|
|
#1 |
|
Administrator
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,009
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Intel's Haswell brings transactional memory tech
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Hypermodder
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 979
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Another clever thing about this tech is that it's backwards compatible with existing software that uses locks for safe concurrency. The thread will believe it has an exclusive lock on the data, but the system will actually allow another thread access to the data in a transactional manner. This'll allow a speed improvement in cases where thread #1 is modifying the data, but thread #2 is only reading it or modifying a non conflicting part of it. Of course, software written with transactions in mind will run even better.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
__________________
Main: Silverstone FT03 | Asus P8P67-M Pro | i5 2500K @ 4.6Ghz | CM 212+ | 16GB Corsair Vengeance 1600Mhz | MSI Radeon 7970 | 128GB Crucial C300 + 1TB Samsung F3 | CM Silent Pro Gold 600W | Samsung XL2270HD Server: Asus M3N78-AM | Athlon II X3 400e | 4GB Corsair XMS2 | 4x 2TB Samsung F4EG (RAID-5) | LSI MegaRAID 8708EM2 | Corsair CX400 |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 219
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
From what I can tell this is just a very low level somewhat restrictive read/write lock. Except instead of waiting for a write lock everything just runs at once and the one that commits the finished operation back to memory first gets to do it, the others then finish, get told they failed and have to start again.
Hence it seems very computensively expensive as before if 6 processes all wanted a write lock 5 would wait and one would do it's work. Now all 6 go for it, but 5 have to abort and start all over again. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Supermodder
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 476
![]() ![]() |
if we're going to have features that are incompatible with current software, personally i'd rather go with amd's route of using a fused cpu and gpu rather than TSX. i'd like to know how much of a difference tsx makes, because i feel like certain tasks won't benefit from this at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
I'm special...
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Aarhus, Denmark
Posts: 3,757
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I'd like to refer you to Andreas Stiller's article from December 2011. In a nutshell, with future many core CPUs transactional memory isn't a "nice-to-have" feature but more of a "must-have" feature.
PS: You can read the original German version here.
__________________
It's not the end of the world ...but you can see it from here. Xeon E3-1245 v2 3.4 GHz | ASUS P8C WS | 16GB Kingston ECC DDR3 | Samsung 830 256GB | eVGA GTX670 2GB | SB Audigy | Seasonic X-560 | Corsair Obsidian 550D | Dell 2209WA |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
What's a Dremel?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17
![]() |
Quote:
Like SSE/SSE2, it made a difference when programmers started coding for it. It didn't help straight away on legacy software. And it only helps if the situation warrants it. You can't just go around implementing everything on everything - these functions have specific tasks, not a catch all situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
What's a Dremel?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kent
Posts: 2
![]() |
if it does to cpu's as it did databases then this could be epic.
sent from my keyboard using my fingers! :-P |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
IT Consultant
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 220
![]() |
There is any "demo" (simulated is ok) around?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Hypermodder
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 979
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I'm sure Intel will demo it at an engineering conference once their Haswell chips are ready to be shown to the world.
__________________
Main: Silverstone FT03 | Asus P8P67-M Pro | i5 2500K @ 4.6Ghz | CM 212+ | 16GB Corsair Vengeance 1600Mhz | MSI Radeon 7970 | 128GB Crucial C300 + 1TB Samsung F3 | CM Silent Pro Gold 600W | Samsung XL2270HD Server: Asus M3N78-AM | Athlon II X3 400e | 4GB Corsair XMS2 | 4x 2TB Samsung F4EG (RAID-5) | LSI MegaRAID 8708EM2 | Corsair CX400 |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Mod Master
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cornwall and London
Posts: 2,814
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
And yes certain talks won't benefit from it but that appliest to almost and particular element of processor technologyn
__________________
As a rule watercooling can be simple, affordable and effective... I guess I just like to break the rules. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Supermodder
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Seattle
Posts: 399
![]() |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|