Integrated Memory Controller? It didnt' do much for AMD, but will it help with Intel's Nehalem?

[GundamF91]

Just wondering what's the impact of having integrated memory on Nehalem. I know it really didn't do a whole lot for AMD chips, other than making it different to overclock without FSB. Performance wise though, it's clear that existing Intel Core2 handily beats the AMD's integrated memory.

 

[Sylvanas]

Ummm, it made a huge impact for AMD on memory performance when they released the first AMD64 with an IMC. Have a look at AT's Nehalem preview.

 

[Drsignguy]

Considering that the FSB is now the bottleneck of a system due to the higher speeds of the latest and greatest cpu's, I am sure it will generate a huge impact.

 

[magreen]

Originally posted by: GundamF91
Just wondering what's the impact of having integrated memory on Nehalem. I know it really didn't do a whole lot for AMD chips, other than making it different to overclock without FSB. Performance wise though, it's clear that existing Intel Core2 handily beats the AMD's integrated memory.

It had a huge impact on AMD and was a large part of the reason the A64 and X2 chips trounced the Intel cpus of their day, the P4 and PD.

I'd imagine it will also have a large effect for Intel.

 

[mooseracing]

Not to mention trouncing Xeons in multiple CPU systems.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Drsignguy
Considering that the FSB is now the bottleneck of a system due to the higher speeds of the latest and greatest cpu's, I am sure it will generate a huge impact.

I was under the impression fsb didn't do much for core duos and quads?

 

[soccerballtux]

flamebait

you're from 2001, and you have 1.5k posts. You of all people should know the memory controller helped AMD.

I guess you're just trying to solicit replies.

 

[SunnyD]

The more cores (and in Nehealm's case, threads as in SMT) the more contention there is for memory bandwidth. Intel has been squeezing GTL+ as far as they possibly could until QPI comes with Nehealm. GTL+ already shows it's limits in server generations when their quadcores came out. 2P and higher systems were starting to get bandwidth starved in many cases. QPI will keep Intel competitive on the bus front now for years to come.

 

[Lonyo]

Intel worked around the FSB problem with Core 2, which is why they have minimal performance loss on the desktop.
With servers it does hurt them more, especially with scaling.

Going to IMC is a solution to a problem they've managed to avoid so far on the desktop, but can't really avoid forever.