Nehalem Info from hkepc

[Shintai]

Please explain Core 2's biggest weakness again?

The FSB between 2 dualcores on a quad and the FSB to link memory+I/O.

[AliG]

Then why don't intel and amd dump x86 and use whatever IBM's using? Makes a lot more sense than trying to max out way outdated technology, I mean that's like keeping with netburst instead of moving with conroe (which thankfully intel did not do, but its time for a change imo)

[AliG]

The FSB between 2 dualcores on a quad and the FSB to link memory+I/O.

Since that's taken care of with nehalem's integrated memory controller and csi, then what else can really be done with x86?

[Donnie27]

The FSB between 2 dualcores on a quad and the FSB to link memory+I/O.

He said "Core 2's biggest weakness is still multithreaded performance, in terms of per core scaling it does worse than K10." Had he said Per Socket, I have not asked that Question. Thanks!

Single Socket Core 2 Duo or Quad hasn't really shown any "weakness" per core. Or Did I miss something, again

[Shintai]

Then why don't intel and amd dump x86 and use whatever IBM's using? Makes a lot more sense than trying to max out way outdated technology, I mean that's like keeping with netburst instead of moving with conroe (which thankfully intel did not do, but its time for a change imo)

IBM is using utter crap too to say it mildly. PPC aint the future.

My best bet currently of whats avalible would be IA64, and no its just not because its Intel.

Else something alike it or completely new. Specially an architecture that can scale well in execution units. Now Core 2/Nehalem is 4 issue wide. IA64 as an example can scale to 11 issue wide and maybe more.

The only single issue there is stopping all progress is. Compability!
Same with software, Microsoft is dead scared to lose compability so we have so much extra baggage always.

We basicly just need a fresh start in both CPU arch and software to leap ahead instead of doing very small steps towards the dead end.

[squilliam]

You are forgetting that each core can now run two threads. That's a significant step in and of itself.

I can run two threads at once! One about the inc alien invasion, and one about foil helmets!

[Shintai]

He said "Core 2's biggest weakness is still multithreaded performance, in terms of per core scaling it does worse than K10." Had he said Per Socket, I have not asked that Question. Thanks!

Single Socket Core 2 Duo or Quad hasn't really shown any "weakness" per core. Or Did I miss something, again

Yes you missed something. Core 2 Quad shows weakness in scaling with specially memory intensive workloads and scaling with threads that have to wait on serialized code execution from a master thread. Sure a single Core 2 Duo dont show such limits. Since its the perfection of a dualcore. Far superiour to X2/Phemom. But Core 2 Quad suffers a whole other faith with its heavy weakness of the FSB chain ball on its feets.

[TEDY]

so socket 775 is dying?

[Shintai]

so socket 775 is dying?

Yes, every socket is sooner or later. But it will last atleast 2 years more. With about 1 year left as highend.

[AliG]

IBM is using utter crap too to say it mildly. PPC aint the future.

My best bet currently of whats avalible would be IA64, and no its just not because its Intel.

Else something alike it or completely new. Specially an architecture that can scale well in execution units. Now Core 2/Nehalem is 4 issue wide. IA64 as an example can scale to 11 issue wide and maybe more.

The only single issue there is stopping all progress is. Compability!
Same with software, Microsoft is dead scared to lose compability so we have so much extra baggage always.

We basicly just need a fresh start in both CPU arch and software to leap ahead instead of doing very small steps towards the dead end.

I agree that seems like the most logical route, that way no one really loses, though it will cost a lot of money, then again no matter how we look at it it will cost a lot of money, better now then later, though I have a feeling the first batch of cpu designs may suck until the engineers and coders start understanding the architecture better

[Donnie27]

Yes you missed something. Core 2 Quad shows weakness in scaling with specially memory intensive workloads and scaling with threads that have to wait on serialized code execution from a master thread. Sure a single Core 2 Duo dont show such limits. Since its the perfection of a dualcore. Far superiour to X2/Phemom. But Core 2 Quad suffers a whole other faith with its heavy weakness of the FSB chain ball on its feets.

I might have -ed it but even Core 2 Duo is not perfection since it isn't 100% faster moving from 1 thread to 2. So why would anyone expect Quad to do the same? But anyway, thanks for the info

[Shintai]

I might have -ed it but even Core 2 Duo is not perfection since it isn't 100% faster moving from 1 thread to 2. So why would anyone expect Quad to do the same? But anyway, thanks for the info

Oh yes Core 2 Duo is perfection. I just think you forget how much code is serial.

[Shintai]

and tri channel mem is confusing...
the board has 4 slots... so... hows it supposed to work?

I found what you are looking for I guess.

[Zytek_Fan]

Ehh, I wonder if boards are going to get more cluttered...

[mstp2009]

Then why don't intel and amd dump x86 and use whatever IBM's using? Makes a lot more sense than trying to max out way outdated technology, I mean that's like keeping with netburst instead of moving with conroe (which thankfully intel did not do, but its time for a change imo)

Yeah, right.

You know how many years (decades?) it would take to recode SW to run on another architecture? OSes in particular?

You can't just dump the code into a different compiler and expect it to work.

[mstp2009]

Since that's taken care of with nehalem's integrated memory controller and csi, then what else can really be done with x86?

Plenty.

All this discussion of the death of x86 came up 10 years ago in the CISC vs. RISC CPU wars. Look who is still king of the hill and who runs in niches now.

[mstp2009]

I agree that seems like the most logical route, that way no one really loses, though it will cost a lot of money, then again no matter how we look at it it will cost a lot of money, better now then later, though I have a feeling the first batch of cpu designs may suck until the engineers and coders start understanding the architecture better

Look how long Intel has been developing Itanium (the "successor" to x86). 10 years (and not by themselves either, HP helped for a very long time).

And that architecture still isn't ready for prime-time.

[Blauhung]

Look how long Intel has been developing Itanium (the "successor" to x86). 10 years (and not by themselves either, HP helped for a very long time).

And that architecture still isn't ready for prime-time.

i wouldn't really call it so much the successor to x86. it was more or less engineered for very specific workloads. But personally i don't know all that much about this topic so I'll fade into the background and continue to get wood thinking about DP Nehalem platforms with 2 independent 3 channel non-buffered ddr3 controllers worth of bandwidth.

[Hornet331]

I found what you are looking for I guess.

hmm so still atx form factor, good thing.

[Zytek_Fan]

Nehalem is the biggest change in Intel microarchitecture since Pentium MMX (supposedly) so it will bring a lot to the table

[RPGWiZaRD]

Nehalem is the biggest change in Intel microarchitecture since Pentium MMX (supposedly) so it will bring a lot to the table

While it's nice and all with new awesome expectations/promises among new products which this news is FULL of it also sucks a bit for my wallet as I have intended to hold onto Penryn for a while as Nehalem will prolly require a full upgrade for me, and this architecture sounds like it could have a serious lead over Core 2 Duo so it could be difficult holding onto C2D a long time.

Nehalem = Intel strenghtening the remaining weak points in Core 2 Duo.

[Helmore]

This will probably be my next CPU, I need a complete system overhaul anyway as I'm still running a S939 system and it's starting to show it's limitations.

[_g0]

It says 45nm, but we all now that Penryn is 45nm and Nahelem will be 32nm. If they got that wrong, no telling what else is inaccurate here.

I'm still trying to decide between a q9450 or waiting for Nahelem. I think the wise thing is to wait, as I doubt I will really need a quad before then.

[Zytek_Fan]

While it's nice and all with new awesome expectations/promises among new products which this news is FULL of it also sucks a bit for my wallet as I have intended to hold onto Penryn for a while as Nehalem will prolly require a full upgrade for me, and this architecture sounds like it could have a serious lead over Core 2 Duo so it could be difficult holding onto C2D a long time.

Nehalem = Intel strenghtening the remaining weak points in Core 2 Duo.

Well, you have to consider how long LGA775 has been alive. Yeah socket changes suck because you have to get all new stuff, but the change of the socket this time is necessary due the IMC and other new things.

I should be really pissed because I'm getting a new rig in March, but I'm not because I'm spending wisely and am buying as much as I can that can carry over to a Nehalem machine

[Shintai]

Nehalem = Intel strenghtening the remaining weak points in Core 2 Duo.

Hmm yes and no..thats only half of it. The other half is more SoC design with PCie+IMC and also IGP on the lowend version.

Its just a matter of time before everything is on a CPU and we have to upgrade it all each time.