Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [ExtremeTech] Intel claims three-year advantage on 10nm, wants to redefine process nodes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[ExtremeTech] Intel claims three-year advantage on 10nm, wants to redefine process nodes - Page 4

post #31 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by b0oMeR View Post

X86 is very different than 10nm SOC processors. SOC processors run on a more confined environment easier to produce for.

The reduction of die size is important because the transistors are denser allowing you to pack a lot more transistors in a smaller die. What this means is it'll be easier for your hardware to cool as the dies are more concentrated and the electricity has less overall resistance (less surface area for it to travel) therefore reducing its power draw that much so. Or they could pack the more transistors and it'll use the same amount of power, both are chips they'll develop.

Xeon chips are important here. Older xeon chips are almost worthless to companies because of the amount of heat they can generate in 24/7 operation the redundancies involved with that and also the electricity draw at 100% uptime. They make money on the margins and one of it includes the cost per watt being paid in a data center environment lets say.

Yes the vast majority of people will only notice an incremental IPC update but compare the 2017/2018 CPU's to 2015 CPU's there is a huge performance gap. Don't just compare the latest 10nm with the latest 14nm. At this point of silicon reduction there is only so much you can reduce.

You are wrong. The denser the die becomes the harder it becomes to cool as heat is concentrated in a very small area and the area of transfer is small and the smaller the area becomes the smaller the area that heat spreaders make contact thus further reducing cooling, which is why overclocking becomes harder and harder on smaller nodes.

 

There might come a time when we can't overclock at all as the heat is so dense that chips will be at their limit, we see this with the current Intel line of CPU's where we are lucky if we get a few hundred MHz out of the chips.

 

Companies don't just care about heat output, they care about performance per Watt. If they can get a 240W chip that can achieve 200GFlops they will take it over a 65W chip that can only achieve 50GFlops, despite the latter chip putting out far less heat (TDP is not indicative of power consumption).

The girlfriend.
(15 items)
 
The Mistress
(13 items)
 
Media Server
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX8320 @ 4.5 Crosshair V (Third One) 290 Tri-X OC 16GB HyperX 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Sandisk SSD Plus 240GB Toshiba 3TB Hitachi 2TB Swiftech H220-X 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 8.1/Mint Viewsonic VX2457-mhd Fuhlen L411 Slim Super Flower Golden King 650W 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Enthoo Pro G400 Super Flower 
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
FX8320 @ 4.5 Crosshair V (Third One) 290 Tri-X OC 16GB HyperX 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Sandisk SSD Plus 240GB Toshiba 3TB Hitachi 2TB Swiftech H220-X 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 8.1/Mint Viewsonic VX2457-mhd Fuhlen L411 Slim Super Flower Golden King 650W 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Enthoo Pro G400 Super Flower 
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 #32 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liranan View Post

You are wrong. The denser the die becomes the harder it becomes to cool as heat is concentrated in a very small area and the area of transfer is small and the smaller the area becomes the smaller the area that heat spreaders make contact thus further reducing cooling, which is why overclocking becomes harder and harder on smaller nodes.

There might come a time when we can't overclock at all as the heat is so dense that chips will be at their limit, we see this with the current Intel line of CPU's where we are lucky if we get a few hundred MHz out of the chips.

Companies don't just care about heat output, they care about performance per Watt. If they can get a 240W chip that can achieve 200GFlops they will take it over a 65W chip that can only achieve 50GFlops, despite the latter chip putting out far less heat (TDP is not indicative of power consumption).

I was refering to it being easier to produce a SoC processor vs a x86 processor.

SoC processors at any stage of development usually are clocked much lower, produce significantly less heat but are usually meant for ASIC type workloads or mobile processors.
post #33 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by b0oMeR View Post

I was refering to it being easier to produce a SoC processor vs a x86 processor.

SoC processors at any stage of development usually are clocked much lower, produce significantly less heat but are usually meant for ASIC type workloads or mobile processors.

I don't really see how you think producing those chips is easier. They have a much stricter tolerance for heat and power usage than say a 7700k. Also these chips are much smaller ex: Apple's A9 is 96mm^2 from Samsung (104.5mm^2 for the TSMC version). They have to fit a pretty damn good amount of power in these chips all while keeping the power usage, heat production, and chip size very small. There is a reason phones cost upwards of 600-700 bucks.
Big Beauty
(14 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 2600k Asus P8P67 Pro XFX R9 290x XFX R9 290x 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro Custom Water Loop. 1 x 360mm and 1 x 240mm. Bot... Windows 7 Pro x64 Overlord 1440p 120hz 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Blackwidow Ultimate BF3 Edition Cooler Master 1000w HAF 932 Razer Naga 
Mouse PadAudio
Steelseries QcK Gaming Mouse Pad Steelseries Siberia V2 Headset 
  hide details  
Reply
Big Beauty
(14 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 2600k Asus P8P67 Pro XFX R9 290x XFX R9 290x 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 Pro Custom Water Loop. 1 x 360mm and 1 x 240mm. Bot... Windows 7 Pro x64 Overlord 1440p 120hz 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Blackwidow Ultimate BF3 Edition Cooler Master 1000w HAF 932 Razer Naga 
Mouse PadAudio
Steelseries QcK Gaming Mouse Pad Steelseries Siberia V2 Headset 
  hide details  
Reply
post #34 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ascii Aficionado View Post

With the same IPC

j/k


maybe...

lol xD
    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-7820HK Kaby Lake @ 4.2Ghz GTX 1070 @ 2Ghz boost @ 9008Mhz Vram 16GB 2x8 DDR4 2133 Samsung 960 EVO 500GB NVMe 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
5TB Seagate 2.5" 5400RPM Grizzly Conductonaut on GPU and CPU Win 8.1 WSUS ;) 17.3" 1080p IPS oc'd 100hz GSYNC 
MouseAudioAudio
Naga 2014 + G303 HE-400i w/ 1540 Alcantara earpads Schiit Fulla 1 AMP/DAC over Type C 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-7820HK Kaby Lake @ 4.2Ghz GTX 1070 @ 2Ghz boost @ 9008Mhz Vram 16GB 2x8 DDR4 2133 Samsung 960 EVO 500GB NVMe 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
5TB Seagate 2.5" 5400RPM Grizzly Conductonaut on GPU and CPU Win 8.1 WSUS ;) 17.3" 1080p IPS oc'd 100hz GSYNC 
MouseAudioAudio
Naga 2014 + G303 HE-400i w/ 1540 Alcantara earpads Schiit Fulla 1 AMP/DAC over Type C 
  hide details  
Reply
post #35 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfej View Post

I don't really see how you think producing those chips is easier. They have a much stricter tolerance for heat and power usage than say a 7700k. Also these chips are much smaller ex: Apple's A9 is 96mm^2 from Samsung (104.5mm^2 for the TSMC version). They have to fit a pretty damn good amount of power in these chips all while keeping the power usage, heat production, and chip size very small. There is a reason phones cost upwards of 600-700 bucks.

not quite right, the reason the phones cost that much is because Apples sat a standard in selling the phones at a higher price than anyone just because their phones was the "cutting edge tech"
My System
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T GA-890FXA-UD5 Sapphire Nitro 390 Mushkin  
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
Mushkin  Patriot Memory  Patriot Memory  Intel SSD VMs 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Caviar black Kingston Fury x2 Raid 0 Optiar DVD-CD combo Thermalright Ultra-120 xtreme 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 pro x64 Acer H243H 24" Razer Lycosa Corsair TX850 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Coolermaster HAF 932 Razer Lachesis Razer Vespula 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T GA-890FXA-UD5 Sapphire Nitro 390 Mushkin  
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
Mushkin  Patriot Memory  Patriot Memory  Intel SSD VMs 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Caviar black Kingston Fury x2 Raid 0 Optiar DVD-CD combo Thermalright Ultra-120 xtreme 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 pro x64 Acer H243H 24" Razer Lycosa Corsair TX850 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Coolermaster HAF 932 Razer Lachesis Razer Vespula 
  hide details  
Reply
post #36 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfej View Post

I don't really see how you think producing those chips is easier. They have a much stricter tolerance for heat and power usage than say a 7700k. Also these chips are much smaller ex: Apple's A9 is 96mm^2 from Samsung (104.5mm^2 for the TSMC version). They have to fit a pretty damn good amount of power in these chips all while keeping the power usage, heat production, and chip size very small. There is a reason phones cost upwards of 600-700 bucks.

ARM chips are *vastly* more simple in design, construction, and execution than x86 chips. After all, this is the very reason they consume so little power and ended up the preferred proc for mobile and IoT. They aren't efficient, and thus make most phones expensive, because they are tremendously difficult to engineer. Rather, the obverse is true; they are efficient, and cheap, compared to x86, because they are simpler. <$100 Android phones anyone?

Not to make ARM out to sound like an abacus, but it pales in comparison to x86 in scale, complexity, and scope.
Up in the Air
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 Asus M5a99fx Pro r2.0 PowerColor 7850 2GBD5-2DHE/OC + Arctic Accelero S1 Kingston HyperX 8GB 1866MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM Asus 24x DVD-RW Zalman CNPS14X 
OSOSMonitorPower
Ubuntu 14.04 x64 Windows 8.1 x64 HP w2207 Seasonic SS-660XP2 ATX 
CaseOther
Corsair 540 Air Crucial MX100 256GB 
  hide details  
Reply
Up in the Air
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 Asus M5a99fx Pro r2.0 PowerColor 7850 2GBD5-2DHE/OC + Arctic Accelero S1 Kingston HyperX 8GB 1866MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM WD Blue 1 TB 7200 RPM Asus 24x DVD-RW Zalman CNPS14X 
OSOSMonitorPower
Ubuntu 14.04 x64 Windows 8.1 x64 HP w2207 Seasonic SS-660XP2 ATX 
CaseOther
Corsair 540 Air Crucial MX100 256GB 
  hide details  
Reply
post #37 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by btupsx View Post

ARM chips are *vastly* more simple in design, construction, and execution than x86 chips. After all, this is the very reason they consume so little power and ended up the preferred proc for mobile and IoT. They aren't efficient, and thus make most phones expensive, because they are tremendously difficult to engineer. Rather, the obverse is true; they are efficient, and cheap, compared to x86, because they are simpler. <$100 Android phones anyone?

Not to make ARM out to sound like an abacus, but it pales in comparison to x86 in scale, complexity, and scope.

Exactly. It is mainly for ASIC type applications in the commercial world and in the mobile world android/ios are rather very "restrictive" systems compared to linux and windows/x86.

If you really looked at the cost of a phone, the processor is a rather cheap component. A typical snapdragon 820 costs about $50 from Qcom. Everything else costs a lot too especially those insane resolution screens and pixel density.
post #38 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by btupsx View Post

ARM chips are *vastly* more simple in design, construction, and execution than x86 chips. After all, this is the very reason they consume so little power and ended up the preferred proc for mobile and IoT. They aren't efficient, and thus make most phones expensive, because they are tremendously difficult to engineer. Rather, the obverse is true; they are efficient, and cheap, compared to x86, because they are simpler. <$100 Android phones anyone?

Not to make ARM out to sound like an abacus, but it pales in comparison to x86 in scale, complexity, and scope.

This is true. x86 has a lot of legacy code built into the CPU, while ARM is very lean. It's that "leanness" that allows ARM to be so power efficient.

That beings said, x86 is a far more robust platform that can do a lot more code-wise. Of course, if you code properly for ARM-based chips, ARM is extremely good as well... you just have to hold ARM's hand a little bit more.
Everest - Intel
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7 4790k Gigabyte Z97X Gaming 7 Nvidia GTX 1070 Founder's Edition Nvidia GTX 1070 Founder's Edition 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
16GB (2x8) Patriot Viper 1866Mhz  Seagate 3TB, WD 500GB HDD, WD 640GB HD Samsung 850 EVO 512GB Samsung DVD-Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Corsair H110 w/ Dual Aerocool DS 140mm fans Windows 10 Pro Dell S2716DG Dell U2412m IPS display 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G810 Orion Spectrum Evga SuperNOVA 750 G2 NZXT Phantom 530 Black Logitech G502 Proteus Core 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Corsair MM400 Creative Sound Blaster E5 DAC/AMP Sennheiser HD 598 Headphones HyperX Cloud Headset 
  hide details  
Reply
Everest - Intel
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7 4790k Gigabyte Z97X Gaming 7 Nvidia GTX 1070 Founder's Edition Nvidia GTX 1070 Founder's Edition 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
16GB (2x8) Patriot Viper 1866Mhz  Seagate 3TB, WD 500GB HDD, WD 640GB HD Samsung 850 EVO 512GB Samsung DVD-Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Corsair H110 w/ Dual Aerocool DS 140mm fans Windows 10 Pro Dell S2716DG Dell U2412m IPS display 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G810 Orion Spectrum Evga SuperNOVA 750 G2 NZXT Phantom 530 Black Logitech G502 Proteus Core 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Corsair MM400 Creative Sound Blaster E5 DAC/AMP Sennheiser HD 598 Headphones HyperX Cloud Headset 
  hide details  
Reply
post #39 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Pistol View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by btupsx View Post

ARM chips are *vastly* more simple in design, construction, and execution than x86 chips. After all, this is the very reason they consume so little power and ended up the preferred proc for mobile and IoT. They aren't efficient, and thus make most phones expensive, because they are tremendously difficult to engineer. Rather, the obverse is true; they are efficient, and cheap, compared to x86, because they are simpler. <$100 Android phones anyone?

Not to make ARM out to sound like an abacus, but it pales in comparison to x86 in scale, complexity, and scope.

This is true. x86 has a lot of legacy code built into the CPU, while ARM is very lean. It's that "leanness" that allows ARM to be so power efficient.

That beings said, x86 is a far more robust platform that can do a lot more code-wise. Of course, if you code properly for ARM-based chips, ARM is extremely good as well... you just have to hold ARM's hand a little bit more.

Lean or not the best ARM cores can't match x86 when it comes to IPC (and thus IPS), if they could octa core ARM chips would be amazingly epic simply due to power consumption and ARM would swiftly become the dominant architecture in the server world and then consumer PC's. Alas, ARM are is outclassed by lower clocked x86 chips (cache and many other factors play a role).

 

Nobody in their right mind would choose an octa core ARM chip, regardless of performance, over a Xeon or Opteron (especially Naples). ARM might dominate in low power storage servers (and NAS) but it will never become the defacto chip for servers that do more than just deal with data.

The girlfriend.
(15 items)
 
The Mistress
(13 items)
 
Media Server
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX8320 @ 4.5 Crosshair V (Third One) 290 Tri-X OC 16GB HyperX 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Sandisk SSD Plus 240GB Toshiba 3TB Hitachi 2TB Swiftech H220-X 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 8.1/Mint Viewsonic VX2457-mhd Fuhlen L411 Slim Super Flower Golden King 650W 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Enthoo Pro G400 Super Flower 
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
FX8320 @ 4.5 Crosshair V (Third One) 290 Tri-X OC 16GB HyperX 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Sandisk SSD Plus 240GB Toshiba 3TB Hitachi 2TB Swiftech H220-X 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 8.1/Mint Viewsonic VX2457-mhd Fuhlen L411 Slim Super Flower Golden King 650W 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Enthoo Pro G400 Super Flower 
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 #40 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liranan View Post

Lean or not the best ARM cores can't match x86 when it comes to IPC (and thus IPS), if they could octa core ARM chips would be amazingly epic simply due to power consumption and ARM would swiftly become the dominant architecture in the server world and then consumer PC's. Alas, ARM are is outclassed by lower clocked x86 chips (cache and many other factors play a role).

Nobody in their right mind would choose an octa core ARM chip, regardless of performance, over a Xeon or Opteron (especially Naples). ARM might dominate in low power storage servers (and NAS) but it will never become the defacto chip for servers that do more than just deal with data.

There are 48 core and soon 54 core ARM chips (14nm FinFET) for the server market by Cavium under the ThunderX name. So, slowly, they might dominate the lower power storage servers. Imagine HP Moonshot cartridges with 54 core ARM chips...Rack density compute with lower power would be insane.

https://www.cavium.com/newsevents-GIGABYTE-announces-384-Core-2U-server-powered-by-Cavium-ThunderX-ARMv8-processors.html

https://www.cavium.com/ThunderX2_ARM_Processors.html
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [ExtremeTech] Intel claims three-year advantage on 10nm, wants to redefine process nodes