server
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A8-6410 Lenovo Lancer 4B2 K16.3 R5 128 Shaders/M230 Hynix 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 840 120 GB SSD Seagate Momentus 1TB 5400rmp Win 8.1 CMN1487 TN LED 14" 1366*768 
KeyboardPowerMouseMouse Pad
Lenovo AccuType 2900mAh/41Wh Elan Trackpad/Logitech M90 Super Flower 
Audio
AMD Avalon(Connexant) 
  hide details  
Reply
The girlfriend.
(15 items)
 
The Mistress
(13 items)
 
Media Server
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A8-6410 Lenovo Lancer 4B2 K16.3 R5 128 Shaders/M230 Hynix 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 840 120 GB SSD Seagate Momentus 1TB 5400rmp Win 8.1 CMN1487 TN LED 14" 1366*768 
KeyboardPowerMouseMouse Pad
Lenovo AccuType 2900mAh/41Wh Elan Trackpad/Logitech M90 Super Flower 
Audio
AMD Avalon(Connexant) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #126 of 161
These days, as always, the main problem is not the Hardware, is the Software !

The software must take an evolution step, just as the Hardware has done. Single Thread processing is an old, and obsolete, trend. But old habits die hard.

As always, the Software is years behind the Hardware. Single to Dual Cores, Dual to Quad Cores, Quad to Six/Eight cores.. etc. The software is never ready to proper use paralelism.

The Hardware has been changed, the Software is still in this process. This is even more relevant regarding games.

"..Developers ARE making use of them, but you're still limited by single thread performance even if you're using 4 cores, because some computations depend on each other and must be made sequentially.."

No they dont, developers are hardly making real use of paralelism. They are years behind.

This is because the current software/frameworks use old processing methods and past architectures/paradigms. Sequencial processing will always exists, but the way your create/use your, somehow outdated framework/platform, is the real problem.

Again, the Hardware have taken a step to the evolution, the Software still not. The investment in Software is lower than in Hardware by the companies, and paralelism is way more complex than just throw some threads in the air....

The Software industry is still adapting to this 'new' hard multithreading era. There´s much more to come, regarding software multi thread performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TranquilTempest View Post

I'm going to have to disagree with the idea that current high end CPUs are"plenty fast enough" for gaming. Maybe for a specific game, but not gaming in general, there are still a ton of strategy and simulation games that are heavily limited by single threaded performance, and that's not going to change any time soon. If CPUs suddenly get twice as fast, games will be made to take advantage of that performance.

Edited by jclafi - 2/11/16 at 8:59am
post #127 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by TranquilTempest View Post

I'm going to have to disagree with the idea that current high end CPUs are"plenty fast enough" for gaming. Maybe for a specific game, but not gaming in general, there are still a ton of strategy and simulation games that are heavily limited by single threaded performance, and that's not going to change any time soon. If CPUs suddenly get twice as fast, games will be made to take advantage of that performance.

It wont matter if only a handful of gamers have that CPU.

I don't get why enthusiasts think that they are the only people who matter. Less than 1% of PC gamers have something ridiculous like 980 Tis in SLI and an overclocked 5960x. Far more people have a rig more like what my computer is. Its foolish to design a game so intensive that only those with 300$+ CPUs can enjoy it.
First Build
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3-4370 ASROCK H97M PR04 380x Nitro Corsair 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Crucial M500 120GB Seagage 320GB Caviar Blue 1TB Windows 8.1 x86-64 
PowerCase
XFX 550W PS07B 
  hide details  
Reply
First Build
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3-4370 ASROCK H97M PR04 380x Nitro Corsair 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Crucial M500 120GB Seagage 320GB Caviar Blue 1TB Windows 8.1 x86-64 
PowerCase
XFX 550W PS07B 
  hide details  
Reply
post #128 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by NuclearPeace View Post

It wont matter if only a handful of gamers have that CPU.

I don't get why enthusiasts think that they are the only people who matter. Less than 1% of PC gamers have something ridiculous like 980 Tis in SLI and an overclocked 5960x. Far more people have a rig more like what my computer is. Its foolish to design a game so intensive that only those with 300$+ CPUs can enjoy it.

sadly that's lost on a lot of people here..

Im gaming just fine on a overclocked AMD steamroller quad @ 4.4ghz (headroom for more but meh ) at 1440p and a firmly mid range Nvidia 760gtx. I won't be upgrading the relatively weak CPU as on idle its a silent machine with sub 34w which is 1. good enough for me and way better than the past and 2. At 1440p and more so 4k modern games rely less on the CPU. Yes a faster CPU will give you 20fps more or 30fps more in the same situation but Im probably like a lot of gamers in that if it runs on a mix of high / ultra @ 1080p / 1440p @ 50 -60fps then thats good enough.

Then there is Vulkan and DX12 which further reduces the burden on the CPU and pretty much every new game engine is going to be using those. You can get by today on a cheap Kaveri / 860k / i3 CPU and spend money on the SSD, GPU and some decent ram instead.
post #129 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by NuclearPeace View Post

It wont matter if only a handful of gamers have that CPU.

I don't get why enthusiasts think that they are the only people who matter. Less than 1% of PC gamers have something ridiculous like 980 Tis in SLI and an overclocked 5960x. Far more people have a rig more like what my computer is. Its foolish to design a game so intensive that only those with 300$+ CPUs can enjoy it.

Enthusiast PC Gamers are 30- 35 Percent of the market and spend almost 125 billion in a year just in 2015 alone so i think we do matter the only people that they make more money from servers +server parts
caseless
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel I5 2500 non k 3.8 all cores 4.2 turbo Asus P8z68 pro GTX 1070 founders CORSAIR Vengeance 16 gigs 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Liteonit LCS-256M6S 2.5 7mm 256GB H 60 29 " 21x9 2k 650 watts 
Case
Yes  
  hide details  
Reply
caseless
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel I5 2500 non k 3.8 all cores 4.2 turbo Asus P8z68 pro GTX 1070 founders CORSAIR Vengeance 16 gigs 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Liteonit LCS-256M6S 2.5 7mm 256GB H 60 29 " 21x9 2k 650 watts 
Case
Yes  
  hide details  
Reply
post #130 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by mypcisugly View Post

Enthusiast PC Gamers are 30- 35 Percent of the market and spend around 95- 125 billion a year in just in 2015 alone so i think we do matter the only people that they make more money from servers +server parts

define enthusiast though ..


in PC terms thats a broad statement.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [ExtremeTech]An end to scaling: Intel’s next-generation chips will sacrifice speed to reduce power