Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Questions about Nehalem and Next Gen.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Questions about Nehalem and Next Gen.

post #1 of 4
Thread Starter 
I was trying to read up on the new Nehalem Intel has to offer, and they were saying that it was 4 core, with 8 threads. How does that work? Is each core divided up into 2, or have the capability of it?

Also, they are mentioning adding a GPU inside the cpu as well. How will that effect Graphic Cards?

Also... they mention of getting rid of the FSB and adding QuickPath. How does that work? Does it separate each ram and assign it a core? This is probably way over my head, but id like a general understanding of it.

With all of these changes, it seems to be a huge breakthrough with their next generation chipset. The Sandy Bridge just seems like its just gonna be slightly faster. So would it be a good time to build a top end machine when Nehalem comes out considering its safe to say the next few years are just making that processor faster instead of new features?

How can AMD compete with this?


Or im i just talking out of my ass not knowing anything about this?
Zev's Comp
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz GIGABYTE GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 LGA 1155 Intel Z68 HDM... GeForce GTX 750 Ti G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DrivePower
1TB HDD 64GB SSD (Used for SRT) 500 GB. Antec BP550 Plus 550W Continuous Power ATX12V V... 
Case
COOLER MASTER ELITE 335 RC-335-KKN1-GP Black S... 
  hide details  
Reply
Zev's Comp
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz GIGABYTE GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 LGA 1155 Intel Z68 HDM... GeForce GTX 750 Ti G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DrivePower
1TB HDD 64GB SSD (Used for SRT) 500 GB. Antec BP550 Plus 550W Continuous Power ATX12V V... 
Case
COOLER MASTER ELITE 335 RC-335-KKN1-GP Black S... 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 4
When will Nehalem come out?
post #3 of 4
4 cores, 8 threads - this just means that it can run 2 threads on each core, it's one tactic chip makers use to make sure the logic in the chip is getting fully utilized. To Windows this appears as 8 'cores' and it treats them that way, but it's obviously not as fast as 8 independent cores. It's basically the same thing as Hyper-Threading except it's not on a P4 any more.

GPU - this is just an extension of moving the memory controller onto the CPU. It's just an integrated graphics chip, and it's been moved from the north bridge to the CPU. It's not going to matter to power users for a couple of generations, I think.

Removal of the FSB - QPI has nothing to do with the memory. The current Intel system architecture involves a front side bus between the north bridge and the memory. Let's say you take the memory controller from the north bridge, and then you move that onto the CPU instead. The CPU no longer has to go through the FSB to access memory, improving latency. They then replace the front side bus with the QPI interconnect, which is faster and wider. The biggest difference comes for dual-socket and multi-socket workstations and servers, in which a point-to-point interconnect lets each CPU have its own local memory and connect to all other CPUs via the interconnect, as well as access their local memory as well (non-uniform memory access). This is not relevant for single-socket desktop, though. What matters is that memory is no longer bottlenecked.

If you read up on how Athlon 64 and/or Phenom works, you'll get the basic idea because we've been dealing with this for five years now. Basically take Hyper-Threading from the P4, toss it onto a Core 2, take that Core 2 processor core and place 4 of them on the same die, then take a leaf from AMD's book and mate those cores with a high-speed high-bandwidth point-to-point interconnect and a low-latency integrated memory controller. It's a very conservative design and probably won't disappoint seeing as there isn't anything risky here.

How can AMD compete with this? Well.. The integrated memory controller and point-to-point interconnect is something they have had since 2003. They have launched their own 'Fusion' project to integrate the GPU which seems to be more ambitious and obviously includes the more capable Radeon GPU as opposed to Intel's IGP. They have Shanghai coming up which is Barcelona on 45nm, and Bulldozer which is a new architecture for late 09/early 2010.

Links for your reading pleasure:

http://www.nehalemnews.com/
http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cf...WT040208182719
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paed...ut-nehalem.ars
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=3264&p=2
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=3326

Mister, the first Nehalems are due out on the new LGA1366 platform the fourth quarter this year. They'll be hitting the Q9450, Q9550 and QX9xxx price brackets first. The LGA1160 platform will follow later in 2009.
Edited by bowman - 6/16/08 at 6:21pm
Small box
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 7700K ASUS Z270F Strix ASUS 1080 Ti FE Corsair Vengeance 16 GB 3200 MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 960 Evo Corsair H115i Windows 10 ASUS PG279Q 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Unicomp Corsair CX850 Fractal Design Define C Logitech G PRO 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries QCK XXL 
  hide details  
Reply
Small box
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 7700K ASUS Z270F Strix ASUS 1080 Ti FE Corsair Vengeance 16 GB 3200 MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 960 Evo Corsair H115i Windows 10 ASUS PG279Q 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Unicomp Corsair CX850 Fractal Design Define C Logitech G PRO 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries QCK XXL 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 4
Thread Starter 
Freeking pissed off my last post messed up and didnt post

Basicaly what i said, is ... AMD seems to focus more on a powerfull CPU and GPU in 1 chip. Is that a better approach for gaming machines considering most games are using only Duel Core, and just starting to use Quad Core.

Having 3 threads on a single core, and an extra boost for the graphics card with the GPU work out well? Would it only be better for games then? Would it be more efficient then having another CPU core for games? Would this be hard to implement into current or future games?

Or, is having more CPU's a better solution. Intel seems to have gotten rid of the issue dealing with bandwith between ram and CPU. What would the next bottle neck be?

Would adding more cores be better then adding more power per core be a better solution?

If that is the case AMD might have an edge. They seem to be a few months behind right now.
Zev's Comp
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz GIGABYTE GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 LGA 1155 Intel Z68 HDM... GeForce GTX 750 Ti G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DrivePower
1TB HDD 64GB SSD (Used for SRT) 500 GB. Antec BP550 Plus 550W Continuous Power ATX12V V... 
Case
COOLER MASTER ELITE 335 RC-335-KKN1-GP Black S... 
  hide details  
Reply
Zev's Comp
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz GIGABYTE GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 LGA 1155 Intel Z68 HDM... GeForce GTX 750 Ti G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DrivePower
1TB HDD 64GB SSD (Used for SRT) 500 GB. Antec BP550 Plus 550W Continuous Power ATX12V V... 
Case
COOLER MASTER ELITE 335 RC-335-KKN1-GP Black S... 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Questions about Nehalem and Next Gen.