Itanium still Lives!

Discussion in 'CPUs and Overclocking' started by Edrick, Nov 8, 2012.

  1. Edrick

    Edrick Golden Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,622
    Likes Received:
    0
    I want one! Always wanted an Itanium, but never could justify the money. Poulson is the first one to make it interesting.

    Now just waiting for IBM to release Power 8 in response.
     
  2. Charles Kozierok

    Charles Kozierok Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Messages:
    6,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    I did, but only after reading a few months back that HP is basically bankrolling Itanium development due to having quite a few eggs in the basket. If not for that, I think it would be dead.
     
  3. jhu

    jhu Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 1999
    Messages:
    11,878
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]
     
  4. Olikan

    Olikan Golden Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,829
    Likes Received:
    0
    so...
    they doubled the performance because of "yes, we can" ?, or because itanium was losing suport?


    poulson
    11 instructions @ 2.53Ghz - compiler based
    power 7+
    8 instructions @ 4.4Ghz - OoO based

    IBM seems fine to me, but i don't know much about these CPUs
     
    #29 Olikan, Nov 9, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
  5. ShintaiDK

    ShintaiDK Lifer

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2012
    Messages:
    20,087
    Likes Received:
    15
    So by your logic Intel should have doubled performance from P4 to Core 2? Yet it was "only" 40%? And actually only 20% compared to Pentium-M. Not exactly fitting into competition conspiracy is it?

    The reason why Itanium scales better is because its a much younger design without the same limitations (yet). There is simply much more lower hanging fruits to be picked from IA64 designs still. Also why Itanium have already grown from 6 issue wide to 11 issue wide. x86 simply doesnt scale that way. As Intel even said, the 4th issue wide on x86 gave maybe 5%. Not 33% if the design had scaled perfectly.
     
    #30 ShintaiDK, Nov 9, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
  6. mrmt

    mrmt Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,976
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think you are being a bit unfair here. Performance does not scale linearly with core count and neither does clock in some benches. So the fact they doubled the performance is no small feat.

    From what I could get they made a lot of changes on the architecture. Do you know if those benches are compiled specifically for Poulson? You would not do that for a mass market processor like Core or Bulldozer, but for tailor-made servers like Integrity, you would not only recompile but also optimize specifically for it too.
     
  7. Olikan

    Olikan Golden Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,829
    Likes Received:
    0
    nop.... 40% is alot
    and, i would be very happy with a 20% increase with haswell to ivy

    but 8, 9, 10%..... booooo!
     
  8. WhoBeDaPlaya

    WhoBeDaPlaya Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2000
    Messages:
    6,474
    Likes Received:
    1
  9. Magic Carpet

    Magic Carpet Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2011
    Messages:
    3,099
    Likes Received:
    1
    Numbers please.
     
  10. Tsavo

    Tsavo Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is that actual size?

    Oh wait, that'd be Bulldozer.
     
  11. hamunaptra

    hamunaptra Senior member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    0
    Im pretty sure because x86 has been around for ages, tons more R&D went into stretching optimizing the way x86 code is handled at the hardware level for a while. Whereas Itanium ISA is fairly recent by comparison. It has much more room to further optimized.
     
  12. SunnyD

    SunnyD Belgian Waffler

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    Messages:
    32,541
    Likes Received:
    3
    Itanium: A solution in search of a problem.
     
  13. ShintaiDK

    ShintaiDK Lifer

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2012
    Messages:
    20,087
    Likes Received:
    15
    You get 10-15% in unoptimized code with Haswell and up to double the performance for pure optimized code. Plus frequency on top.

    Core 2 gave you 20% IPC over Pentium M, and thats with alot more than a single year in between.

    If competition is the reason, why are ARM cores so dull and turtle slow in terms of performance increase? Or AMD chips for that matter?

    I mean obvious you must have the answer to back up the "conspiracy", so please, explain.

    Or maybe the tick/tock is confusing you.
     
    #38 ShintaiDK, Nov 9, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012
  14. Olikan

    Olikan Golden Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,829
    Likes Received:
    0
    conspiracy? WHAT? WHERE?

    LOL, create a thread and try to explain why the lack of competition is good for the consumers...(oh...don't forget to use lub)
     
  15. ShintaiDK

    ShintaiDK Lifer

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2012
    Messages:
    20,087
    Likes Received:
    15
    Its you who claims that its the lack of competition that holds us back. yet you cant prove it does, since high competition segments shows exactly the same behaviour. So how does that work out? :rolleyes:
     
  16. cytg111

    cytg111 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,179
    Likes Received:
    6
    - I have a counter-proposal for you: Prove that lack of competition is good for innoivation.
    I dunno, to me it seems simple, but you may have an illuminating argument?
     
  17. Olikan

    Olikan Golden Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,829
    Likes Received:
    0
    yes...
    atom
    tick-tock model of 2 years cadence
    but for some odd reason, intel accelarated it to 1 year...

    i am sure that bobcat and ARM progress have nothing to do about it :rolleyes:
     
  18. Edrick

    Edrick Golden Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,622
    Likes Received:
    0
    What are you talking about? Intel is still on a 2 year cadence, Tock every 2 years and Tick every 2 years.
     
  19. Edrick

    Edrick Golden Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,622
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trendy little quote....that has no bearing here.

    It was a failed solution to a very big problem.
     
  20. Olikan

    Olikan Golden Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,829
    Likes Received:
    0
    this:
    [​IMG]
     
  21. Edrick

    Edrick Golden Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,622
    Likes Received:
    0
    I will believe it when I see it. Atom has been slower than 2 years for awhile. If 2014 gets Atom to 14nm, then I will agree with you. Until that happens, I disagree :)
     
  22. jhu

    jhu Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 1999
    Messages:
    11,878
    Likes Received:
    0
    Eagerly awaiting Future Product (although a bit strange for an architecture name).
     
  23. KompuKare

    KompuKare Senior member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    0
    More like all their high-end eggs in that basket - Itanium is nearly 100% HP as they basically contract Intel to design and manufacture the CPU for them. It's like Intel's Itanium is HP's outsourced CPU arm. Not even sure if this arrangement costs them less / provides them better results than having kept Alpha or PA RISC.
     
  24. Olikan

    Olikan Golden Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,829
    Likes Received:
    0
    if they manage to do this or don't t doesn't matter...it's the competition that made intel atleast think about doing it
     
  25. ShintaiDK

    ShintaiDK Lifer

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2012
    Messages:
    20,087
    Likes Received:
    15
    Competition already makes sure you need government support to change hard locked segments with multiple companies in it. Since the risk for a company to radically innovate is too high in terms of what the other company or companies can counter economicly cheap. hcen you need someone else to

    Competition also have a tendency to drive quality to the bottom. Something that is shown way too often. Often as a chance to destroy another competitor with higher quality products on a short run.

    And lastly, lack of competition is beneficial in a segment where costs for progress inhibits healthy competition. And x86 is one of those areas. The volume and market is simply too small for 2 players. Discrete cards is the next one where there will only be room for one.

    Dont get me wrong, competition is the best case in 70-80% of all cases. However its not the great saviour as often portraited.
     
    #50 ShintaiDK, Nov 9, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2012