Intel Corp. said that its next-generation multi-core processor code-named Haswell will support Transactional Synchronization Extensions (TSX). These new synchronization extensions are useful in shared-memory multithreaded applications that employ lock-based synchronization mechanisms. Thanks to TSX, specially written applications will run faster on multi-core/multi-threaded chips.
Intel TSX provides a set of instruction set extensions that allow programmers to specify regions of code for transactional synchronization. Programmers can use these extensions to achieve the performance of fine-grain locking while actually programming using coarse-grain locks. With transactional synchronization, the hardware can determine dynamically whether threads need to serialize through lock-protected critical sections, and perform serialization only when required. This lets the processor expose and exploit concurrency that would otherwise be hidden due to dynamically unnecessary synchronization.

At the lowest level with Intel TSX, programmer-specified code regions (also referred to as transactional regions) are executed transactionally. If the transactional execution completes successfully, then all memory operations performed within the transactional region will appear to have occurred instantaneously when viewed from other logical processors. A processor makes architectural updates performed within the region visible to other logical processors only on a successful commit, a process referred to as an atomic commit.
These extensions can help achieve the performance of fine-grain locking while using coarser grain locks. These extensions can also allow locks around critical sections while avoiding unnecessary serializations. If multiple threads execute critical sections protected by the same lock but they do not perform any conflicting operations on each other’s data, then the threads can execute concurrently and without serialization. Even though the software uses lock acquisition operations on a common lock, the hardware is allowed to recognize this, elide the lock, and execute the critical sections on the two threads without requiring any communication through the lock if such communication was dynamically unnecessary.
While Intel TSX may enable efficient implementations of new programming models, it does not require a new programming model and does not propose a new programming model. Intel TSX provides hardware-supported transactional-execution extensions to ease the development and improve the performance of existing programming models.
Intel TSX targets a certain class of shared-memory multi-threaded applications; specifically multi-threaded applications that actively share data. Intel TSX is about allowing programs to achieve fine-grain lock performance without requiring the complexity of reasoning about fine-grain locking.
Tags: Intel, Haswell, 22nm, TSX
Comments currently:
19
Discussion started: 02/09/12 02:04:58 PM
Latest comment: 02/13/12 08:57:48 AM
Expand all threads |
Collapse all threads
[1-7]
1.
Awesome!!!
5
1
[
Posted by: jmlxg

|
Date: 02/09/12 02:04:58 PM]
2.
I'm still going to buy IB and not holdout for Haswell.
2
0
[
Posted by: AnonymousGuy

|
Date: 02/09/12 10:35:11 PM]
+ expand thread (2 answers)
- collapse thread
...and then still buy Haswell or its refresh anyway. You know you'll want to

2
1
[
Posted by: BestJinjo

|
Date: 02/10/12 07:13:41 AM]
Me too.
2
1
[
Posted by: jmlxg

|
Date: 02/10/12 10:37:33 AM]
3.
Competition or no competition Intel keeps going right along...
3
0
[
Posted by: SteelCity1981

|
Date: 02/10/12 09:57:55 AM]
+ expand thread (3 answers)
- collapse thread
Why wouldn't they? That's the very nature of the PC/electronic industries. All companies do this because if you aren't going forward, you are definitely going backwards in these dynamic industries.
0
4
[
Posted by: beenthere

|
Date: 02/10/12 02:05:31 PM]
AMD sucks for Id's Rage so I WON'T be buying any of their products. Worse off AMD hasn't fixed the texture popping where everyone else has. I can't wait to play rage on Intel's HD 4000 its going ROCK OUT LOUD.
2
2
[
Posted by: jmlxg

|
Date: 02/10/12 02:15:06 PM]
Because they don't have to in that segment. They could slow up if they wanted to and no one is close to catching them now that's why.
3
1
[
Posted by: SteelCity1981

|
Date: 02/11/12 09:44:59 PM]
4.
Haha! Even more instructions! I wonder how much time before x86 becomes so complex that nobody would be able to handle it?
The funniest thing is that in nature much more powerful computers are based on much simpler principles, which enable astounding parallelism, unimaginable fault tolerance and reliability, unmatched cognitive abilities. :D
Oh, well in 1 billion years Intel might actually do it!

0
1
[
Posted by: Zingam

|
Date: 02/11/12 01:18:11 AM]
5.
0
2
[
Posted by: mosu

|
Date: 02/11/12 04:11:19 AM]
+ expand thread (7 answers)
- collapse thread
AMD's HSA approach is due in 2013/2014 with many exciting APU possibilities. Clearly AMD's APUs are the future for most mainstream PC users.
http://www.anandtech.com/...-in-2013-hsa-gpus-in-2014
0
4
[
Posted by: beenthere

|
Date: 02/11/12 09:46:39 AM]
"Clearly AMD's APUs are the future for most mainstream PC users."
That may be true but more for laptops and Ultrathin strategy. However, keep in mind, Xbitlabs is a site for PC enthusiasts. We don't care about APUs on the desktop and their weak graphics.
Put it this way, if you are a mainstream user, you aren't reading this website. And if you are a PC enthusiast who builds desktops for gaming, you'll be FAR more excited about Haswell (or whatever next advanced power CPU will be) than some crappy Intel/AMD APUs, even if they increase performance 2-3x. We'll be pairing Haswell with HD8000 or Kepler refresh, etc.
Actually, the mainstream users are most likely to buy more advanced smartphones and tablets than crappy laptops. Most "mainstream" users I know don't care about $500 cheap laptops (with AMD APUs or Intel GPU, doesn't matter to them). They'd rather buy an iPad 3 for $500 for basic tasks and a nice laptop for everything else, while gaming on a console.
And that leaves PC desktop enthusiasts, who buy the best CPU for gaming -- which has been Intel for since Core 2 Duo days in 2006. I agree that AMD's APU will be amazing for the mobile side though, especially if they bring better longer battery life than Intel and underprice Ultrabooks by $200 with their Ultrathin line.
2
1
[
Posted by: BestJinjo

|
Date: 02/11/12 12:47:28 PM]
Please take your Meds...
0
4
[
Posted by: beenthere

|
Date: 02/11/12 01:58:37 PM]
Beenthere I think you need to just fall off a cliff and post it on youtube.
3
1
[
Posted by: jmlxg

|
Date: 02/11/12 02:37:44 PM]
Why do I need to take meds?
Intel G800 series is faster than the entire Bulldozer line for games:
http://www.tomshardware.c...apu-benchmark,3120-3.html
http://www.tomshardware.c...apu-benchmark,3120-6.html
A budget desktop gamer would get a Pentium G850 or even G630 and spend $50-60 on a cheap videocard. That setup would still be much faster than any AMD APU setup. Why would anyone buy an A8-3870K for $140?
Especially since people who want to game on a budget can probably find a 9800GT/ GT250 or HD4850 or even HD4890 for $50-70.
3
1
[
Posted by: BestJinjo

|
Date: 02/11/12 07:58:22 PM]
you are preaching to a self-centered, self-proclaimed-know-it-all, who is the best known amd kiss-@$$ bloke on the face of online forums worldwide! regardless of whatever source of info you post, he won't and can't get it thru his thick hollow skull!
2
1
[
Posted by: dudde

|
Date: 02/13/12 08:57:47 AM]
I can't wait for haswell even though I am a low power computer enthusiast. I can't run Id's Rage properly on Anything that has an AMD GPU in it including APU's.
2
1
[
Posted by: jmlxg

|
Date: 02/11/12 02:36:16 PM]
6.
I wonder how much better HT will work with Haswell, when compared to sandy bridge. Haswell will be up against AMDs Steamroller cores
http://amdfx.blogspot.com/
1
4
[
Posted by: polyzp

|
Date: 02/11/12 04:46:08 PM]
7.
In this age, Intel has to compete with its discontinued capable CPU backlog and ARM to survive. Something AMD fanboys can't understand with their No AMD = Intel monopoly bullshit. How about AMD release something competitive that people actually want if they don't want that to happen?
2
0
[
Posted by: Randomguy

|
Date: 02/12/12 03:08:17 AM]
[1-7]