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

Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 247 posts

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#71

Post by ngold »

spyhi wrote: post #7
wmf wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ice Lake has been delayed from 2017 to 2018, so I'm not sure what competition has to do with it.

> it's rare these days for Intel to talk more than a generation ahead in CPU architectures. This, to me, looks like the PS2 vs Dreamcast move, where Sony blocked Dreamcast sales with PS2 hype. We've been waiting for 10nm for a while now, and now Intel is essentially confirming "yes, it's really coming this time" where they might not have otherwise--it's hard to not see that as a reaction to Threadripper. At least on…

I like that idea. It would mean intel had to show its hand a bit early with large promises in the near future. I admit i am a bit nostalgic for the crazy days of cpu clockspeed doubling every year. Then the early Gpu wars.

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#73

Post by Dolores12 »

GuiA wrote: post #10

According to the table in the article: - 2011: 32nm - 2012: 22nm - 2014: 14nm - 2018?: 10nm I don't know much about foundry processes, but it seems that it's taking more and more time for lesser and lesser gains, right? At this rate, how long until we reach sub nanometer? What are the physical limits on these processes, and does it have any implications for end users? Will we be using 2nm CPUs for 50 years? Would lov…

If you consider relative change it looks like

2011: 32nm

2012: 31% size reduction

2014: 36% size reduction

2018: 28,5% size reduction

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#74

Post by std_throwaway »

kakwa_ wrote: post #70
nullnilvoid wrote: post #4

As a consumer, it's great to see competition picking up in the CPU market. Intel does not seem to be able to hold the edge in node process as tsmc and Samsung are matching intel. It has to resort to architecture design.

Well actually I think it's more a case of "increase in performance is becoming harder and harder, the technology leader (Intel) is slowly becoming stuck and the competition (AMD) is catching up". Everybody will be more or less at the same level as it requires huge investments to only get a marginal advantage. Apart from games, I would not be that afraid to install recent pieces of software (browser, office suit, os)…

Gains in instructions-per-clock start to flatten out. And that's where the gains were coming from in the last years. Some time ago a paper was posted here that showed how even if you have an infinite amount of transistors, you will still be limited in the range of 3-10 instructions-per-clock for typical programs.

Clock speeds seem to have leveled and IPC will only see another gain of 50-100%. Single threaded performance is close to the limit. What after that? Is this the end?

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#75

Post by ido »

std_throwaway wrote: post #74
kakwa_ wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well actually I think it's more a case of "increase in performance is becoming harder and harder, the technology leader (Intel) is slowly becoming stuck and the competition (AMD) is catching up". Everybody will be more or less at the same level as it requires huge investments to only get a marginal advantage. Apart from games, I would not be that afraid to install recent pieces of software (browser, office suit, os)…

Gains in instructions-per-clock start to flatten out. And that's where the gains were coming from in the last years. Some time ago a paper was posted here that showed how even if you have an infinite amount of transistors, you will still be limited in the range of 3-10 instructions-per-clock for typical programs. Clock speeds seem to have leveled and IPC will only see another gain of 50-100%. Single threaded performa…

When was the last time we saw a 50-100% performance gain in cars? airplanes? spacecraft?

Was it the end of those industries?

Welcome to mature technology.

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#76

Post by purpleidea »

slededit wrote: post #62
IntelMiner wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"GPUs are only good at _very_ specific workloads." Let me detail you a completely specific workload citing my own personal experience over objective facts with citations Oh and let me also take a swipe at Intel again without any verifiable evidence

Primecoin is a good example. If you look at the implementation it requires generating a tightly packed bitfield for the sieve and then randomly accessing it after. Lots of synchronization required so you don't overwrite previously set bits are required and the memory accesses are random so its suboptimal for the GPU's memory subsystem. It took under a year for a GPU miner to come out. Having optimized it for Intel in…

> a thousand cores can brute force its way through anything

Cool! Please factor this very large prime for me

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#77

Post by GuiA »

Dolores12 wrote: post #73
GuiA wrote: post #10

According to the table in the article: - 2011: 32nm - 2012: 22nm - 2014: 14nm - 2018?: 10nm I don't know much about foundry processes, but it seems that it's taking more and more time for lesser and lesser gains, right? At this rate, how long until we reach sub nanometer? What are the physical limits on these processes, and does it have any implications for end users? Will we be using 2nm CPUs for 50 years? Would lov…

If you consider relative change it looks like 2011: 32nm 2012: 31% size reduction 2014: 36% size reduction 2018: 28,5% size reduction

Yes, but in 1, 2, and 4 years respectively.

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#78

Post by slededit »

purpleidea wrote: post #76
slededit wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Primecoin is a good example. If you look at the implementation it requires generating a tightly packed bitfield for the sieve and then randomly accessing it after. Lots of synchronization required so you don't overwrite previously set bits are required and the memory accesses are random so its suboptimal for the GPU's memory subsystem. It took under a year for a GPU miner to come out. Having optimized it for Intel in…

> a thousand cores can brute force its way through anything Cool! Please factor this very large prime for me

I can't tell what you are mocking...

That primecoin exists? That it's POW is finding prime numbers? That it has a GPU miner?

http://cryptomining-blog.com/2192-gpu-mining-for-primecoin-x...

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#79

Post by [deleted] »

kakwa_ wrote: post #70
nullnilvoid wrote: post #4

As a consumer, it's great to see competition picking up in the CPU market. Intel does not seem to be able to hold the edge in node process as tsmc and Samsung are matching intel. It has to resort to architecture design.

Well actually I think it's more a case of "increase in performance is becoming harder and harder, the technology leader (Intel) is slowly becoming stuck and the competition (AMD) is catching up". Everybody will be more or less at the same level as it requires huge investments to only get a marginal advantage. Apart from games, I would not be that afraid to install recent pieces of software (browser, office suit, os)…

[deleted]

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#80

Post by hvidgaard »

slededit wrote: post #62
IntelMiner wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"GPUs are only good at _very_ specific workloads." Let me detail you a completely specific workload citing my own personal experience over objective facts with citations Oh and let me also take a swipe at Intel again without any verifiable evidence

Primecoin is a good example. If you look at the implementation it requires generating a tightly packed bitfield for the sieve and then randomly accessing it after. Lots of synchronization required so you don't overwrite previously set bits are required and the memory accesses are random so its suboptimal for the GPU's memory subsystem. It took under a year for a GPU miner to come out. Having optimized it for Intel in…

> a thousand cores can brute force its way through anything

This is so fundamentally wrong that your complete lack of understanding the underlying math is obvious. Let us use 1024bit RSA as the key to bruteforce. If we use the entire universe as a computer, i.e. every single atom in the observable universe enumerate 1 possibility every millisecond, it would take ~6 * 10^211 years to go through them all. In comparison, the universe is less than ~14 * 10^9 years old.

And this is for 1024bit, today we use 2048bit or larger.

Post reply on HN