Upgrading to haswell

[Edrick]

Will it ah heck. If a CPU which does not support FMA3 receives an FMA3 instruction, it will not have a clue what to do.

You can have alternate paths in your code which avoid the FMA instruction and instead issue separate multiply and add instructions, but as I pointed out that adds complexity.

That is done at the compile level. It will not have to be done by the developer (unless you are coding in Assembly).

So it may add a slight increse in size of the end state library, but it will not add complexity or time to the development.

 

[NTMBK]

Yea, right kid.

I just disagree with a 2 years or more number someone pulled out of their arse. I never put an exact number anywhere.

No, no exact numbers, just wild exaggerations and speculation.

 

[NTMBK]

That is done at the compile level. It will not have to be done by the developer (unless you are coding in Assembly).

So it may add a slight increse in size of the end state library, but it will not add complexity or time to the development.

That's an option if you're using autovectorized stuff generated by the compiler, aye. I was talking about handwritten algorithms. (Using intrinsics or assembly.) I'm highly dubious of the real world performance gains you can get from autovectorization (although AVX2 will help).

 

[Edrick]

Aha. I write code full of SSE intrinsics for a living. Try again.

And you talk about my arguements being irrelevant. SSE and AVX2 are very different beasts.

Listen, if you want to have a conversation about this, I am game. But your attacking is very immature.

 

[NTMBK]

And you talk about my arguements being irrelevant. SSE and AVX2 are very different beasts.

Different, sure, but far more relevant to the discussion than GPUs using FMA...

 

[Edrick]

No, no exact numbers, just wild exaggerations and speculation.

"Under 2 years" is wild exaggerations? I don't think so. The latest VS2012 already supports it. The latest Intel Compilers already suppot it. As I stated before, it can be written into code now and it will run fine on todays CPUs and take advantage of Haswell (and Piledriver), when executed on those platforms.

Yes, it is speculation, but I feel it is well within expectations.

 

[Edrick]

That's an option if you're using autovectorized stuff generated by the compiler, aye. I was talking about handwritten algorithms. (Using intrinsics or assembly.) I'm highly dubious of the real world performance gains you can get from autovectorization (although AVX2 will help).

Yes, if using assembly, then sure, you are 100% correct.

But seeing that most games (and applications) are written in something else, like C++ for example, autovectorization will be the norm. And I have no doubts that Intel compilers will be very optimized.

 

[moonbogg]

New features will take for damn ever to be used by common stuff like games. Are you serious about less than 2 years? Game devs make games for consoles and will continue to do so. Do you expect them to make more advanced code for brand spanking new CPUs that hardly anyone will own compared to the older CPUs? Games are going to stay consolized and simple for a longass time. Haswell's benefit to gamers will be IPC and clockspeed, pure and simple.

 

[cytg111]

Do you expect them to make more advanced code for brand spanking new CPUs that hardly anyone will own compared to the older CPUs?.

- Yes. If its a simple matter of a recompile of the runtime and a gain of 40% upwards, hell yes. To be bundled with the installer, why not? The cost/benefit looks like a nobrainer.

 

[NTMBK]

Yes, if using assembly, then sure, you are 100% correct.

But seeing that most games (and applications) are written in something else, like C++ for example, autovectorization will be the norm. And I have no doubts that Intel compilers will be very optimized.

Sadly C++ just doesn't handle the concepts of SIMD very well in its basic form. It's why we use things like intrinsics. The GPGPU languages like CUDA do a nice job of it- just by adding primitives like float4 and their vector operations you can make clean vector code.

Autovectorisation has its place and is great for an "almost free" speed boost (just throw the magic compiler switch! ). But it can't approach the gains had from handwriting intrinsics/assembly. (Intrinsics are more common, since Microsoft chucked out support for inline asm in their 64 bit compiler, and they're generally nicer to work with.) Just autovec won't get the promised 2X speedups from newer instruction set extensions.

 

[tweakboy]

All this Haswell talk, you guys realize Haswell is 2014 release Q2 at earliest. That is about 18 months away. You wait 18 months for 5 percent improvement and Haswell instructions,,,, how many companies are gonna have their software optimized for haswell, making everything else look bad. Its a big step forward, but my Water 2.0 doesnt have this 1150 bracket,,, soo I cant use it ? I have to buy a Haswell and buy a 100 dollar Corshair or Thermaltake all in one ,,,,, sealed rubber,,pump on block,, neat stuff,, speedfan as time goes slowly slows down my 2 fans both pointing exhaust put up top drilled holes,,, and have fan so slow on Rad in middle sandwiched... how cool a coolant gets depends on the air and the weather,, plus my case is open on both sides,, dispates heat away with a room set at 70F.... thx gl

 

[kleinkinstein]

All this Haswell talk, you guys realize Haswell is 2014 release Q2 at earliest. That is about 18 months away.

WhatchootalkinboutWillis? You've got the right quarter, wrong year. Do better. Haswell arrives in six short months, <200 days!

 

[Kristijonas]

Sorry, but:

Could someone explain the meaning of these words, please? Want to educate myself

 

[moonbogg]

- Yes. If its a simple matter of a recompile of the runtime and a gain of 40% upwards, hell yes. To be bundled with the installer, why not? The cost/benefit looks like a nobrainer.

If we could somehow make a bet and remember it, I would bet you. Forget all the contingencies and stipulations. You say Haswell will scream based on its new features being implemented in games and I say that won't happen for a long time. Plain and simple.

 

[tweakboy]

Guys man sheeez Im soo sorry,,,,,, for this mistake. Actually I had heard Haswell was coming out in 2013 late but I saw some graph and got confused,,, that sandy E and ivy E 6 core come then haswell in 2014. Gosh I had it right first time, sorry for mistake thats they have this forum. I was misinformed and you told me 200 days. So thanks for your response and I apologize for my post.. sheeeez :'(

 

[tweakboy]

OMG Then if its 2013 Im upgrading, but once again no brackets for the 1150 ,,,,, for all in one water,, maybe by then a new one comes out with support for haswell. that is one thing Im worried about. Man there is no way I will buy a 4 core 8 thread haswell. I need cores for Sonar X2 . Just like some one who does heavy encoding needs more cores.......
I cant see myself buying a Q6 GO in 2007 Nov. Then in 2013 I buy another quad core, shure it has 8 threads and its almost like 8 cores, and shows as soo. if app is HT enabled which I know it is same with Premiere... I will get the 6 core hexa Haswell for sure...... Its going to cost 1k ,,,,,,, at least highest version, and thats what I wanna do buy highest version,,,,, buy best I can for 2013 , and not upgrae for another 6 to 8 years Ill be way safe.........

 

[moonbogg]

OMG Then if its 2013 Im upgrading, but once again no brackets for the 1150 ,,,,, for all in one water,, maybe by then a new one comes out with support for haswell. that is one thing Im worried about. Man there is no way I will buy a 4 core 8 thread haswell. I need cores for Sonar X2 . Just like some one who does heavy encoding needs more cores.......
I cant see myself buying a Q6 GO in 2007 Nov. Then in 2013 I buy another quad core, shure it has 8 threads and its almost like 8 cores, and shows as soo. if app is HT enabled which I know it is same with Premiere... I will get the 6 core hexa Haswell for sure...... Its going to cost 1k ,,,,,,, at least highest version, and thats what I wanna do buy highest version,,,,, buy best I can for 2013 , and not upgrae for another 6 to 8 years Ill be way safe.........

You are acting funny and your posts seem unfamiliar coming from you. Are you alright?

 

[cytg111]

If we could somehow make a bet and remember it, I would bet you. Forget all the contingencies and stipulations. You say Haswell will scream based on its new features being implemented in games and I say that won't happen for a long time. Plain and simple.

It's on .. we will revisit this thread in 2 years if I'm right ill dig dig it up .. If not, then I assume you will .

 

[cytg111]

You are acting funny and your posts seem unfamiliar coming from you. Are you alright?

- Thinking the same thing ... Drugs ?

 

[moonbogg]

It's on .. we will revisit this thread in 2 years if I'm right ill dig dig it up .. If not, then I assume you will .

OK, but 2 years? I thought that if games don't get a 40% increase upon Haswell's release day you auto-lose the bet. Right?
JK. If I can even remember or care in 2 years then we'll dig it up. By then we will have moved on to argue about the next chip, and all will be right with the world.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

OMG Then if its 2013 Im upgrading, but once again no brackets for the 1150 ,,,,, for all in one water,, maybe by then a new one comes out with support for haswell. that is one thing Im worried about. Man there is no way I will buy a 4 core 8 thread haswell. I need cores for Sonar X2 . Just like some one who does heavy encoding needs more cores.......
I cant see myself buying a Q6 GO in 2007 Nov. Then in 2013 I buy another quad core, shure it has 8 threads and its almost like 8 cores, and shows as soo. if app is HT enabled which I know it is same with Premiere... I will get the 6 core hexa Haswell for sure...... Its going to cost 1k ,,,,,,, at least highest version, and thats what I wanna do buy highest version,,,,, buy best I can for 2013 , and not upgrae for another 6 to 8 years Ill be way safe.........

Man, just put down the chronic

 

[SithSolo1]

- Thinking the same thing ... Drugs ?

Haha. I don't even follow tweakboy post what much but I thought the same thing. I was under the impress he at least spoke English as a first language at a level higher than 5th grade.

As for the 1150 bracket, it may be the same physical size as the 1155 bracket. Even if it isn't I bet they will have updated brackets available for little to no cost.

 

[Lazlo Panaflex]

<tweakrant snip>

psssst...guess what, you can get an 8 core CPU...it's called Bulldozer. Why don't you go buy one, AMD could use the help. OMG! Whatevs!

D:

 

[ShintaiDK]

Could someone explain the meaning of these words, please? Want to educate myself

AVX2 is new 256bit instructions. Gather and vector of scalar instructions. Huge perofrmance benefit possible there. Haswell also got 2 extra issue ports and everything is double to handle singlecycle 256bit execution. Including double L1 and L2 bandwidths.

TSX is to help certain types of multithreaded code.

SOix is basicly power saving modes.

The ondie VRM is also a huge thing, mainly for power, platform size reduction and cost savings. In theory all the VRM around the CPU socket gets moved ondie.

 

[blckgrffn]

I would think that, somewhat ironically, games will be heavily optimized for the latest and greatest ISA set AMD includes in their APUs come next summer.*

*If it's true that AMD is going into at least the PS4, if not also the next xbox. PC gamers are just a handful next to the legions of console gamers, so unless Haswell is in a gaming console somewhere, I doubt we tons of optimization for it in the near term.

Why would we when the adoption rate for new desktop computers is going to be so long and slow? Developers don't normally cater to a small minority of their potential customers.

And the number of CPU limited games is what, now? Be realistic here. We're talking can't manage 30-40 FPS for most folks out there, not whether or not it can feed your double GTX 690 setup.