Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TechReport] Intel gives peek into Nehalem bag of tricks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[TechReport] Intel gives peek into Nehalem bag of tricks - Page 5

post #41 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkcloud89 View Post
I see what you're saying, and I know the IPC changes aren't going to be massive from Barcelona to Shanghai, but they are significant. But the thing is, for single threaded performance on a per-clock basis, the current Phenom is not that far behind the C2Q. A 15-20% per-clock performance improvement would comfortably put Phenom on par with C2Q. And for single threads, if it's on par with C2Q, that isn't going to change a whole lot with Nehalem. So effectively it would be a cores/GHz race for performance at this point.
You are making a huge assumption with the 15-20% (was 20-30%) boost in performance. I don't think it is going to happen and I don't think you should make an arguement using a companies own publicity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HugeDink View Post
It doesn't matter, because it doesn't change the fact that Companies choose AMD because Intel needs an expensive 120W 2.93ghz processor with a power hungry northbridge to compete with a cheap, 75w 2.3ghz processor from AMD.

Power usage and heat dissipation are HUGE concerns for big companies with big servers.
Companies went with Intel because they had their product available while AMD played around with its TLB bug.
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #42 of 55
interesting - but to be honest I wouldnt put Nehalem in my main desktop

Why? Because I wouldnt have a need for it to be honest. Hell, I don't even need 4 threads at the moment. My server maybe could for folding, hosting, game servers, ect.
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
Nemesis NE-α
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4790k (Devil's Canyon) AsRock Z97 Extreme 4 Visiontek AMD 6990 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 840 XSPC Raystorm Windows 8.1 Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Dell U2311H 1920x1080 IPS Ducky Blue Overclock.net Themed Mechanical Keyb... Corsair Silver 1kw  
CaseMouseAudio
Case Labs TH10 Logitech G502 Logitech 5.1 speakers w/ Onkyo Receiver 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon W3520 i7 4.0ghz EVGA X58 Classified Visiontek 6990 GSkill 6GB DDR3 Pi 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD ; 2x 1TB ; 2x 2TB Samsung BluRay Burner Windows 7 Ultimate 64x 3x Dell U2311H 23" 1080p IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Keyboard SilverStone Strider 1000w Modular Power Supply Lian Li V2000 Plus Logitech G9 Gaming Laser Mouse 
Mouse Pad
Cyba Sniper Tracer (Acrylic Glass) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #43 of 55
Wait, so I am wanting to get a Q6700. Does this mean I should wait for the new things these guys are talking about? I am also going to get a new motherboard as well with it. I don't understand what Nehalem or Shanghai is at all. I am guessing new sockets or cores. Should I go ahead and get my Q6700?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X3220 DFI Lanparty UT X48-T2R HD 4870 G.SKILL (2 x 2GB) DDR2 1066MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
160GB IDE + 160GB IDE/USB Enclosure Samsung SH-S183L DL DVD±RW Windows Vista Ultimate x64 2 x Dell 1704FPV 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech DiNovo Edge Antec TruePower Quattro 1000w Antec P182 Logitech MX Revolution 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X3220 DFI Lanparty UT X48-T2R HD 4870 G.SKILL (2 x 2GB) DDR2 1066MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
160GB IDE + 160GB IDE/USB Enclosure Samsung SH-S183L DL DVD±RW Windows Vista Ultimate x64 2 x Dell 1704FPV 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech DiNovo Edge Antec TruePower Quattro 1000w Antec P182 Logitech MX Revolution 
  hide details  
Reply
post #44 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by HugeDink View Post
Bulldozer isn't coming until 2010 or something.

Shanghai is competing with Nehalem, its basically 45nm Agena but with an improved IPC rate. They should be real close in terms of performance.
can I quote you in 6 months?
R7 1700
(21 items)
 
Phenom II BE
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1700 ASUS Prime b350-a/CSM GTX 970 32GB @2666MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
MyDigitalSSD PBX Western Digital Cavier Green 3TB HDD Corsair H100 Corsair Air Series AF140 Quiet Edition  
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Corsair Air Series AF140 Quiet Edition  Windows 10 x64 Dell u2711 Dell u2711 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell u2711 Shap Aquos 50" HDTV Das Keyboard Mechanical Keyboard - Silent Edition Corsair HX650W 
CaseMouseAudioAudio
Corsair Carbide 300r Razer Death Adder Klipsch promedia 2.1 Sennheiser HD800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II x4 720be Gigabyte ud4p 4870 512mb 4GB (2*2GB) Super talent micron d9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
80GB Intel x25-m + 640GB WD cavier Lite On DVD burner Windows 7 Dell 2005 FPW & Dell e207wfp 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitch Ultra X Corsair TX 750W Lianli PCV-1000II Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
R7 1700
(21 items)
 
Phenom II BE
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1700 ASUS Prime b350-a/CSM GTX 970 32GB @2666MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
MyDigitalSSD PBX Western Digital Cavier Green 3TB HDD Corsair H100 Corsair Air Series AF140 Quiet Edition  
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Corsair Air Series AF140 Quiet Edition  Windows 10 x64 Dell u2711 Dell u2711 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell u2711 Shap Aquos 50" HDTV Das Keyboard Mechanical Keyboard - Silent Edition Corsair HX650W 
CaseMouseAudioAudio
Corsair Carbide 300r Razer Death Adder Klipsch promedia 2.1 Sennheiser HD800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II x4 720be Gigabyte ud4p 4870 512mb 4GB (2*2GB) Super talent micron d9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
80GB Intel x25-m + 640GB WD cavier Lite On DVD burner Windows 7 Dell 2005 FPW & Dell e207wfp 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitch Ultra X Corsair TX 750W Lianli PCV-1000II Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #45 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldovi View Post
You are making a huge assumption with the 15-20% (was 20-30%) boost in performance. I don't think it is going to happen and I don't think you should make an arguement using a companies own publicity.
Again, are you serious pauldovi? You are the one who was trying to prove a point with Intel branded slides. Don't even try to call someone else out on using a company's "publicity"

Quote:
Companies went with Intel because they had their product available while AMD played around with its TLB bug.
Yeah, sure they did, because EVERY company NEEDED to upgrade their server processors in the time between the C2Q launch and the Phenom fix... Especially when they were already sitting on AM2 sockets from their Dual-core Opterons...

Von Strauss
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 5000x2 BE @ 3.2 ASUS M2R-32 MVP Sapphire HD4850 700/1100 2x1gb G.Skill HZs 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250gb WD IDE lol LG DVD-RAM w/ Lightscribe Vista Ultimate 32-bit Sceptre, 1280x1024, 5ms 
PowerCase
Corsair TX 650W Enermax Chakra w/ 250mm Side Panel Fan 
  hide details  
Reply
Von Strauss
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 5000x2 BE @ 3.2 ASUS M2R-32 MVP Sapphire HD4850 700/1100 2x1gb G.Skill HZs 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250gb WD IDE lol LG DVD-RAM w/ Lightscribe Vista Ultimate 32-bit Sceptre, 1280x1024, 5ms 
PowerCase
Corsair TX 650W Enermax Chakra w/ 250mm Side Panel Fan 
  hide details  
Reply
post #46 of 55
Guys, dont even bother arguing with Paul.

Hes a die-hard Intel fan[boy], and probably sleeps with those intel slides every night.

He will never back down, right or wrong he will stand there with "ctrl+v" ready to post another graph or article regardless if it even proves his point.

/on topic:
Nehalem looks like a beast, but none of us know if it will really bring the desktop sector a huge boost in performance. It is virtually a c2q with much better multithreading/socket capabilities, on board memory controller, and "quick connect."

No matter how many synthetic graphs you can cram into a thread, you will not know the performance against a C2Q or Phenom until intel releases nehalem.

Arguing on the internet = fail sauce
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500k Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3 XFX HD5870 16GB G.Skill RipjawsX 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
60GB OCZ Vertex 3 + 2x TB Seagate LG DVD+RW Stock Intel Windows 7 64bit / OSX Mountain Lion 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell ST2210 + 17" IBM Das Ultimate S Antec TruePower 650W Antec P183 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech MX Revolution X-Trac Ripper Objective 2 + ODAC Combo Sennheiser HD650 + Klipsch 2.1 Promedia 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500k Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3 XFX HD5870 16GB G.Skill RipjawsX 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
60GB OCZ Vertex 3 + 2x TB Seagate LG DVD+RW Stock Intel Windows 7 64bit / OSX Mountain Lion 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell ST2210 + 17" IBM Das Ultimate S Antec TruePower 650W Antec P183 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech MX Revolution X-Trac Ripper Objective 2 + ODAC Combo Sennheiser HD650 + Klipsch 2.1 Promedia 
  hide details  
Reply
post #47 of 55
The integrated memory controller was awesome for AMD once they brought it out. It'll probably be awesome now, too.

I do doubt that people on Penryn quads have any reason for upgrading, but those on Conroes or us on 90nm dinosaurs might want to have a look.. I'm definitely looking very hard at it
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 #48 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post
The on-die memory controler itself will be a huge boost in real-world IPC. Intel is going to cut out 25-40% of it's memory latency with that alone.
Although memory access latency is going to be much lower in Nehalem than it was in Core 2, this isn't going to somehow arbitrarily increase performance accross the board. What it does do is very specific and that is cut down on the relatively huge amount of latency from having to access main memory through a FSB. The Core2 architecture already sucessfully managed to mask this latency by having relatively large amounts of cache available and aggressively prefetching data using idle memory bandwidth. Assuming that the prefetcher is fairly accurate, the chance of a cache miss will be fairly low as will the number of situations where main memory has to be accessed directly. Remember that an IMC only becomes more advantageous the more often main memory is accessed. So if you want to see where the IMC will benefit Nehalem, you have to look for where the most cache misses are occuring. Obviously it isn't happening all that often in single threaded applications because that's where Core2 really shines. However, when you start multithreading it cuts down on the amount of cache available per thread dramatically. Less cache available means more cache misses and the performance penalty that ensues. This is when the IMC will make the difference for Nehalem, with multithreading.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post
The K8 was essentially a K7 with a handful of minor tweaks, and an on-die memory controler. I distinctly remember the change I went from a 2.2GHz Barton to a 2.2GHz Clawhammer (I bought the 3400+ a few days after it came out in 2004), and the Clawhammer annihilated the barton in every single test I threw at it, with all other components, besides motherboard (and I had a fast K7 motherboard), being identical.
Besides the on-die memory controller, K8 also widened and deepened the pipeline from K7 in addition to the minor tweaks. But, yes there was obviously a pretty huge performance difference in AMD CPUs with the addition of the IMC. However, the circumstances under which AMD integrated it with K8 are different than what Intel faced with Nehalem. Personally, I don't think that AMD's decision to implement an IMC was purely a design decision. I don't doubt that if AMD would have instead developed a smart prefetcher and used a larger amount of cache that they could have achieved similar results. The problem with this, though, is that cache takes up a very significant amount of die space. For a company with a limited production capacity like AMD coming off the sucess of K7, an IMC was a good business decision because it meant a reduced die size, therefore more could fit on a single wafer and increase yields.

I'm not saying that AMD's inclusion of the IMC was purely business, because it obviously turned out to be a good design deicsion as well. I'm trying to point out the differences in the circumstance that Intel chose to include it. Namely, that is that AMD used it as an alternative to putting more cache on the CPU. Obviously this isn't the same circumstance that Intel was in. They already had the cache and prefetching pretty much mastered with Core2 and they could afford the extra die space for it. However, their cache/prefetch model doesn't work nearly as well when you start to increase the number of simultaneous threads and CPU cores, and that's why Intel is going with it now. I don't think it's reasonable to expect the same kind of performance gain with the IMC from Intel that AMD had because it's meant to solve a different problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post
If Nehalem was just another Core 2 revision, I would probably agree that Shanghi may have a fighting chance, but Nehalem is much more than that.
The thing is, though, that as far as single threading goes, Nehalem really is just a Core2 revision. Nothing major has been introduced to address any single threaded performance that has been revealed. By far the biggest changes are QuickPath, IMC, and HyperThreading. All three of those are clearly geared towards multithreading/multicore performance, and really all this is doing is bringing the Core architecture to parity with Barcelona in terms of scaling. The only thing AMD would need to do with Shanghai to compete with this is improve single threaded performance with some balance of IPC tweaking and increased clock speeds with the move to 45nm.
post #49 of 55
Wow.

I love you?
Von Strauss
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 5000x2 BE @ 3.2 ASUS M2R-32 MVP Sapphire HD4850 700/1100 2x1gb G.Skill HZs 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250gb WD IDE lol LG DVD-RAM w/ Lightscribe Vista Ultimate 32-bit Sceptre, 1280x1024, 5ms 
PowerCase
Corsair TX 650W Enermax Chakra w/ 250mm Side Panel Fan 
  hide details  
Reply
Von Strauss
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 5000x2 BE @ 3.2 ASUS M2R-32 MVP Sapphire HD4850 700/1100 2x1gb G.Skill HZs 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250gb WD IDE lol LG DVD-RAM w/ Lightscribe Vista Ultimate 32-bit Sceptre, 1280x1024, 5ms 
PowerCase
Corsair TX 650W Enermax Chakra w/ 250mm Side Panel Fan 
  hide details  
Reply
post #50 of 55
Well i do not really care about this problem all i see is this.

If AMD make a faster CPU ill buy it
If Intel Make a faster CPU ill buy it

very simple im not a AMD or Intel fan boy i get the best in my budget.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 920 @4.2Ghz ASUS Rampage II Extreme iX58 ATI HD 5870 Crossfire Corsair 1866MHz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
80GB Intel M SSD (OS) 1TB Seagate LG GSA-H66NBAL 18X SATA Windows 7 64 RTM Samsung Pebble SM2232BW 22 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razor Antec TruePower Quattro 1000W Custom Modded TJ11 WCUK Logitec G3 
Mouse Pad
Ice Matt 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 920 @4.2Ghz ASUS Rampage II Extreme iX58 ATI HD 5870 Crossfire Corsair 1866MHz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
80GB Intel M SSD (OS) 1TB Seagate LG GSA-H66NBAL 18X SATA Windows 7 64 RTM Samsung Pebble SM2232BW 22 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razor Antec TruePower Quattro 1000W Custom Modded TJ11 WCUK Logitec G3 
Mouse Pad
Ice Matt 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TechReport] Intel gives peek into Nehalem bag of tricks