Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-09-2012, 10:06 AM   #26
Edrick
Golden Member
 
Edrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Boston MA
Posts: 1,525
Default

I want one! Always wanted an Itanium, but never could justify the money. Poulson is the first one to make it interesting.

Now just waiting for IBM to release Power 8 in response.
__________________
Core i7 4770
Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H (F5 BIOS)
G.Skill RipjawsZ 8GB @ 2400mhz 10-12-12-31
Gigabyte GTX 660
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB
Antec Eleven Hundred
Edrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:07 AM   #27
Charles Kozierok
Elite Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OVerLoRDI View Post
Wow, I never expected this. Is there even demand for this instruction set at this point?
I did, but only after reading a few months back that HP is basically bankrolling Itanium development due to having quite a few eggs in the basket. If not for that, I think it would be dead.
__________________
"Of those who say nothing, few are silent." -- Thomas Neill
Charles Kozierok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:33 AM   #28
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Thats one epic update.
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:35 AM   #29
Olikan
Golden Member
 
Olikan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,825
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
No, its a design that can still scale relatively easy.
so...
they doubled the performance because of "yes, we can" ?, or because itanium was losing suport?


Quote:
Now just waiting for IBM to release Power 8 in response.
poulson
11 instructions @ 2.53Ghz - compiler based
power 7+
8 instructions @ 4.4Ghz - OoO based

IBM seems fine to me, but i don't know much about these CPUs

Last edited by Olikan; 11-09-2012 at 10:55 AM.
Olikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:49 AM   #30
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 10,750
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olikan View Post
so...
they doubled the performance because of "yes, we can" ?, or because itanium was losing suport?
So by your logic Intel should have doubled performance from P4 to Core 2? Yet it was "only" 40%? And actually only 20% compared to Pentium-M. Not exactly fitting into competition conspiracy is it?

The reason why Itanium scales better is because its a much younger design without the same limitations (yet). There is simply much more lower hanging fruits to be picked from IA64 designs still. Also why Itanium have already grown from 6 issue wide to 11 issue wide. x86 simply doesnt scale that way. As Intel even said, the 4th issue wide on x86 gave maybe 5%. Not 33% if the design had scaled perfectly.
__________________
Anandtech forums=Xtremesystems forums

Last edited by ShintaiDK; 11-09-2012 at 10:55 AM.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:52 AM   #31
mrmt
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHADBOGA View Post
Ivy Bridge doesn't have twice the cores and the benchmark data that Intel's
own press release is showing are for server benchmarks which love moar cores.
I think you are being a bit unfair here. Performance does not scale linearly with core count and neither does clock in some benches. So the fact they doubled the performance is no small feat.

From what I could get they made a lot of changes on the architecture. Do you know if those benches are compiled specifically for Poulson? You would not do that for a mass market processor like Core or Bulldozer, but for tailor-made servers like Integrity, you would not only recompile but also optimize specifically for it too.
mrmt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:03 AM   #32
Olikan
Golden Member
 
Olikan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,825
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
So by your logic Intel should have doubled performance from P4 to Core 2? Yet it was "only" 40%? And actually only 20% compared to Pentium-M. Not exactly fitting into competition conspiracy is it?
nop.... 40% is alot
and, i would be very happy with a 20% increase with haswell to ivy

but 8, 9, 10%..... booooo!
Olikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:20 AM   #33
WhoBeDaPlaya
Diamond Member
 
WhoBeDaPlaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 5,762
Default

Details in ISSCC paper :
http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www...sscc-paper.pdf

This is Intel's 20ft dildo of the CPU world
__________________
BlueSmoke.net
Silverstone Temjin TJ09S - i7 4770K @ 4.55GHz - MSI Z87-GD65 - 32GB Crucial Ballistix Elite 1866 CL9 - MSI Twin Frozr 780 - X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro - BFG EX-1000 - Antec Kuhler 920 - 6x Noctua NF-P12 - Samsung 840 500GB - Samsung F3 1TB - OptiArc 7261S - Logitech G19 - 2x Klipsch Promedia 2.1
Clevo w230ss - i7 4810MQ - 16GB GSkill 1600 CL9 - GTX 860M - Crucial M500 240GB - Hitachi Travelstar 7200 1TB
WhoBeDaPlaya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:27 AM   #34
Magic Carpet
Golden Member
 
Magic Carpet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,822
Default

Quote:
Intel says that in its internal benchmarks on a variety of commercial workloads that matter for Itanium, the eight-core Poulson are seeing somewhere between 2 and 2.4 times the performance of a quad-core Tukwila chip. But HP says it can do better than that, thanks to software tuning. "We have systems in the labs that are significantly above 3X," bragged Lewis. So you could get something on the order of three times the bang for the buck.
Numbers please.
Magic Carpet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:28 AM   #35
Tsavo
Platinum Member
 
Tsavo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,301
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Thats one epic update. Very nice to see Itanium still kicking. It was wierd to see they jumped over 45nm.

But damn, Poulson basicly moves Itanium up in the top again. And 54MB cache



Soon(tm) you can freely change between Itanium and Xeons on a board. Thats pretty amazing too.
Is that actual size?

Oh wait, that'd be Bulldozer.
__________________
i5-3570K, i5-750. i5-2410M. i3-2100/2120.
Tsavo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:43 AM   #36
hamunaptra
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 927
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cytg111 View Post
wtf .. 2x performance increase? And on x86 we're struggeling to get another 10%?
Envy much?
Yes.
Im pretty sure because x86 has been around for ages, tons more R&D went into stretching optimizing the way x86 code is handled at the hardware level for a while. Whereas Itanium ISA is fairly recent by comparison. It has much more room to further optimized.
__________________
PCP&C 500watt Silencer
i5 3570k @ 4300mhz 1.15v / Scythe Mugen 2
Gskill 1866 8GB RAM @ 1866mhz 8-9-9-24
Asrock Z77 Extreme4
ASUS HD6950 DCII 1GB @ 870/1325mhz
Sony 7260s DVDRW
hamunaptra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:44 AM   #37
SunnyD
Belgian Waffler
 
SunnyD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Waffle House
Posts: 31,170
Default

Itanium: A solution in search of a problem.
__________________
It's a long story... and trust me, no, you really don't have time.
Need VPN? Cheap hosting? I can do that.
SunnyD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:59 AM   #38
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 10,750
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olikan View Post
nop.... 40% is alot
and, i would be very happy with a 20% increase with haswell to ivy

but 8, 9, 10%..... booooo!
You get 10-15% in unoptimized code with Haswell and up to double the performance for pure optimized code. Plus frequency on top.

Core 2 gave you 20% IPC over Pentium M, and thats with alot more than a single year in between.

If competition is the reason, why are ARM cores so dull and turtle slow in terms of performance increase? Or AMD chips for that matter?

I mean obvious you must have the answer to back up the "conspiracy", so please, explain.

Or maybe the tick/tock is confusing you.
__________________
Anandtech forums=Xtremesystems forums

Last edited by ShintaiDK; 11-09-2012 at 12:05 PM.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 12:20 PM   #39
Olikan
Golden Member
 
Olikan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,825
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
If competition is the reason, why are ARM cores so dull and turtle slow in terms of performance increase? Or AMD chips for that matter?

I mean obvious you must have the answer to back up the "conspiracy", so please, explain.
conspiracy? WHAT? WHERE?

LOL, create a thread and try to explain why the lack of competition is good for the consumers...(oh...don't forget to use lub)
Olikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 01:02 PM   #40
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 10,750
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olikan View Post
conspiracy? WHAT? WHERE?

LOL, create a thread and try to explain why the lack of competition is good for the consumers...(oh...don't forget to use lub)
Its you who claims that its the lack of competition that holds us back. yet you cant prove it does, since high competition segments shows exactly the same behaviour. So how does that work out?
__________________
Anandtech forums=Xtremesystems forums
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 01:57 PM   #41
cytg111
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,348
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Its you who claims that its the lack of competition that holds us back. yet you cant prove it does, since high competition segments shows exactly the same behaviour. So how does that work out?
- I have a counter-proposal for you: Prove that lack of competition is good for innoivation.
I dunno, to me it seems simple, but you may have an illuminating argument?
__________________
404
cytg111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 02:08 PM   #42
Olikan
Golden Member
 
Olikan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,825
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Its you who claims that its the lack of competition that holds us back. yet you cant prove it does, since high competition segments shows exactly the same behaviour. So how does that work out?
yes...
atom
tick-tock model of 2 years cadence
but for some odd reason, intel accelarated it to 1 year...

i am sure that bobcat and ARM progress have nothing to do about it
Olikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 02:32 PM   #43
Edrick
Golden Member
 
Edrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Boston MA
Posts: 1,525
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olikan View Post
yes...
atom
tick-tock model of 2 years cadence
but for some odd reason, intel accelarated it to 1 year...

i am sure that bobcat and ARM progress have nothing to do about it
What are you talking about? Intel is still on a 2 year cadence, Tock every 2 years and Tick every 2 years.
__________________
Core i7 4770
Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H (F5 BIOS)
G.Skill RipjawsZ 8GB @ 2400mhz 10-12-12-31
Gigabyte GTX 660
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB
Antec Eleven Hundred
Edrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 02:36 PM   #44
Edrick
Golden Member
 
Edrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Boston MA
Posts: 1,525
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SunnyD View Post
Itanium: A solution in search of a problem.
Trendy little quote....that has no bearing here.

It was a failed solution to a very big problem.
__________________
Core i7 4770
Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H (F5 BIOS)
G.Skill RipjawsZ 8GB @ 2400mhz 10-12-12-31
Gigabyte GTX 660
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB
Antec Eleven Hundred
Edrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 02:44 PM   #45
Olikan
Golden Member
 
Olikan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,825
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edrick View Post
What are you talking about? Intel is still on a 2 year cadence, Tock every 2 years and Tick every 2 years.
this:
Olikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:04 PM   #46
Edrick
Golden Member
 
Edrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Boston MA
Posts: 1,525
Default

I will believe it when I see it. Atom has been slower than 2 years for awhile. If 2014 gets Atom to 14nm, then I will agree with you. Until that happens, I disagree
__________________
Core i7 4770
Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H (F5 BIOS)
G.Skill RipjawsZ 8GB @ 2400mhz 10-12-12-31
Gigabyte GTX 660
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB
Antec Eleven Hundred
Edrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:12 PM   #47
jhu
Lifer
 
jhu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: تهران
Posts: 11,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olikan View Post
this:
Eagerly awaiting Future Product (although a bit strange for an architecture name).
__________________
moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - h.g. wells
夜思 - 床前明月光, 疑是地上霜. 舉頭望明月, 低頭思故鄉
jhu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:15 PM   #48
KompuKare
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 472
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesKozierok View Post
I did, but only after reading a few months back that HP is basically bankrolling Itanium development due to having quite a few eggs in the basket. If not for that, I think it would be dead.
More like all their high-end eggs in that basket - Itanium is nearly 100% HP as they basically contract Intel to design and manufacture the CPU for them. It's like Intel's Itanium is HP's outsourced CPU arm. Not even sure if this arrangement costs them less / provides them better results than having kept Alpha or PA RISC.
__________________
_______________
|| i5-3570K at stock || Asus P8Z77-V LX || 8GB DDR3 || 120GB Sandisk Extreme
|| Gigabyte HD7950 || Corsair CX400 (Seasonic) || Nec 2170NX (1600x1200)
KompuKare is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:40 PM   #49
Olikan
Golden Member
 
Olikan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,825
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edrick View Post
I will believe it when I see it. Atom has been slower than 2 years for awhile. If 2014 gets Atom to 14nm, then I will agree with you. Until that happens, I disagree
if they manage to do this or don't t doesn't matter...it's the competition that made intel atleast think about doing it
Olikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 04:12 PM   #50
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 10,750
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cytg111 View Post
- I have a counter-proposal for you: Prove that lack of competition is good for innoivation.
I dunno, to me it seems simple, but you may have an illuminating argument?
Competition already makes sure you need government support to change hard locked segments with multiple companies in it. Since the risk for a company to radically innovate is too high in terms of what the other company or companies can counter economicly cheap. hcen you need someone else to

Competition also have a tendency to drive quality to the bottom. Something that is shown way too often. Often as a chance to destroy another competitor with higher quality products on a short run.

And lastly, lack of competition is beneficial in a segment where costs for progress inhibits healthy competition. And x86 is one of those areas. The volume and market is simply too small for 2 players. Discrete cards is the next one where there will only be room for one.

Dont get me wrong, competition is the best case in 70-80% of all cases. However its not the great saviour as often portraited.
__________________
Anandtech forums=Xtremesystems forums

Last edited by ShintaiDK; 11-09-2012 at 04:15 PM.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.