Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
4th Generation of Core Microarchitecture: Intel Haswell

Started by: jijibu | Date 09/12/12 03:17:16 PM
Comments: 14 | Last Comment:  05/20/13 03:32:36 PM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-8]

1. 
Core architecture's progress somehow reminds me Pentium way... Their CPU progress is weaker and weaker in performance. it's mainly influenced by lowering nm-s than arhitectural innovations... That's why we need competitor like AMD, which forces Intel to try it's best in IGP sector.
Best side of Haswell is reduced power consumption...
4 0 [Posted by: jijibu  | Date: 09/12/12 03:17:16 PM]
Reply

2. 
pffffffff...

Okay i can see the 10% percent cpu performance over ivy bridge.

However the integrated graphics well have the same performance or less than the APU Liano series, also please note that haswell is 2 generation ahead of Liano, once AMD will release the Kabini APU based on 28mm CPU and GPU , with GCN arch,which will be released same time as haswell.

It will basically be an HD 7750 medium graphic card with 20% ram DDR3 instead of DDR5 penalty, and that is an 109 US dollars graphic card, so it will be like 80~90 USD worth of graphic card.

as well as the CPU enhancement in the steam roller that will provide similar performance of an sandy bride hopefully.

Face it guys, CPU performance hit a wall already with sandy bridge, its the internal GPU that counts now, and Intel needs a couple of more GPU arch`s to make it happen, and AMD is 2 steps forward in GPU and 2 steps backward in CPU.
2 2 [Posted by: medo  | Date: 09/13/12 01:49:44 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
I don't think what you said is entirely inaccurate, it probably will be similar performance to llano, but with a few caveats.

With in essence 160 shader processors, and a clock similar to Ivy bridge (1150-1300mhz), it could more-or-less match the lower-end Trinity (256sp @ 760mhz) in compute (or llano, 400 at 600mhz since 5D is generally less efficient) given the disparity of power efficient clocks between 22nm and 32nm (at probably around 1.05v).

That said, the native design seems geared toward having enough bandwidth, unlike trinity that may very well choke with 384sp versions. While AMD's design decisions may come down to toss-ups between getting decent yields and having an upper-end part that can use all bandwidth of the cpu when a task is completely devoted to the gpu, Intel's structure looks to be very efficient for what it is: a practical inherent resource split of an igp within a cpu tdp.

None of them have made the perfect omelet, but design, yield, and power realities kind of disrupt that from being practical.

I agree it's pretty much a race to whom can get enough shaders to saturate the equivalent of 4 ROPs (probably around 1.5-2x the gpu core logic haswell will have) at an energy efficient clock for the given process, supplying enough bandwidth to make it practical, having a strong-enough cpu for general tasks, while living inside realistic tdps for each given market.

AMD and Intel are both headed in that direction, but from opposite strongholds. Much of why it hasn't happened yet can probably be attributed to Intel's manufacturing lead (process and quality) re: AMD (which will probably get there on a smaller node) mixed with Intel's inexperience in creating appropriate consumer graphics architectures (causing them to rely on a stronger cpu which innovation has typically been their strong suit).
0 1 [Posted by: turtle  | Date: 09/13/12 04:40:30 AM]
Reply

3. 
I can't see the image whene using GGChrome
0 0 [Posted by: Multimedia2030  | Date: 09/16/12 07:00:59 AM]
Reply

4. 
With Intel at present only having 44% of the total cpu market and 80+% of the x86 market and its market share declining in both markets with the x86 market in near free fall it does not bode well for either co. playing in the x86/desktop/laptop/Wintel market with M/S already preparing its departure it is only a matter of time before the cpu market. This is the same thing which has happened in the Auto areo space and other USA donimated markets. The world has moved on not the bean counters who control the USA'S companies.
2 1 [Posted by: tedstoy  | Date: 09/16/12 07:13:33 PM]
Reply

5. 
Why Intel instead of using the extra transistors for CPU power is wasting them on stupid GPU processor??!? I mean for the performance CPUs not mainstream ones. Any user that buy a strong CPU will also buy a standalone graphics card, right?
0 1 [Posted by: TAViX  | Date: 09/21/12 07:13:57 AM]
Reply

6. 
3 years all the same clock speed of 3.5GHz and all Quad-Core only! Intel don't need 4GHz clock speeds and Octa-Core too be the fastest top dog around!

i7-2700K 3.5GHz Quad-Core 95W 32nm Sandy Bridge

i7-3770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core 77W 22nm Ivy Bridge

i7-4770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core 84W 22nm Haswell

i7-5800K 3.5GHz Quad-Core ??W 14nm Broadwell
0 0 [Posted by: ToxicTaZ  | Date: 02/16/13 03:30:40 PM]
Reply

7. 
when does it release in laptop in 2013
0 0 [Posted by: neel  | Date: 02/20/13 12:37:46 AM]
Reply

8. 
The Intel processors onboard this Dell T5600 performed well on benchmarks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uK1J3o1fks
0 0 [Posted by: Chris Rodinis  | Date: 05/20/13 03:32:36 PM]
Reply

[1-8]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment