1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Intel's "Core" Architecture; Successor to the P4 Announced

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by RotoSequence, 7 Mar 2006.

  1. RotoSequence

    RotoSequence Lazy Lurker

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    4,588
    Likes Received:
    7
    Well, Its come time that Intel has released the first information about the successor to the Netburst Architecture, which offers several tantalizing features

    4 issue processing
    128 bit SSE registers permitting single cycle SSE execution
    Micro-Ops Fusion
    Macro Ops Fusion (combining X86 instructions into single execution stages)
    2 MB L2 cache per core (dual core)

    Also included, a block diagram and a Merom Die shot :thumb:

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    More information to come throughout the day; Bit-tech will be able to keep better tabs on the information than I, but check out what there is to be seen; this architecture is looking interesting :D
     
    Last edited: 7 Mar 2006
  2. hitman012

    hitman012 Minimodder

    Joined:
    6 May 2005
    Posts:
    4,877
    Likes Received:
    19
    Very cool stuff, although the diagram isn't giving a huge amount of information :(. The shared L2 cache design is certainly a step forward to alleviate some load on the shared front side bus, though, and it's also interesting to note that they've cut both one ALU (they retaining any NetBurst design features for these?) and the execution trace cache.

    The latter is strange - perhaps it was removed because the extra transistors didn't justify the performance gain; it's easier to keep the pipes performing optimally than it was before, especially with the increased execution width and, therefore, the increase in buffer depth (meaning more transistors).

    I'm also especially curious about the ins and outs of the uop fusion system... I'll be keeping up-to-date with this one :)
     
    Last edited: 7 Mar 2006
  3. RotoSequence

    RotoSequence Lazy Lurker

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    4,588
    Likes Received:
    7
    Last edited: 7 Mar 2006
  4. atanum141

    atanum141 I fapped to your post!

    Joined:
    22 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    7,986
    Likes Received:
    19
    yeah cool stuff, im actually pretty interested in this conroe platform. the only doubts i have about these multi-cored systems is wouldnt the fsb be streched or even not fast enough to throw the data at such speeds where the cpu's have nothing to do.
     
  5. ch424

    ch424 Design Warrior

    Joined:
    26 May 2004
    Posts:
    3,112
    Likes Received:
    41
    Hitman, you're normally right about these things, but I thought the new "Core" processors were an evolution of the Pentium-M, so never had anything to do with NetBurst, right?

    What I don't get is what Merom adds over Core. 64-bitness? Virtualisation?

    ch424

    ch424
     
  6. hitman012

    hitman012 Minimodder

    Joined:
    6 May 2005
    Posts:
    4,877
    Likes Received:
    19
    You're quite correct in the respect that it's mainly Pentium M-based - I was wondering, however, if they had used the same system of ALU processing as NetBurst (fast simple instruction units, slow complex instruction unit), as IIRC they are taking a few features from the old architecture. In retrospect, it seems unlikely that they'll double-pump the units, but more information is yet to be released.

    The specifics haven't been announced for Merom, but it's likely that it will feature much lower power consumption than the desktop parts and better silicon for low-voltage running. All Intel chips since Prescott E have implemented EM64T instructions, which is basically an Intelified AMD64 set. Intel's virtualisation technology, code-named Silvervale, is also set to be included in all newer chips.
     
  7. Ramble

    Ramble Ginger Nut

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    5,596
    Likes Received:
    43
    I believe the new Core processor is a merging of Pentium-M technology and Netburst.
     
  8. RotoSequence

    RotoSequence Lazy Lurker

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    4,588
    Likes Received:
    7
    Not quite - The Core architecture follows the same aspects of performance per watt (realizing that no one liked the ovens that are Pentium 4s), and worked on making a high power, high efficiency architecture. This thing has a lot of things that current Centrino processors lack.
     
  9. ch424

    ch424 Design Warrior

    Joined:
    26 May 2004
    Posts:
    3,112
    Likes Received:
    41
    But what though?

    ch424
     
  10. Krikkit

    Krikkit All glory to the hypnotoad! Super Moderator

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2003
    Posts:
    23,623
    Likes Received:
    457
    This looks damn fine. Looking forward to this tbh.
     
  11. padrejones2001

    padrejones2001 Puppy Love

    Joined:
    17 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    1,434
    Likes Received:
    15
    You and me both. Intel was looking a little bit, shall we say, pathetic during the inception of the Prescott cores, but now that they've gotten under new management and acquired a new outlook on the processor industry, they can finally move forward and make great processors again. This is quite a step forward from where they were 18 months ago.
     
  12. RotoSequence

    RotoSequence Lazy Lurker

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    4,588
    Likes Received:
    7
    Great processors indeed: Anandtech ran benchmarks (preloaded onto two machines, one with an FX-60 at 2.8 GHz).

    Anandtech didnt see anything fishy, but the results, summed up, are that Intel is kicking ass with a vengeance. The 2.66 GHz Conroe that they had running was running 50% faster in most benchmarks than the Athlon 64 FX (which was 200 MHz overclocked). Both machines were running in Crossfire, and appeared to be using identical configurations and drivers.

    While we cant be certain about core clocks or memory clocks on the GPUs, if things werent messed with, AMD is going to have some serious catch up to do over their current Athlon 64 offerings to maintain the gaming crown in current generation architectures - otherwise, Intel will once again be the top choice for gaming enthusiasts.
     
  13. ch424

    ch424 Design Warrior

    Joined:
    26 May 2004
    Posts:
    3,112
    Likes Received:
    41
    :jawdrop: Roto's talking about this. Just insane to be honest. This is going to be awesome.

    ch424
     
  14. padrejones2001

    padrejones2001 Puppy Love

    Joined:
    17 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    1,434
    Likes Received:
    15
    Mother of God, those things are fast. I can't even imagine what they'll do if you ramped up the FSB.
     
  15. RotoSequence

    RotoSequence Lazy Lurker

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    4,588
    Likes Received:
    7
    Going by the motherboard though (DFI RD480) theres an awful lot of room for BIOS manipulation (and as of late, it hasnt seemed to be past Intel to "tweak" results...)

    So the question becomes, are games truly that CPU limited?
     
  16. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,937
    Likes Received:
    536
    Hmmm.... interesting :naughty:


    btw... SMP.... i have an idea what it is via googling, but is it something you can turn on and off easily? I'm pretty certain Windows XP Pro supports it, but how do I know it's using it?

    What of those who use Win XP Home and buy a dual core CPU?
     
  17. hitman012

    hitman012 Minimodder

    Joined:
    6 May 2005
    Posts:
    4,877
    Likes Received:
    19
    It's just a fancy name for a multiprocessor environment in which the CPUs share resources, e.g. RAM. You can turn it off if you want by reverting to the uniprocessor ACPI configuration, but you'll lose half of your FX-60 ;)

    AFAIK Home is licensed to a single physical processing unit, not a logical one. HyperThreading works fine on Home, so dual-core processors should as well.
     
  18. Ab$olut

    Ab$olut What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    22 Dec 2004
    Posts:
    590
    Likes Received:
    1
    lets see what amd have instore with am2 im sure they will have something up there sleeves ;) none the less its going to be a good cpu war 2006
     
  19. Shadowed_fury

    Shadowed_fury Minimodder

    Joined:
    21 Nov 2003
    Posts:
    7,506
    Likes Received:
    21
    Can't wait, come on Intel! :)
    And Dual processors works on Home, can't see Dual Core being a problem.
     
  20. Sherk

    Sherk What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    10 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aww man, and I just went over to the AMD side of the house after being on Intel's side for all these years (broke down and bought an Opty 165). :waah:
     

Share This Page