Future Intel CPU info, some of it verifies what I thought/hoped they might do!!! 7 replies

Please wait...

>Omen<

Modern Warfare

50 XP

1st January 2005

0 Uploads

7,395 Posts

0 Threads

#1 10 years ago

OK, I just read a very good article featuring info on upcoming Intel CPU architecture by Manny Frishberg called "Invasion of the (micro) Chips" in a local computer tech magazine here in the NW called Computer Source which is headquarted in Microsoft's backyard of Redmond, Wa. It details stuff about AMD's chips and Spider platform too, but nothing most of us don't already know in that regard. Unfortunately I do not have a scanner nor is this issue (which I just got in the mail today) showing on their website so I can only quote you excerpts. At least this way I'm not risking copyright infringement, though it is a free magazine publication anyway. First factoid I wasn't aware of is that Intel's success with die shrinking without the problem of current leakage is due to their using a substance called "hafnium". Intel has replaced the gate dielectrics, previously made from silicon dioxide, with a material based on this metal. The hafnium-based compound is a so-called high-K material, which refers to its dielectric constant, and has a greater ability to store electrical charge than silicon dioxide. OK, some of you super techies may have already known that, but read on, some of what I'm about to say goes into the year 2010, a virtual cyberspace oddity. AMD is being hush about their next gen CPU plans but Intel has let loose and spilled the beans. Turns out the 45nm Penryns are just the "Tick" of what they call "Tick-Tock", an "ambitious program for alternately shrinking the size of the transistors on a chip and developing a new micro-architecture". "The scheduled introduction of the Newhalem circuit design later this year" is the "Tock" phase. The following contains quotes from Intel's George Alf, previous quotes are Manny Frishberg's: Alf Describing Newhalem: "It will be a four-issue machine, like our current core micro-architechture--it can process four instructions at once. Basically each core can process two threads at once. Newhalem will come in two-core, four-core and even eight-core versions. if the software can handle it, two cores could process four threads at once, four cores could process eight threads and eight cores, 16 threads." OK, you may have even known that, but here's where it gets interesting. Manny goes on to say, "Newhalem will also feature multi-level shared-cache architecture, additional power management features and something at the system level called "Quick Path." Alf describes Quick Path: "Quick Path is high-speed interconnects between each processor and out to the system level, so very high-speed interconnects to keep the cores fed. We'll also have an integrated memory controller capability and integrated graphics capability on the CPU. The next tick, due to happen in 2009, takes the Newhalem architecture and drops it down to 32nm. What we'll be able to do is take that very efficient micro-architecture and CPU and feed it using these new system capabilities of Newhalem at a faster rate. Instead of the processor sitting idle, we'll be able to get it data faster. So this is going to help high-end desktop and workstation usages, such as video encoding, audio encoding, 3D rendering--pretty much all the high-end kind of applications where people just demand the highest performance. And the nice thing is, in an energy-efficient manner, we've been able to hold our current thermal envelopes pretty stable for a while now." Alf on Sandy Bridge: "We'll have an entirely new micro-architechture called Sandy Bridge---that's a tock---that'll be on 32nm in roughly the 2010 time-frame. Ahn Tuan Huynh of Daily Tech: "Home users will be able to do their high-definition video editing faster. On the gaming side, game developers are working on using multicore CPUs for the physics processing, so you get more realistic physics effects--just more interactiveness and better AI in games--instead of focusing more on graphics, they're focusing more on the gameplay aspect of things, so you get a better overall game experience." Now again, much of this the more well informed may have already known. I for one did not know about hafnium, no wonder Intel can go so small with the dies. I had hoped and dreamed Intel would make a shared cached CPU and discussed it here, some doubted it would happen. I had also brought up integrated memory controllers, but I wasn't counting on Intel implementing that let alone integrated graphics capability or use of Quick Path. Though I am excited about this info I can't help but think my hopes of incorporating a shared cache Intel CPU into my next build is a dream too far away. It's the only thing I really wanted to see in an Intel CPU, a true integrated quad vs the current Core 2 quads. It's kind of refreshing to know that Intel has had enough success in their testing and confidence in their foothold on the market to divuldge this info.




>Omen<

Modern Warfare

50 XP

1st January 2005

0 Uploads

7,395 Posts

0 Threads

#2 10 years ago

Oops, I spelled one of the names wrong there, it's Nehalem, not Newhalem.[COLOR=black]:doh:[/COLOR]




Jeff Über Admin

I am a mean boss ⬆️⬆️⬇️⬇️⬅️➡️⬅️➡️🅱🅰

184,632 XP

6th April 2000

0 Uploads

14,591 Posts

1,534 Threads

#3 10 years ago

yea, I've been keeping tabs on this new cpu. I plan on making it my next full system upgrade, since you'll need a new mobo anyway.

Also the difference between Intels interconnect technology and AMD's is that when in a 4 core or more arrangement is that with AMD's the date must go in a square formation to get to core 3. So it would need to travel to the second core before hitting the third. Intel has changed this by allowing not only the square formation but allow each cpu to contact the other ones with diagonal paths as well. It's a simplistic explanation for what it does. Basically it allows better communication between each core on the cpu.


Product Manager | GameFront.com




>Omen<

Modern Warfare

50 XP

1st January 2005

0 Uploads

7,395 Posts

0 Threads

#4 10 years ago

Noe do you know if the Nehalems will be the same socket the Skulltrail MB takes, which is 771 I think? Not that I want a Skulltrail, just curious. Also, it sounds like you're describing the fast interconnects of Quick Path as being links between the cores, rather than between individual CPU chips correct? When Alf described the Quick path interconnects as being "between each processor" in the article, it got a bit comfusing. Anyways this looks to be the CPU I want to build my next system around too and I couldn't care less if it's not 32nm. In fact I'm wondering if there will be a bit of an unforseen technical delay on those and/or take some time for software to catch up to their faster capability. I also hope the 8 thread capable Nehalem 45nm quads will work OK with games that only stream 4 threads at a time because we won't likely see 8 thread games for a while.




Jeff Über Admin

I am a mean boss ⬆️⬆️⬇️⬇️⬅️➡️⬅️➡️🅱🅰

184,632 XP

6th April 2000

0 Uploads

14,591 Posts

1,534 Threads

#5 10 years ago
>Omen<;4132718Noe do you know if the Nehalems will be the same socket the Skulltrail MB takes, which is 771 I think? Not that I want a Skulltrail, just curious. Also, it sounds like you're describing the fast interconnects of Quick Path as being links between the cores, rather than between individual CPU chips correct? When Alf described the Quick path interconnects as being "between each processor" in the article, it got a bit comfusing.

Yeah, when I first read about it, there was a diagram with a much more detailed explanation about how that technology works. I believe it will be an all new socket. The 771 is used for xeon cpu's. It's why the skulltrail, while obviously packed with enthusiast perks is technically a server motherboard. Nehelam will take an all new socket I believe.

Anyways this looks to be the CPU I want to build my next system around too and I couldn't care less if it's not 32nm. In fact I'm wondering if there will be a bit of an unforseen technical delay on those and/or take some time for software to catch up to their faster capability.

You should, the smaller die means less friction with the processed data = less heat and better cooling arrangements. Perhaps we won't need a cooling system the size of a brick to keep things running properly now.

They've already created the wafer for the Nehelam, so I believe the preliminary step was done, right now they're just working on the instruction sets and testing.

I also hope the 8 thread capable Nehalem 45nm quads will work OK with games that only stream 4 threads at a time because we won't likely see 8 thread games for a while.

I'm sure there won't be issues on the hardware end with compatability, however utilizing all of those cores will require the programers of the games to make them multi-threaded. Current games without that technology probably won't see any changes, but future games after it's released will. Especially with them currently making games that support dual core systems. It's just then a matter of patching it to support a larger number of threads rather than redesigning it to alternate the data between cores from scratch. The two threads per core sounds is similiar to hyperthreading, but according to intel is much different. In any event, if it's like hyperthreading it means each core will simulate two cores and handle the data strictly through hardware without any need for software changes.


Product Manager | GameFront.com




&gt;Omen&lt;

Modern Warfare

50 XP

1st January 2005

0 Uploads

7,395 Posts

0 Threads

#6 10 years ago
n0e;4133570You should, the smaller die means less friction with the processed data = less heat and better cooling arrangements. Perhaps we won't need a cooling system the size of a brick to keep things running properly now.

Yeah but waiting for the 32nm ones means well into 2009 from what this article says. Are you going to wait that long to get a 32?The first Nehalems will be 45nm like the Penryns and still have the integrated architechture and Quick Path not to mention the memory controller capability mentioned. I doubt if aftermarket cooling would be needed any more than the current Core 2, in fact the 65nm Core 2s can handle a decent OC without it if you don't go crazy. My idea of a safe OC is bumping a 2.4GHz up to 3.0. On the threading I think it's got to be more advanced than HyperThreading just due to the multi-level shared-cache architecture. The shared cache will no doubt allow the cores to more easily handle threads due to a better data sorting/storing capability. Anyways, I hope I can get my dream machine built by end of next year, I'll be awfully tired of AGP by then. I just don't want to have to spend a fortune doing it.




Jeff Über Admin

I am a mean boss ⬆️⬆️⬇️⬇️⬅️➡️⬅️➡️🅱🅰

184,632 XP

6th April 2000

0 Uploads

14,591 Posts

1,534 Threads

#7 10 years ago

dunno, I planned on doing my next big upgrade for my computer with nehalem. If the 32nm die is released a few months later, I can simply wait it out. I'm in no rush.

The big question as to whether this will be a success really depends on DDR3 pricing and performance. Currently it's just not worth it. If the price doesn't go down quite a bit and have better latency, the hype will certainly be killed for this new cpu as they'll most certainly go with ddr3 exclusively.


Product Manager | GameFront.com




&gt;Omen&lt;

Modern Warfare

50 XP

1st January 2005

0 Uploads

7,395 Posts

0 Threads

#8 10 years ago

I would guess it would be at least 6 months in between the release of the integrated Nehalem quads and the 32nm chips. I agree that DDR3 needs to come down in price for it all to make it worthwhile to most, as well as the price of DDR3 MBs.