• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

Page 77 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
7,397
2,092
136
I doubt the modems are that low margin. Margins aren't really the problem. Apple has lower margins than Intel but many times more revenue. The focus on margins was what lost the original iPhone deal because they believed the volume wouldn't be there. At potential 200 million sales, they won't be complaining.

The biggest issue is modems bring in small revenue.

Working with Apple has other benefits like learning how mobile markets work, and how to make power efficient silicon. We might see them using the same modem across broader segments like in their own products. Expect to see on-package LTE effort to expand.
 

.vodka

Golden Member
Dec 5, 2014
1,183
1,491
136
  • Like
Reactions: french toast

Andrei.

Senior member
Jan 26, 2015
316
385
136
If all of this is true that's a 30% increase in IPC. Getting closer to Apple IPC :) Let's how high it clocks!
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/10436977?baseline=10445533

It doesn't look anywhere near 30%. More like 10-20% depending on workload, which matches what it was rumoured to be. It's also going to need to maintain that IPC in high clocks (memory).

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/7230379?baseline=10445533

Test compared to 6100H (2.7 Ghz). There are a couple tests where the Icelake sample loses, but there's also several where it wins by 30% or more.
Don't compare Windows vs Linux, they're using different compilers. Linux and macOS is going to be on top in every Geekbench result.
 

Dayman1225

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2017
1,019
622
106
So I got a friend of mine to clock down his 6700K to 2.6GHz on the core, 2.8GHz uncore at 2 core and 4 threads Smeltdown Patches disabled, 2133MHz ram, but still lower latency than the ICL U scores.

He ran GB4 two times like this I chose the higher score to compare, links below:

Link 1

Link 2

I then compared this to the ICL U score:

Link to ICL U score

Compared score link

Yes, I know one is running Windows (6700K system) and the other is running Linux (ICL U) but this is the best I could do for you for direct comparison. Not scientific at all of course. So I typed the sub scores into excel made a graph and this is what I got.


Overall I got an average percentage change of:

ST: 24% (rounded to 1 decimal place)

MT: 14.3% (rounded to 1 decimal place)
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,719
2,010
126
So I got a friend of mine to clock down his 6700K to 2.6GHz on the core, 2.8GHz uncore at 2 core and 4 threads Smeltdown Patches disabled, 2133MHz ram, but still lower latency than the ICL U scores.

He ran GB4 two times like this I chose the higher score to compare, links below:

Link 1

Link 2

I then compared this to the ICL U score:

Link to ICL U score

Compared score link

Yes, I know one is running Windows (6700K system) and the other is running Linux (ICL U) but this is the best I could do for you for direct comparison. Not scientific at all of course. So I typed the sub scores into excel made a graph and this is what I got.


Overall I got an average percentage change of:

ST: 24% (rounded to 1 decimal place)

MT: 14.3% (rounded to 1 decimal place)
Nice!
 

.vodka

Golden Member
Dec 5, 2014
1,183
1,491
136
Let's do some crude and probably horribly wrong numbers to compare these two

@csbin's 6200U @ 2.8GHz sample vs that Icelake 2.6GHz sample, both running Linux. It's GB4 4.2.2 vs 4.3.0 though...

ST
i5-6200u: 4001/2800 = 1.4289 points per MHz
Icelake sample: 4151/2600 = 1.5965 points per MHz

1.5965/1.4289 ~ 11.72% ST increase over Skylake on average.

Not too bad, that's in line with the 5-10% average increases we've been getting since Nehalem.
 

Gideon

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,256
2,367
136
Well Zen2 or Zen3 really need to be good, to compete, unless Intel fails miserably with 10nm clocks
 

Gideon

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,256
2,367
136
Link to where you can find this

adding .gb4 to the end of the Geekbench score link brings this up
Thanks!
The closest I could find (also ubuntu) is this:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/10417578?baseline=10445533

But it clocks minorly higher, and has similar scores to m3-7Y30.

Overall looks impressive (though we obviously need more datapoints). There are also 2 things to keep in mind that somewhat inflate the Icelake Score. 1. It has very good bandwidth numbers (quite a few tests are sensitive to it) and it's AES throughput is phenominal.

It's still pretty good, in whatever way you slice it. Now we obviously need more results (and also other benchmarks) to get a better idea overall.
 
Last edited:

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
748
353
106
Thanks!
The closest I could find (also ubuntu) is this:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/10417578?baseline=10445533

But it clocks minorly higher, and has similar scores to m3-7Y30.

Overall looks impressive (though we obviously need more datapoints). There are also 2 things to keep in mind that somewhat inflate the Icelake Score. 1. It has very good bandwidth numbers (quite a few tests are sensitive to it) and it's AES throughput is phenominal.

It's still pretty good, however way you slice it. Now we obviously need more results (and also other benchmarks) to get a better idea overall
Now we need to get that released. With turbo like 4GHz it can be very nice. The AES improvement were announced and long time expected.
 

Nothingness

Platinum Member
Jul 3, 2013
2,165
409
126
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/10436977?baseline=10445533

It doesn't look anywhere near 30%. More like 10-20% depending on workload, which matches what it was rumoured to be. It's also going to need to maintain that IPC in high clocks (memory).
I picked against a i8550u running Linux which does ~4800 @ 4 GHz
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/10449968?baseline=10445533
That gives 1200 / GHz vs 1600 / Ghz, a 30% increase.
Isn't Kaby Lake Intel latest uarch ?

EDIT: Silly me, I forgot to sort the results...
So that is 1350 vs 1600 so ~20%.
Sorry for the mistake :(
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,175
1,807
126
Well Zen2 or Zen3 really need to be good, to compete, unless Intel fails miserably with 10nm clocks
The max clocks are definitely going to be worse than Intel's 14 nm, hence why Intel is sticking with Coffee Lake for desktop next year. Whiskey Lake U can turbo to 4.6, so if they manage that, that would be a decent upgrade with the IPC gain for mobile.
 

yuri69

Member
Jul 16, 2013
116
132
116
So it got 50% bigger L1D, 100% bigger L2 and 30% bigger L3. Plus they throw a lot of crypto units to the mix.

This is the way they spent the transistors the 10nm brought to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vattila

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
748
353
106
So it got 50% bigger L1D, 100% bigger L2 and 30% bigger L3. Plus they throw a lot of crypto units to the mix.

This is the way they spent the transistors the 10nm brought to them.
If it does more IPC and can clock around 5GHz (what is IMO the biggest issue now) I don't care
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY