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.
Sapphire Rapids is server only right? Will there be a desktop version?
I think he considers it cheating to get a faster chip that way...If it does more IPC and can clock around 5GHz (what is IMO the biggest issue now) I don't care
Anyway, Intel supposedly canceled their original small10nm node, so they supposedly don't have as many more transistors as you'd think...
There's also no indication 14+ or 14++ made Kabylake/Coffeelake lost density, despite what Anandtech articles say.
Intel backported Single Dummy Gate to 14++ to largely make up for the reduction in gate pitch.
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/10445533
Intel Corporation IceLake U 2.60 GHz
GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 126 Stepping 1
There is a first proper Geekbench entry from Icelake U @2 cores. L1 Data Cache and L3 Cache are bigger.
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...
You don't need to use CPUs with Turbo which messes up comparisons. Just compare against 7130U. It's clocked at 2.7GHz, and is a dual core with Hyperthreading without Turbo. The lack of Turbo is what makes it great for comparisons.
I'm seeing a 10% difference in ST Integer and FP. I would say that's actually a big disappointment, unless we get a huge surprise at least in mobile or something. We should see closer to 20% to make up for all the delays.
You are a bit late. Dayman posted that first. The last 10 posts or so are talking about that result.
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/10445533
Intel Corporation IceLake U 2.60 GHz
GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 126 Stepping 1
There is a first proper Geekbench entry from Icelake U @2 cores. L1 Data Cache and L3 Cache are bigger.
I have found an m3-7Y30 that was also running Ubuntu albeit a slightly older release, updated graphs below:
Average difference:
ST: 15%
MT: 15.5%
Link to compared results
M3 score by it self
Yeah in ten years when all Intel CPU have it, like AVX. Oh wait no, AVX still isn't available on all currently fabbed Intel CPU more than 10 years after being announced, and more than 7 years after being available in Sandy Bridge.That enchanced REP MOV that works properly fast with short sequences is going to be big boon. Replacing all those crazy memcpy library implementations from hell, with 1 instruction is going to be huge win for everyone, hopefully AMD will jump with bandwagon.
Yeah in ten years when all Intel CPU have it, like AVX. Oh wait no, AVX still isn't available on all currently fabbed Intel CPU more than 10 years after being announced, and more than 7 years after being available in Sandy Bridge.
Thanks but I perfectly know what it does and how to implement it (and also know Torvalds rants about the various brain dead implementations of it). My point is that before getting rid of existing implementations you will need a huge critical mass of CPU implementing that new instruction. And you don't have any guaranty that Intel will implement it in all new CPU after Ice Lake.You don't get what it does. It is good old rep movX, but made faster. For example Linux Kernel already is using REP MOV to memcopy. All is great and dandy, but current implementations on Intel/AMD are microcoded and have insane setup times, meaning performance is hurt when memcopy is done for small sizes. Alternative is those "implementations" that do crazy stuff like size detection and run into kilobytes of instruction cache use. Icelake (supposedly) reduces setup time and everyone already using it benefits automatically. The rest get incentives to delete code and replace hundreds of lines and branches with 5 instructions.
You're seriously complaining because you have to buy an i3 to get AVX?Yeah in ten years when all Intel CPU have it, like AVX. Oh wait no, AVX still isn't available on all currently fabbed Intel CPU more than 10 years after being announced, and more than 7 years after being available in Sandy Bridge.
Yes, Intels segmentation just sucks. Disabling HT everywhere, disabling turbo for i3, etc. AMDs looks about right for the price points (only outright disabling features at price-points <99$).You're seriously complaining because you have to buy an i3 to get AVX?
No, I complain because when I develop software, I have to take care of Intel ISA segmentation and write several code paths.You're seriously complaining because you have to buy an i3 to get AVX?
Yeah we needed some silly car analogy. I guess you're not doing software dev or you'd not say something like that Or perhaps you are just an Intel fan.Well, you don't get navigation and a good stereo when you buy the low end model car...
Definitely always been partial to Intel, both in the thin times and the thick times.Yeah we needed some silly car analogy. I guess you're not doing software dev or you'd not say something like that Or perhaps you are just an Intel fan.