Resurrection?

[PeachGr]

https://wccftech.com/intel-grand-ridge-platform-will-feature-24-atom-cores-based-on-7nm-hll-process/

Well according to that article, Intel is back in business with a 7nm and DDR 5 and pcie 4.0 and things like that. 

Combine with the news about Intel... well Intel... leak. That can mean 3 things: 

1. That page is full of b.s.

2. Intel is really back

3. They even leak things on purpose to show that they are cooking something!!11!!

[eeeee1]

I hope Intel comes back

[Mateyyy]

Moving from "few" (as in few compared to AMD's counterparts), very fast cores to lots of Atom cores sounds like quite the shift in direction. Maybe they know something we don't, but I don't see that panning out particularly great for most consumers at the moment.

(assuming this is actually real, of course)

[PeachGr]

3 minutes ago, Mateyyy said:

Moving from "few" (as in few compared to AMD's counterparts), very fast cores to lots of Atom cores sounds like quite the shift in direction. Maybe they know something we don't, but I don't see that panning out particularly great for most consumers at the moment.

(assuming this is actually real, of course)

So Atom cores means something? I thought it was a marketing term like "AI cores" or "quantum cores"

[startrek03]

5 minutes ago, Mateyyy said:

Moving from "few" (as in few compared to AMD's counterparts), very fast cores to lots of Atom cores sounds like quite the shift in direction. Maybe they know something we don't, but I don't see that panning out particularly great for most consumers at the moment.

(assuming this is actually real, of course)

A lot of programs aren't even able to utilize the "few" cores right now. On such an Atom core you might be able to open a gazillion Chrome tabs, if you have enough RAM. But in real life performance they might, as you already said, not be that good.

[PeachGr]

Just now, startrek03 said:

A lot of programs aren't even able to utilize the "few" cores right now. On such an Atom core you might be able to open a gazillion Chrome tabs, if you have enough RAM. But in real life performance they might, as you already said, not be that good.

Agree to that, 90% of people will be happy with a PC that costs about 400$, but innovation is good. Better games, better movies, better apps in general will always need more computing performance

[Blademaster91]

Those Atom cores are going to be really awful for any serious tasks unless they have decent IPC,  then again it's WCCF so a huge pile of salt.

 

[Mateyyy]

1 minute ago, PeachGr said:

So Atom cores means something? I thought it was a marketing term like "AI cores" or "quantum cores"

Atom is basically Intel's branding for their super low-power chips, they were very common with netbooks back in the day.

I think Intel's current-gen Xeon Scalable CPUs are based also on Atom cores, but I could be wrong on that.

 

3 minutes ago, startrek03 said:

A lot of programs aren't even able to utilize the "few" cores right now. On such an Atom core you might be able to open a gazillion Chrome tabs, if you have enough RAM. But in real life performance they might, as you already said, not be that good.

What I'm thinking is that Intel's whole shtick at the moment is gaming. I mean, "GaMiNg" is literally plastered all over their Comet Lake marketing.

Lots of Atom cores is exactly the opposite of what you want for gaming, at least with today's titles, so this is what I don't really get. It's not like this is supposed to be HEDT either, since that slide only mentions dual-channel memory support.

[startrek03]

1 minute ago, Mateyyy said:

What I'm thinking is that Intel's whole shtick at the moment is gaming. I mean, "GaMiNg" is literally plastered all over their Comet Lake marketing.

Lots of Atom cores is exactly the opposite of what you want for gaming, at least with today's titles, so this is what I don't really get. It's not like this is supposed to be HEDT either, since that slide only mentions dual-channel memory support.

Idk, the only thing that comes to my mind, when I hear low power and tons of cores, is laptops for for video editing or rendering tasks since these processes usually utilize multiple cores quite well.

And maybe they want to diversify their product line after their drop in marketshare. I mean, even the "GaMiNg" market is mostly dominated by AMD at this point.

[Fasterthannothing]

You know what this brings to mind GPUs. Remember Linus did that video of rendering graphics in the CPU? What if the base CPU is 24 cores and Intel is looking at doing 100+ cores in a cpu and completely eliminating the iGPU thus increasing efficiency and bringing their supposed GPU all at once? Intel has mentioned 100+ core CPUs all the way back in 2006. I don't know maybe I'm not thinking about this correctly so someone feel free to chime in. 

[PeachGr]

27 minutes ago, Shorty88jr said:

You know what this brings to mind GPUs. Remember Linus did that video of rendering graphics in the CPU? What if the base CPU is 24 cores and Intel is looking at doing 100+ cores in a cpu and completely eliminating the iGPU thus increasing efficiency and bringing their supposed GPU all at once? Intel has mentioned 100+ core CPUs all the way back in 2006. I don't know maybe I'm not thinking about this correctly so someone feel free to chime in. 

They have to somehow make the CPU strong enough to compete in the CPU market as well. But there are so many news those days... Maybe they killed Xe for that reason that you mention, who knows

[2FA]

So basically the Xeon D platform?

[PeachGr]

3 hours ago, Caroline said:

so the fanboy horde strikes the forums again with their "boooo amd is bs only poor ppl buy it lolz how can you play with amd" crap and making posts about how their $3000 64 core intel chip is 1000 times better than a dual core athlon from 2006? 

 

No, thanks.

We don't in sides. Intel is one of the two manufacturers. Without that and will start b.s tactics that you don't wanna see.

[eeeee1]

3 hours ago, Caroline said:

so the fanboy horde strikes the forums again with their "boooo amd is bs only poor ppl buy it lolz how can you play with amd" crap and making posts about how their $3000 64 core intel chip is 1000 times better than a dual core athlon from 2006? 

 

No, thanks.

wtf man? I RUN AMD. READ THE SIG! i want intel to stay because it creates competition and maybe intel might actually pull a good product. aint a fanboy for anyone.

[TetraSky]

Good news that Intel finally is getting up to speed with the "next gen" of pci-e and gets support for DD5. (not to mention 7nm)

But, last I checked, Atom cores were low power cores designed for very low power devices like tablet and the sole reason it has to exist today is because even though it has very low single core performances, it's still better than ARMs.

The "up to" 2.6GHz clock speed is pretty much proof to that.

It might be somewhat decent in highly multithreaded applications, but other than that... Not really something I'd go out of my way to get in my mobile devices.

[Bombastinator]

I don’t think there is or ever really has been a question that intel will come back.  They’re too big.  They’ve got other sectors to fall back on.  The question is when? Implication here is they have a shot in 2021 maybe. A 24 atom core processor sounds like kind of a specialty use item though that won’t affect either game PCs or even a lot of enterprise stuff all that much. It’s apparently on 7nm though which implies they either think they will have 7nm running by 2021 or there’s still delusion problems there. There was a claim that the 7nm problems were “fixable”.  Might be counting chickens before they hatch though with 7nm not actually in hand.

[CarlBar]

The only thought that springs to mind here is intel is going to try and copy AMD, (sort of), and go to a really insane number of cores, but each core will be quite weak. I just don't see that working well unless intel pulls somthing weird like grouping the cores together and displaying each group to the OS as a single core. In that situation the cpu would presumably split each thread amongst the cores as the individual cores fill up.

 

I still suspect serious technical hurdles but potentially they could produce somthing competitive with it as power efficiency drops exponentially with increasing frequency so really low clock cores in huge numbers would be quite power efficient.

[Dabombinable]

So a really gimped Xeon Phi then?

[Helpful Tech Witch]

52 minutes ago, eeeee1 said:

wtf man? I RUN AMD. READ THE SIG! i want intel to stay because it creates competition and maybe intel might actually pull a good product. aint a fanboy for anyone.

I mean my rig is intel, but does that mean i like anti consumer practices? Do i like that my 7th gen preforms the same as a 4th gen? Take a guess.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

32 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

It’s apparently on 7nm though which implies they either think they will have 7nm running by 2021 or there’s still delusion problems there. There was a claim that the 7nm problems were “fixable”.  Might be counting chickens before they hatch though with 7nm not actually in hand.

Didnt intel say 7nm was coming out 2022 earliest?

[Helpful Tech Witch]

6 hours ago, PeachGr said:

https://wccftech.com/intel-grand-ridge-platform-will-feature-24-atom-cores-based-on-7nm-hll-process/

Well according to that article, Intel is back in business with a 7nm and DDR 5 and pcie 4.0 and things like that. 

Combine with the news about Intel... well Intel... leak. That can mean 3 things: 

1. That page is full of b.s.

2. Intel is really back

3. They even leak things on purpose to show that they are cooking something!!11!!

Im taking this with a years supply of salt (for every single person in the USA)

[Bombastinator]

12 minutes ago, TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp said:

Didnt intel say 7nm was coming out 2022 earliest?

I don’t know but I did see 7nm on that so something apparently doesn’t add up.  Perhaps this is a thing that was made before it became clear that there was a problem with 7nm.  So it’s critically out of date and perhaps what intel would have been doing if things turned out differently.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

31 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

I don’t know but I did see 7nm on that so something apparently doesn’t add up.  Perhaps this is a thing that was made before it became clear that there was a problem with 7nm.  So it’s critically out of date and perhaps what intel would have been doing if things turned out differently.

Probably this.

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp said:

Probably this.

So a thing likely never to occur, because the industry will continue to change while intel gets its stuff in a box and by the time it does there will be different things to make.   They can’t make 2021 parts in 2023.  The weird bit is they COULD sell the stuff they make now and wipe AMD. They could have done it with gen 8.  They just have to sell their stuff for less money.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 minute ago, Bombastinator said:

So a thing likely never to occur, because the industry will continue to change while intel gets its stuff in a box and by the time it does there will be different things to make.   They can’t make 2021 parts in 2023.  The weird bit is they COULD sell the stuff they make now and wipe AMD. They could have done it with gen 8.  They just have to sell their stuff for less money.

And admit that AMD is better? NEVER!!!!!