Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

eetimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 126 posts

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#61

Post by phire »

gcp wrote: post #38
pshposh wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do both of these feature only the physics benchmark? The second link illustrates that Intel still wins in single core performance.

I don't think there's any question that Intel will win in single-thread performance. AMD has never stated the opposite. They will, though, manage to deliver much more cores despite only being a tiny bit behind in single-core, which is a very big difference from e.g. Bulldozer.

Yeah, Intel will remain the single-thread king. But I feel like intel have backed themselves into a corner here.

The main reason intel is getting better single-thread performance is the higher clock speeds. I think the graphs even suggest that zen is getting higher IPC.

I really doubt Intel can push the clock speeds much higher. Intel really need to find more IPC somewhere, otherwise future versions of Ryzen (Zen+, Zen++) will overtake the intel chips as AMD refine the Zen design to improve IPC and improve clock speeds at the same time.

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#62

Post by sliken »

oliwarner wrote: post #43

Getting a bit bored of leaks, press releases and even specs. The proof of a CPU is in how it benchmarks across real workloads. We're 2-3 weeks away from global release. People buying components NOW are exactly the sort of people AMD should be working their socks off to stop buying Intel parts. But instead of any firm performance figures, we have rumour. The only reason I can imagine AMD is still keeping the press und…

If amd reveals the details now, Intel will react with better price/perf before you can but an AMD chip.

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#63

Post by pkd »

kogepathic wrote: post #54
leonroy wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the issue might more be related to yields and distribution. Even when AMD were outpacing Intel (many years back) they struggled to meet demand and manufacture enough chips. There was a great article back then too about why Apple and Dell weren't going all in on AMD chips and whilst sweeteners from Intel is part of it, a lot of it had to do with Dell or Apple's typical volume far outpacing what AMD could relia…

> they struggled to meet demand and manufacture enough chips. I would think, and hope, that the situation is better now. Back then, AMD was manufacturing their chips in house, now they're manufactured by GlobalFoundries and TSMC.

GlobalFoundries was spin off from the AMD fabrication units so I don't think they got an immediate advantage with them.

Regardless of that AMD is a much smaller company than Intel (~9k employees vs ~100k employees) so it is quite a remarkable feat that they have managed to stay in the competition for so long.

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#64

Post by mtgx »

coldtea wrote: post #39
mrb wrote: post #3

I should have linked to the second page: http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1331317&page_numb... Relevant quote: "AMD said its upcoming Zen x86 core fits into a 10 percent smaller die area than Intel’s currently shipping second-generation 14nm processor. Analysts and even Intel engineers in the session said the Zen core is clearly competitive though many confidential variables will determine whether the die a…

> AMD said its upcoming Zen x86 core fits into a 10 percent smaller die area than Intel’s currently shipping second-generation 14nm processor. Sounds totally irrelevant.

It's actually super-relevant.

Here's what this means. Intel has about 10% advantage in process technology. Yet despite that, AMD's chip is still 10% smaller than Intel's chip. That gives AMD an effective 20% architectural advantage over Intel for similar performance. This is why Intel is now scrambling to "streamline" its architecture as soon as possible (but won't be able to do it for the next 3 years or so).

A smaller, more "efficient" chip (in terms of performance/die area) means AMD can sell it significantly cheaper and still make as much profit as Intel does on that chip. But from the looks of it, AMD is going to price its equivalent chips at around half or less of Intel's chips, which will make AMD chips a complete no-brainer.

Add to this the fact that Intel will begin to make Xeons rather than its mainstream chips on new process nodes, at first, which means a delay of 6-12 months for the mainstream chips using Intel's latest process technology, and AMD looks to have a tremendous opportunity to steal a ton of market share from Intel over the next few years.

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#65

Post by mtgx »

vorticalbox wrote: post #34
anonova wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given early benchmarks are showing that the Ryzen 7 1700X ($390) is performing similarly to the Intel Core i7-6900K ($1050), they definitely are going in that direction. http://hothardware.com/news/amds-ryzen-7-1700x-delivers-i7-6...

If that's true they are vastly under cutting the market and I do see these cheap prices staying for the next gen. I could be AMD trying to steal market share.

Which is what they need to do. They need a "rapid" increase in both market share and relevance, and the two are tied together. They can delay making a lot of profits until later. But it looks like AMD's architecture is significantly more cost-effective than Intel's, so even if they have to sell the chips at "only" 70% of Intel's price later on, for the same performance, they could still make significant profit on those chips.

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#66

Post by zamalek »

kogepathic wrote: post #55
mrb wrote: post #3

I should have linked to the second page: http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1331317&page_numb... Relevant quote: "AMD said its upcoming Zen x86 core fits into a 10 percent smaller die area than Intel’s currently shipping second-generation 14nm processor. Analysts and even Intel engineers in the session said the Zen core is clearly competitive though many confidential variables will determine whether the die a…

> AMD said its upcoming Zen x86 core fits into a 10 percent smaller die area than Intel’s currently shipping second-generation 14nm processor. We need to compare apples to apples. AMD's Zen chips have no IGP, while most Intel chips are shipping with an Intel GPU. If you look at an Intel die shot, about half of the area is taken by the GPU. [0] Since the current batch of Zen SKUs lacks any IGP, I'd be worried if they…

I strongly doubt AMD are specifically targeting the desktop/laptop CPU market.

* Cloud computing has an absurd market cap.[1]

* Ryzen has some features that specifically target cloud computing:

* * More PCIe lanes than a Xeon. These are basically useless for desktop/gaming (as SLI doesn't scale beyond 2 cards). This shines for cloud computing because you can fit more GPUs in a blade. There's also ML to consider.

* * Virtualization security features. The chip can automatically encrypt pages, mitigating some of the virtualization attacks that we have seen recently.

* * More compute per watt. Cost is nice to have (which Ryzen has), but cooling is one of the main concerns when selecting chips for high density.

Intel's brand power is a waste of time and money to compete with. Unless AMD can sort something out with Apple (for example), Intel are going to continue dominating the desktop market - irrespective of which chip is actually superior. It's incredibly likely that only enthusiasts would buy a Ryzen - who AMD has catered for with XFR. Essentially, ignoring IGP is likely a strategic decision because it's irrelevant for the markets that AMD can easily attack.

[1]: http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexkonrad/2015/06/18/byron-deet...

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#67

Post by sundvor »

sliken wrote: post #62
oliwarner wrote: post #43

Getting a bit bored of leaks, press releases and even specs. The proof of a CPU is in how it benchmarks across real workloads. We're 2-3 weeks away from global release. People buying components NOW are exactly the sort of people AMD should be working their socks off to stop buying Intel parts. But instead of any firm performance figures, we have rumour. The only reason I can imagine AMD is still keeping the press und…

If amd reveals the details now, Intel will react with better price/perf before you can but an AMD chip.

About time Intel got some competition again. I got the 6 core 6850k last June, for my personal use (previously a 2600k); its predecessor still clocks and performs better due to poor overclocking headroom of the new one.

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#68

Post by floatboth »

zamalek wrote: post #66
kogepathic wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AMD said its upcoming Zen x86 core fits into a 10 percent smaller die area than Intel’s currently shipping second-generation 14nm processor. We need to compare apples to apples. AMD's Zen chips have no IGP, while most Intel chips are shipping with an Intel GPU. If you look at an Intel die shot, about half of the area is taken by the GPU. [0] Since the current batch of Zen SKUs lacks any IGP, I'd be worried if they…

I strongly doubt AMD are specifically targeting the desktop/laptop CPU market. * Cloud computing has an absurd market cap.[1] * Ryzen has some features that specifically target cloud computing: * * More PCIe lanes than a Xeon. These are basically useless for desktop/gaming (as SLI doesn't scale beyond 2 cards). This shines for cloud computing because you can fit more GPUs in a blade. There's also ML to consider. * *…

Summit Ridge is literally a desktop CPU. The server CPU line, Naples, will come later.

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#69

Post by floatboth »

phire wrote: post #61
gcp wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's any question that Intel will win in single-thread performance. AMD has never stated the opposite. They will, though, manage to deliver much more cores despite only being a tiny bit behind in single-core, which is a very big difference from e.g. Bulldozer.

Yeah, Intel will remain the single-thread king. But I feel like intel have backed themselves into a corner here. The main reason intel is getting better single-thread performance is the higher clock speeds. I think the graphs even suggest that zen is getting higher IPC. I really doubt Intel can push the clock speeds much higher. Intel really need to find more IPC somewhere, otherwise future versions of Ryzen (Zen+, Z…

Intel wins on single thread… on the desktop line (4 cores max). Summit Ridge is competing against the overpriced "enthusiast" lineup (Haswell-E/Broadwell-E), which doesn't clock nearly as high as Skylake/Kaby Lake.

Re: Intel Shows 2.5D FPGA at ISSCC

#70

Post by JustSomeNobody »

AlphaSite wrote: post #11
chx wrote: post #6

There's a lot that goes into CPU performance. Go to http://wccftech.com/ryzen-smaller-die-intel-zen-architecture... and search for "Table courtesy of the Linley Group" without quotes to see an extremely interesting table: http://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Zen-Doubl... > Intel has a double precision IPC of 16 FLOPs per Clock with Skylake as well as 2x 256 bit FMA whereas Zen only has 8 FLOPs per clock…

Differ t workloads will be if it in different ways from the trade offs. I do t imagine many applications will miss AVX 512.

OT, but did your 'n' key fall off?
Post reply on HN