Intel's 14nm chips.

[LukaP]

So we're going to have Broadwell and then a new socket within six months of each other? That's embarrassing.

 

They managed alright until now.

 

They're chips aren't that much faster than ARM's designs. http://www.anandtech.com/show/6536/arm-vs-x86-the-real-showdown/14 They're all extremely competitive with each other.

there isnt to be broadwell desktop (iirc)

 

yes, and they managed to make 14nm one of the highest yielding processes.

but are faster, and just barely take any more power

[Builder]

there isnt to be broadwell desktop (iirc)

 

yes, and they managed to make 14nm one of the highest yielding processes.

but are faster, and just barely take any more power

Oooh right I forgot. Broadwell is mobile only with a Core-M focus, correct?

[LukaP]

Oooh right I forgot. Broadwell is mobile only with a Core-M focus, correct?

thats what is rumoured. with skylake coming to desktop in h1 2015

[patrickjp93]

So we're going to have Broadwell and then a new socket within six months of each other? That's embarrassing.

 

They managed alright until now.

 

They're chips aren't that much faster than ARM's designs. http://www.anandtech.com/show/6536/arm-vs-x86-the-real-showdown/14 They're all extremely competitive with each other.

Not really. Skylake comes with unified memory and a much larger iGPU (192 cores supposedly). Broadwell's top SKU comes with a 92-CORE 2 TFlop iGPU based on the older cores. Skylake brings new iGPU core designs in addition to unified memory, many more iGPU cores, and a wholly new CPU architecture as well. Both will be extremely good, and Skylake will be better and on the level where most mid-range gamers won't need a dGPU.

[LukaP]

Not really. Skylake comes with unified memory and a much larger iGPU (192 cores supposedly). Broadwell's top SKU comes with a 92-CORE 2 TFlop iGPU based on the older cores. Skylake brings new iGPU core designs in addition to unified memory, many more iGPU cores, and a wholly new CPU architecture as well. Both will be extremely good, and Skylake will be better and on the level where most mid-range gamers won't need a dGPU.

that is all speculation. those 192 cores could be waay less powerful than the ones now, but more power efficient. (think fermi vs kepler). and you really think a 90W tdp can give you enough power for a midrange gpu and a CPU, powerful enough to drive it? and by that time, gaming will evolve to require more power. youre looking at it from a very narrow point of view

[Builder]

Not really. Skylake comes with unified memory and a much larger iGPU (192 cores supposedly). Broadwell's top SKU comes with a 92-CORE 2 TFlop iGPU based on the older cores. Skylake brings new iGPU core designs in addition to unified memory, many more iGPU cores, and a wholly new CPU architecture as well. Both will be extremely good, and Skylake will be better and on the level where most mid-range gamers won't need a dGPU.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very excited about all of Intel's new stuff too. I think a homogeneous approach to system design is better in almost all aspects, which is why I'm impressed with Broadwell and soon to be Skylake.

 

But what really gets me going is stuff like RISC-V, where I can buy one of these and follow these instructions and actually program a RISC-V implementation into an FPGA. Basically anything open gets me excited but I think overall that homogeny is more important than taking a side in RISC vs CISC going forward as we see the prevalence of integrated systems increase alongside an ever-increasing demand for lower power consumption.

[virtualTune]

I just wanna thank everyone who posted. This was very informative and strangely entertaining

[patrickjp93]

that is all speculation. those 192 cores could be waay less powerful than the ones now, but more power efficient. (think fermi vs kepler). and you really think a 90W tdp can give you enough power for a midrange gpu and a CPU, powerful enough to drive it? and by that time, gaming will evolve to require more power. youre looking at it from a very narrow point of view

Broadwell's top SKU comes with a 2TFlop solution (96 cores at the same clock rate as Iris 5200's 40 cores)...That's half of Nvidia's top TESLA in performance. There's no way in Hell games are going to evolve THAT fast. But to put in in perspective, the first Nvidia GPU to beat that rating is the GTX 760. That's not a wimpy GPU for anyone except 4K or triple-monitor gamers, or, not the crowd an iGPU is generally aimed at (yet). For medium-high settings on 1440p gaming, Iris 6200 will be plenty. 7200? God who knows.

[patrickjp93]

Don't get me wrong, I'm very excited about all of Intel's new stuff too. I think a homogeneous approach to system design is better in almost all aspects, which is why I'm impressed with Broadwell and soon to be Skylake.

 

But what really gets me going is stuff like RISC-V, where I can buy one of these and follow these instructions and actually program a RISC-V implementation into an FPGA. Basically anything open gets me excited but I think overall that homogeny is more important than taking a side in RISC vs CISC going forward as we see the prevalence of integrated systems increase alongside an ever-increasing demand for lower power consumption.

Heterogeneous design* I think you mean integrated and open design.

[patrickjp93]

I just wanna thank everyone who posted. This was very informative and strangely entertaining

I have a reputation for that, not to blow my own horn.  :rolleyes:

[LukaP]

Broadwell's top SKU comes with a 2TFlop solution (96 cores at the same clock rate as Iris 5200's 40 cores)...That's half of Nvidia's top TESLA in performance. There's no way in Hell games are going to evolve THAT fast. But to put in in perspective, the first Nvidia GPU to beat that rating is the GTX 760. That's not a wimpy GPU for anyone except 4K or triple-monitor gamers, or, not the crowd an iGPU is generally aimed at (yet). For medium-high settings on 1440p gaming, Iris 6200 will be plenty. 7200? God who knows.

not everything is TFLOPs... you need proper drivers, engine support, and your gpu needs hardware engines. im not an intel expert, but a 2TF solution would be lost in the work if it doesnt have the things NVIDIA and AMD do separately in their own hardware (tasselation engine, polymorph, etc...) 

 

TLDR, cores arent the be all and end all, and TFLOPs arent either. its the desing

[patrickjp93]

not everything is TFLOPs... you need proper drivers, engine support, and your gpu needs hardware engines. im not an intel expert, but a 2TF solution would be lost in the work if it doesnt have the things NVIDIA and AMD do separately in their own hardware (tasselation engine, polymorph, etc...) 

 

TLDR, cores arent the be all and end all, and TFLOPs arent either. its the desing

Oh I know drivers are everything once the tech is in place (Intel did release 2 million lines of graphics code for Linux for Skylake). Of course I also know Intel is more aimed at putting scientific computing into hyperdrive and shoving the dGPU makers out of the supercomputer world (Intel hybrid XFire with Xeon Phis anyone ). If tessellation and polymorph can be proven to be useful for those environments, Intel will not only make those engines, they'll build them better.

 

Intel does have one advantage over its competitors. Its floating point units are the fastest in the industry by far, whereas AMD's and Nvidia's are pretty equal with tiny deficiencies in some operations which get lost in the grand scheme. Intel's architecture is more expandable on the compute side, which means it has time to now focus on the other engines. We'll see though. We'll see

[LukaP]

Oh I know drivers are everything once the tech is in place (Intel did release 2 million lines of graphics code for Linux for Skylake). Of course I also know Intel is more aimed at putting scientific computing into hyperdrive and shoving the dGPU makers out of the supercomputer world (Intel hybrid XFire with Xeon Phis anyone ). If tessellation and polymorph can be proven to be useful for those environments, Intel will not only make those engines, they'll build them better.

 

Intel does have one advantage over its competitors. Its floating point units are the fastest in the industry by far, whereas AMD's and Nvidia's are pretty equal with tiny deficiencies in some operations which get lost in the grand scheme. Intel's architecture is more expandable on the compute side, which means it has time to now focus on the other engines. We'll see though. We'll see

that i agree with. and for gaming, i can assure you, they will NEED polymorph and other hardware solutions to be competitive

[Builder]

Heterogeneous design* I think you mean integrated and open design.

Definitely integrated and open, however I believe homogeneous is the word I was looking for, to the extent that APUs/iGPUs are more homogeneous than dGPUs, in a higher level broad sense. I wasn't necessarily talking about homogeny on a semiconductor level, but definitely above that.

 

I have a reputation for that, not to blow my own horn.  :rolleyes:

I would too, but nobody around here ever needs Mac advice...

[patrickjp93]

Definitely integrated and open, however I believe homogeneous is the word I was looking for, to the extent that APUs/iGPUs are more homogeneous than dGPUs, in a higher level broad sense. I wasn't necessarily talking about homogeny on a semiconductor level, but definitely above that.

 

I would too, but nobody around here ever needs Mac advice...

Yay abstraction! Heterogeneous mixing of cores, but a homogenous system.

 

Actually I will probably require Mac advice at some point. I bought the top-end fully-decked MBPr at the start of July, and then 3 weeks later they released the new one with the 4980HQ in it (4GHz vs. my 3.8) and dropped the price by $200. I was livid. Apple needs to start announcing when they're going to refresh their machines. To screw over a wealthy client (me) is a very dumb thing to do.

[Builder]

Yay abstraction! Heterogeneous mixing of cores, but a homogenous system.

 

Actually I will probably require Mac advice at some point. I bought the top-end fully-decked MBPr at the start of July, and then 3 weeks later they released the new one with the 4980HQ in it (4GHz vs. my 3.8) and dropped the price by $200. I was livid. Apple needs to start announcing when they're going to refresh their machines. To screw over a wealthy client (me) is a very dumb thing to do.

You're a masters student that's wealthy? Jeez, did Intel give you a paid internship or something?

 

And yes, that's the word I was looking for. Abstraction. Systems are becoming homogeneous in an abstracted sense, however on a lower level they are becoming more heterogeneous as parts become more specialized.

 

That's not really screwing you over, it's just your impatience However in the future The MacRumors Buyer's Guide will in general tell you when it's safe to buy an Apple product and when you should wait for the refresh. 

 

Also I need to keep you around as an example of a power user who likes Macs, just in case I need to defend myself in an argument. Out of curiosity, do you run OS X, Linux, one of the free BSDs, or Windows?

[LukaP]

Also I need to keep you around as an example of a power user who likes Macs, just in case I need to defend myself in an argument. 

one of the rare points i agree with you on... a mac can be very good for a power user, if you get the programs you need on it. most of my sound stuff i do on a mac

[Builder]

one of the rare points i agree with you on... a mac can be very good for a power user, if you get the programs you need on it. most of my sound stuff i do on a mac

Great. I'll add you to the list as well.  Also I suspect we agree on more than you realize. Weed, for example.

[LukaP]

Great. I'll add you to the list as well.  Also I suspect we agree on more than you realize. Weed, for example.

depends. so far. macs are the only thing

[Builder]

depends. so far. macs are the only thing

Do you support marijuana legalization? Do you program? Do you like technology? Are you liberal? etc

 

The list goes on. Like I said, I'm sure we're more similar than either of us realize.

[LukaP]

Do you support marijuana legalization? Do you program? Do you like technology? Are you liberal? etc

 

The list goes on. Like I said, I'm sure we're more similar than either of us realize.

yes, in a way. still needs moderation.

 

yes

yes

more liberal than conservative, but usually apolitical. 

 

the only thing i cant stand with you is that when you start an argument, and are possibly proven wrong, you keep on going, without acknowledgin it

[Builder]

yes, in a way. still needs moderation.

 

yes

yes

more liberal than conservative, but usually apolitical. 

 

the only thing i cant stand with you is that when you start an argument, and are possibly proven wrong, you keep on going, without acknowledgin it

Exactly, so we're very similar in several aspects.

 

When have I ever been proven wrong and kept going? 

[LukaP]

Exactly, so we're very similar in several aspects.

 

When have I ever been proven wrong and kept going? 

in this thread, about the TDPs just a most recent example. i do respect your knowledge on UNIX greatly though

[Builder]

in this thread, about the TDPs just a most recent example. i do respect your knowledge on UNIX greatly though

I didn't continue after I was proven wrong?

 

Besides, I wasn't really proven wrong. We've only decided that at this point Intel and ARM processors are too close in TDP and performance for CISC and RISC to be having a massive impact on performance or power consumption.

 

I didn't start from the point of "RISC is best," I was trying to prove that ARM started off in a better place performance per watt wise versus Intel. At this time, Intel is very rapidly catching up. I still prefer the ARM instruction set to x86, (not the architecture, the IS itself) which is why I'm still a RISC believer, at least from a programming standpoint.

[LukaP]

I didn't continue after I was proven wrong?

 

Besides, I wasn't really proven wrong. We've only decided that at this point Intel and ARM processors are too close in TDP and performance for CISC and RISC to be having a massive impact on performance or power consumption.

 

I didn't start from the point of "RISC is best," I was trying to prove that ARM started off in a better place performance per watt wise versus Intel. At this time, Intel is very rapidly catching up. I still prefer the ARM instruction set to x86, (not the architecture, the IS itself) which is why I'm still a RISC believer, at least from a programming standpoint.

well ive told you that intels new broadwell M is 4.5w and snapdragon is 2-4W and the argument still carried on.

 

Why risc tho? im not that advanced when it comes to programming, and dont exactly understand the difference between the philosophies when it comes to the code itself. (tho i mainly code arduino and rpi, rarely x86)