GT0 can go into headless IoT devices, or a micro network node.GT0 for exist
Yeah. It's big.LITTLE Intel style, with the big being Icelake. I guess we will see what markets they attempt to sell it to but I imagine it will include Intel's LTE modem on package.Wait, Intel is going to produce a die with Core and Atom cores sharing space? I guess Tremont is the successor to Goldmont?
We live in strange times.
You know, it would be a compelling and interesting product if Intel could execute a product like this on 10nm or 7nm instead of 14nm++(+?). Leading-edge process, Intel's famous power manage ment/boost management (which is often much more robust than what you find in ARM chips), AND big.LITTLE? That's a dizzying array of different power consumption levels you can choose just from one die. For their sake, let's hope they can do this on 10nm.Yeah. It's big.LITTLE Intel style, with the big being Icelake. I guess we will see what markets they attempt to sell it to but I imagine it will include Intel's LTE modem on package.
The product is built on 10nmYou know, it would be a compelling and interesting product if Intel could execute a product like this on 10nm or 7nm instead of 14nm++(+?). Leading-edge process, Intel's famous power manage ment/boost management (which is often much more robust than what you find in ARM chips), AND big.LITTLE? That's a dizzying array of different power consumption levels you can choose just from one die. For their sake, let's hope they can do this on 10nm.
PR aside, the reason Intel didn't really bother until now was because Windows had no support for big.LITTLE. MS has apparently fixed this.I heard about this a couple of years ago, looks like a really good idea, to think Intel was slagging off ARM back in the day for big_LITTLE...if you can't beat them, join them!.
How do you know that was the real reason? Android certainly did and intel threw away billions into it before throwing in the towel.PR aside, the reason Intel didn't really bother until now was because Windows had no support for big.LITTLE. MS has apparently fixed this.
There seems to be an IPC increase, reminiscent of what Sandy -> Ivy was.Conclusion
The NUC8i3CYSM ($574) is a mediocre product, and the i3-8121U is a mediocre chip. Nevertheless, they represent the first, and possibly only, availability of Cannon Lake for microarchitecture enthusiasts. As shown, the improvements to Cannon Lake blur the lines between "tick" and "tock," adding a new instruction set in AVX-512, new LPDDR4 memory controllers, as well as general improvements to front-end and back-end. Indeed, mere "shrinks" have often come with significant IPC gains in the past, as the first version of a new architecture often comes with bugs that require performance-improving features to be disabled. For example, the Ivy Bridge microarchitecture enables MOV-elimination in the front-end and a cycle-aware L3 cache, features that were likely intended for Sandy Bridge.
The NUC8i3CYSM will be compared against a Dell XPS 13 9350 featuring a "Skylake" i7-6500U, which operates at a similar frequency to the i3-8121U. The XPS 13 has been undervolted to enable it to run at its maximum turbo frequency under all workloads. The NUC's power limits were increased to 30 W for the same reason. Unless otherwise mentioned, benchmarks do not use AVX-512 instructions. All benchmarks are run multiple times, and the highest score is reported.
10 nm Process Technology
Intel's 10 nm process technology was expected to reduce power (dynamic capacitance) and increase performance (drive current), when compared to the original 14 nm process. To assess this, power metrics were monitored during CineBench execution via HWiNFO. For this test, the voltage of the i7-6500U was restored to factory values.
The capacitance reduction of 10 nm is evident, as the minimally binned i3-8121U has a 10% efficiency gain over the "i7"-grade 6500U, despite having a 100 mV penalty. Unfortunately, the same voltage penalty shows that the performance benefits of 10 nm are not being realized in the i3-8121U. Since the launch of "Skylake," Intel has released "Kaby Lake" and "Coffee Lake" processors on enhanced 14 nm processes, which improve drive current and hence allow operation at lower voltages. These 14 nm performance improvements also translate to power reduction, so 10 nm as it currently stands is not ready for widespread adoption.
Hold that thought. Since its measured using Turbo mode, it will deviate a few % from the 6%. It may not be 6%, but 2% for example. The AVX comparisons and the explanations are very good though. We won't see proper perf/clock comparisons until the chip has Turbo off and set to same frequency.So based on current info and leaks, it seems that Cannon-Lake brought up to 6% improvement in some vectorised workloads, while Ice-Lake will at least bring some improvements in Hyper-threading.
It's not exactly comparable as the 8130U has higher Turbo.I dunno, NBC's review of the Aspire with the 8130U got 338, and in the review they mention it was staying between 3.1 and 3.2. That has single channel DDR4 2400 memory.
Because Intel didn't sample it to reviewers so they must be bought by themselves. Though like I said Ian from Anandtech is working on a review.So what is the IPC difference? do we have any serious numbers? how come that no one can publish the cannon lake benches....
No. ARM took a pass on power gating (to the extent that Intel pushes it) and just went big.LITTLE. Intel tries to have one core (or a small set of cores) in their low-power chips scale from boosted 3 GHz+ states chewing up higher-than-TDP power ratings to ultra-low clockspeeds with sub-4.5W power usage. And to their credit, it almost worked. But they have never been able to make Core suitable for tablets or phones, and it will never work. Atom didn't work out there either, nor will it ever. Which is why they punted on those markets, at least for awhile.Sorry but is this part a complete joke? Arm SoCs are years ahead in this regard.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Question Which AMD CPU/GPU or CPU mated with a RX580/RX570/8GB/4GB will work best in B550 or B450 M/B? I also have some Intel questions too.||CPUs and Overclocking||36|
|T||Question Intel 14nm and 5 Ghz||CPUs and Overclocking||4|
|H||Question Intel 1Q21 Earnings||CPUs and Overclocking||29|
|Discussion Intel Core i7-11370H is it power hungry?||CPUs and Overclocking||14|
|J||Question Two Intel Desktop CPUs: 2014-era Core i7 vs 2020 (current) Core i3?!||CPUs and Overclocking||9|
|Question Which AMD CPU/GPU or CPU mated with a RX580/RX570/8GB/4GB will work best in B550 or B450 M/B? I also have some Intel questions too.|
|Question Intel 14nm and 5 Ghz|
|Question Intel 1Q21 Earnings|
|Discussion Intel Core i7-11370H is it power hungry?|
|Question Two Intel Desktop CPUs: 2014-era Core i7 vs 2020 (current) Core i3?!|