Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

Page 915 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Panino Manino

Senior member
Jan 28, 2017
852
1,079
136
Everything older than Pentium Pro, the patents have expired. For everything else (AVX implementation, power management, virtualization, etc.) patents have not expired.

It's eight years later, I imagine more patents have expired by now?
 

DavidC1

Senior member
Dec 29, 2023
466
673
96
If the P cores in GraniteRapids are physically different from the RedwoodCove cores in MeteorLake, they are certainly not RedwoodCove+.
It is Redwood Cove in the case that it doesn't get full changes. Code names are arbitrary definitions set by people and they can set it whatever they want you know? Again, refer back to Goldmont "Plus" as an example. Was that just a "Plus"?
Edit:
Intel had already made a mistake because, according to the slides, SunnyCove in Xeon has ROB 384, but the inquisitiveness of journalists forced Intel to react and it was officially admitted that it was a mistake, because SunnyCove in Xeon is the same as in IceLake and ROB is 352.
In the case of Granite Rapids it is backed up by Pat's statements that the move from Intel 4 to 3 and the time lag allowed it to squeeze in more changes and to quote: "10 plus percent improvements".

While it is one thing to mess up on numbers(they don't always make mistakes either), it is another thing to state "performance-efficiency" and "performance improvement in the core" and specific things like branch prediction and memory parallelism related improvements.
 

trivik12

Senior member
Jan 26, 2006
321
288
136
SO Granite rapids 1st cpu launch is going to be 128 core model. It would be good apples to apples comparison with Turin. Plus Intel 3 vs N4P for Turin.
 

lightisgood

Senior member
May 27, 2022
209
90
71
SO Granite rapids 1st cpu launch is going to be 128 core model. It would be good apples to apples comparison with Turin. Plus Intel 3 vs N4P for Turin.

Intel is able to release Granite Rapids-AP as up to 144 cores product (e.g. SPR@60C).
However GNR-AP is actually up to 128 cores product and has >16 redundant cores.
This is clearly good sign, probably, GNR boasts of sufficient competitiveness.
 

Attachments

  • GNR_HCC_Up_to_48_cores.jpg
    GNR_HCC_Up_to_48_cores.jpg
    119.5 KB · Views: 32
  • Like
Reactions: ashFTW

trivik12

Senior member
Jan 26, 2006
321
288
136
Plus all the accelerators are enabled by default across all Skus. Intel did absolutely stupid stuff in trying to make it optional and hoping for additional $. Enabling it for default would lead to wide spread adoption. On top of it the RWC+ core in GNR is different from RWC on MTL. It would be interesting to see the reviews.
 

cebri1

Member
Jun 13, 2019
142
160
116

“The Xeon 6780E 2P was delivering slightly better performance than the Xeon 8592+ 2P at... 70% the power consumption on average. The generational uplift in power efficiency with the Xeon 6700E is significant. Or if still relying on Ice Lake era infrastructure, the geo mean performance from the Xeon Platinum 8380 2P flagship to the Xeon 6780E was 1.896x the performance at 73% the CPU power consumption!

One Xeon 6766E was also about 5% faster than a single Xeon Platinum 8592+ while the Sierra Forest CPU was consuming just 55% the power of the prior Emerald Rapids flagship.“
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

AMDK11

Senior member
Jul 15, 2019
353
246
116
Intel-Xeon-6-Workloads-3.jpg

Do I see correctly? According to this slide, RedwoodCove has an 8-way decoder like LionCove? Is this a bug or what?
 

AMDK11

Senior member
Jul 15, 2019
353
246
116
Its redwood cove plus architecture
So you think there are two versions: RedwoodCove with a 6-way decoder and RedwoodCove with an 8-way decoder?

It doesn't stick to me. This appears to be blocked additional features in MeteorLake. A wider decoder is a bigger change than + to RedwoodCove.

I don't buy it and think it's a bug or that it's the exact same cores but new instructions are blocked in Meteor.

It would be best to compare the shots of both cores.
 

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,256
654
96
So you think there are two versions: RedwoodCove with a 6-way decoder and RedwoodCove with an 8-way decoder?

It doesn't stick to me. This appears to be blocked additional features in MeteorLake. A wider decoder is a bigger change than + to RedwoodCove.

I don't buy it and think it's a bug or that it's the exact same cores but new instructions are blocked in Meteor.

It would be best to compare the shots of both cores.
Same here. I don't buy it either. Frankly, Intel should stop allocating resources to RWC (or RWC+ or RWC++) & ditch it altogether, move the the team to DMR, and accelerate it's release. Instead of releasing outdated products that just DOA. GNR is too little too late.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and DavidC1

DavidC1

Senior member
Dec 29, 2023
466
673
96
Same here. I don't buy it either. Frankly, Intel should stop allocating resources to RWC (or RWC+ or RWC++) & ditch it altogether, move the the team to DMR, and accelerate it's release. Instead of releasing outdated products that just DOA. GNR is too little too late.
What do you guys mean by it doesn't make sense?

It backs up Pat's statements perfectly. Paraphrasing, "Because of the move to Intel 3 and moving back the timeline, we were able to fit more performance, ten-plus percent in the core".

This is exactly what it is. They are saying it and you are saying, no, no, no.
 

trivik12

Senior member
Jan 26, 2006
321
288
136
Same here. I don't buy it either. Frankly, Intel should stop allocating resources to RWC (or RWC+ or RWC++) & ditch it altogether, move the the team to DMR, and accelerate it's release. Instead of releasing outdated products that just DOA. GNR is too little too late.
We have not seen any reviews and already you are calling it DOA !!! Wait until Intel On event. You will see reviews. I expect 3rd reviews like from phoronix and others on Day 1 similar to SRF.
 

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,256
654
96
We have not seen any reviews and already you are calling it DOA !!! Wait until Intel On event. You will see reviews. I expect 3rd reviews like from phoronix and others on Day 1 similar to SRF.
It's just that I'm not a big fan of RWC. I strongly feel a fat/power-hungry uarch like RWC shouldn't exist in this day and age. LNC is the right way to go. Good performance & better efficiency.

And most importantly, I can't wait for CWF with it's 288 darkmont cores. I'm pretty sure it'll be extermely powerful and efficient enough to blow the competition to smithereens.
 

H433x0n

Golden Member
Mar 15, 2023
1,107
1,356
96
Same here. I don't buy it either. Frankly, Intel should stop allocating resources to RWC (or RWC+ or RWC++) & ditch it altogether, move the the team to DMR, and accelerate its release. Instead of releasing outdated products that just DOA. GNR is too little too late.
I wouldn’t jump to conclusions yet. Just 2 days ago I would’ve called SRF DOA and yet the results were well beyond what we expected and somehow Xeon is the best defense against ARM’s encroaching market share in the data center.

GNR may end up being more competitive than you expect.
 

lightisgood

Senior member
May 27, 2022
209
90
71
I wouldn’t jump to conclusions yet. Just 2 days ago I would’ve called SRF DOA and yet the results were well beyond what we expected and somehow Xeon is the best defense against ARM’s encroaching market share in the data center.

GNR may end up being more competitive than you expect.

Based on SRF's review, it seems to be Intel at least fulfilled the PPW promise of Intel 3.
I'm sure that Xeon 6 has good competitiveness.
However, Intel DCAI's mainstream product is Emerald Rapids in this year, yet.
 

Attachments

  • Intel_3_PPW.png
    Intel_3_PPW.png
    878.2 KB · Views: 23

lightisgood

Senior member
May 27, 2022
209
90
71
Intel flexing on turin.. xeon 6900p will destroy it even more 😃😁

Yes. This is typical Lisa's AMD.
Lisa had an advantage over Krzanich, however, today's intel is Pat's intel.

AMD says that MI300 is wonderful and is refusing to submit MLPerf results as if running away.
Meanwhile, Intel confirms to submit Gaudi3's MLPerf results at the almost same time as launching product.

Also see this...


P.S.
Paul Alcorn, famous Tom's hardware writer, reports this news, too.
> Notably, Intel does submit its CPU and Gaudi test results
> to the publicly-available industry accepted MLPerf database
> to allow for easily verifiable AI benchmark results,
> whereas AMD has yet to submit any benchmarks for comparison.
 
Last edited:

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,254
3,659
126
So they used custom software and a total of 3 processors to barely eeek out a win, instead of generic software, where it was crushed. I would not say Turin was destroyed, but the other way around.
I don't understand your statement. Why do you think Intel used 3 processors in a 2 socket configuration?

Intel stated by using the open source PyTorch software you get 686 requests and by optimizing it you could turn off SNC to get 740 requests. This is compared to AMD's claim of 671 requests for their chip on an unspecified software/configuration. All on two 64 core Intel processors vs two 128 core AMD processors.