Live data from Hacker News

Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

agner.org

61–70 of 253 posts

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because I sure would love to have more cores available (currently rocking a 32 core Threadripper) wtf do you need more cores for??? Wat are you doing? > not interested in actually pushing HEDT forward since consider buying a server.

I see nothing particularly hard in utilising 32 cores. When I launch all the services in the project I’m working on my os has plenty work to schedule. Right now I have 3732 threads running on my machine. It’s totally separate question if OS can schedule so many threads effectively on so many cores, and how much coordination overhead there will be. But that’s just something we have to figure out and fix.

The pure thread count is not that interesting. Running windows with pretty much just firefox open shows me about 5000 active threads, and and recent hardware shouldn't have a lot of problems with a 5digit number. Heavily loaded threads that actually require CPU power to execute are however definitely a different story.

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> wtf do you need more cores for??? Wat are you doing? I have a bunch of embarrassingly parallel workloads which I have to run regularly (text analysis, machine learning which is not easily accelerated on a GPU, etc.). > consider buying a server. I looked into it; not really an option. Those are vastly more expensive, really loud (I need a quiet workstation), have significantly lower boost clocks (I also need single-…

OK, you win! Just a thought, if embarrassingly parallel, buy a 2nd desktop and farm it out?

Alas you can't do that for every workload, and even for those where you can that brings extra complexity. On a single machine I can just replace an `.iter()` into a `.par_iter()` in my Rust programs and boom, I parallelized my workload across every core with only a single line change. It's not that simple with multiple machines. (I might do that one day, but I'm not there yet.)

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#63

Personally I don't really see a point in having a hybrid architecture like this unless it'll lead to massively increased core counts, and so far it doesn't look like it does. AMD still beats Intel in both core counts and power efficiency, and they're only using P cores so... what's the point of having E cores? But maybe that's just because it's a first generation technology for Intel? I hope things improve in the fut…

> Personally I don't really see a point in having a hybrid architecture like this unless it'll lead to massively increased core counts What about massively reduced energy consumption and associated loss of head dissipation/noise and increased battery life? Isn't that why Apple and mobile phone SoCs introduced that design in the first place?

Yeah, that too, but as I've said, right now compared to AMD this advantage seems to not be there for Intel, and personally I mostly care about desktops where power consumption isn't as important as raw power.

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#64

Personally I don't really see a point in having a hybrid architecture like this unless it'll lead to massively increased core counts, and so far it doesn't look like it does. AMD still beats Intel in both core counts and power efficiency, and they're only using P cores so... what's the point of having E cores? But maybe that's just because it's a first generation technology for Intel? I hope things improve in the fut…

Single core performance is so much more important for most workloads (and harder to achieve) than higher core count.

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#65
post #23

Personally I don't really see a point in having a hybrid architecture like this unless it'll lead to massively increased core counts, and so far it doesn't look like it does. AMD still beats Intel in both core counts and power efficiency, and they're only using P cores so... what's the point of having E cores? But maybe that's just because it's a first generation technology for Intel? I hope things improve in the fut…

It's quite possible AMD has plans for this type of thing as well: despite their cores being more energy efficient and powerful per watt than Intel, I don't think they can match Apple yet (some of that is due to 5 nm process though). They have a patent for something similar at least: https://wccftech.com/amd-big-little-processor-cores-show-up-...

Yep, that's rumoured to be the plan for Zen 5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE9N95uSqHA

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#66
post #56
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The top Alder Lake desktop CPU has 16-cores, 8P+8E, compared to 8P in the 11-th gen. The E cores get around half the performance of the P cores, so the 8P+8E is get roughly the performance of a hypothetical 12P+0E CPU. The very high core parts are reserved for Xeon (a 56 core Alder Lake Xeon has been leaked, but I think the P/E split is still unknown). What people need to realize is that a P cores takes around 4 time…

Indeed, I do sometimes wonder what it'd be like if they made the entire processor out of E cores.

I believe Sierra Forrest will be first in the new line of E only CPUs to do just that [1]

[1] https://www.servethehome.com/intel-sierra-forest-the-e-core-...

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, you win! Just a thought, if embarrassingly parallel, buy a 2nd desktop and farm it out?

Alas you can't do that for every workload, and even for those where you can that brings extra complexity. On a single machine I can just replace an `.iter()` into a `.par_iter()` in my Rust programs and boom, I parallelized my workload across every core with only a single line change. It's not that simple with multiple machines. (I might do that one day, but I'm not there yet.)

Gotcha. But FYI I wrote a work farmer years ago and it wasn't difficult. You just manually started a program over there and started the farmer over here and that was all. It could use every machine in the office. These days there may be better solutions than hand-rolling it, never used it but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_parallel> might work. Also see if beowulf software has anything to make it easier. Good luck!

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#68
post #56
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The top Alder Lake desktop CPU has 16-cores, 8P+8E, compared to 8P in the 11-th gen. The E cores get around half the performance of the P cores, so the 8P+8E is get roughly the performance of a hypothetical 12P+0E CPU. The very high core parts are reserved for Xeon (a 56 core Alder Lake Xeon has been leaked, but I think the P/E split is still unknown). What people need to realize is that a P cores takes around 4 time…

Indeed, I do sometimes wonder what it'd be like if they made the entire processor out of E cores.

the concept of “e-cores” is a rebranding of Atom. The Atom name is extremely tarnished from the days when it was super slow in-order netbook cores but Intel started seriously revamping the design in 2012-2014 with silvermont and airmont. They have been good for several years now - Goldmont (eg J5005) is between core2quad and Nehalem i5 (non-SMT) level performance despite running lower clocks (ie IPC is higher), and there have been 2 subsequent generations since - but they haven’t been able to escape the stigma of the atom branding until now.

Denverton is actually a very interesting platform for the wattage - that’s 16 Goldmont cores in a 32W package (despite being 14nm!) with full RDIMM support and QuickAssist acceleration. And as mentioned there is a new atom-based server platform with newer cores (I think they’re not the Gracemont but actually the next iteration?) coming in the next year or two.

https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/cores/denverton

If you want something with a lower core count now, look for something with a J3405, J5005, or Tremont-based processor. Intel has some NUCs with those chips and there are also itx-form factor motherboards from other companies like Asrock and gigabyte.

Actually a lot of the 2-bay synology NASs come with those chips, I believe it’s the ones ending in J. They have fairly nice video encode/decode support for their price bracket which makes them nice for plex/etc.

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#69
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The top Alder Lake desktop CPU has 16-cores, 8P+8E, compared to 8P in the 11-th gen. The E cores get around half the performance of the P cores, so the 8P+8E is get roughly the performance of a hypothetical 12P+0E CPU. The very high core parts are reserved for Xeon (a 56 core Alder Lake Xeon has been leaked, but I think the P/E split is still unknown). What people need to realize is that a P cores takes around 4 time…

It's worth making it explicit that many home computing tasks are highly parrallelizable because the work is actually completely separate programs. If you watch a video while writing a document in word, that's trivially parrallelizable.

It’s also not very intensive, especially since video decode usually runs on the GPU.

(Or it should - browsers are not always very good about this but the tools are there, they just don’t want to pay licensing fees to use them.)

I always cringe a bit when people insist they need 6 cores “so they can have discord and Spotify open while they game”. People don’t generally have a very good intuitive sense of just how little cpu time it takes to run those (a lot of times the “at the desktop” measurements are not even with the processor clocked up, it’s running in the lowest active power state), and there is almost always a little cpu headroom due to non-perfect game scaling. Context switching is cheap, your OS is running thousands of threads at any given time, but people don’t have a good intuitive sense of the overhead of context switching either.

Playing a video and writing a document is something that can be trivially done on a core2duo era processor, or the modern equivalent of a low-end dual-core nuc with e-cores (atom cores) like a J4005. You don’t even need performance cores for that.

The tradeoff Intel is making is that some tasks need performance cores because they can’t really be parallelized all that well, and embarrassingly parallel stuff is more efficient to implement with lots of smaller cores. In principle this is also more power efficient, like big.LITTLE in phones, but Intel actually seems to have fairly poor power scaling - they are space efficient but not all that power efficient. This is also partially due to the fact that the little cores share a core voltage with the big cores - the big cores need higher voltage to clock up and that kills efficiency on the little cores. At that point you may as well clock the little cores up too since they have to share the voltage anyway, and that’s an inefficient way to run them.

As Agner Fog mentions, the AVX-512 is also present in silicon yet disabled, which hugely blows up core size for almost no benefit (it’s dark silicon which does have some minor thermal benefits). Alder Lake is in many ways not that well-designed at a high level, but it is magnificently fast on those performance cores and the e-cores would be very nice if they weren’t conjoined awkwardly to the p-cores. Gracemont-based server and atom chips are going to be nifty when they finally arrive.

Apple is still way ahead with Icestorm though - those cores are absolutely absurdly tiny for the performance they give. They are 0.5mm2 each iirc, even considering the node shrink that is teeny-tiny, they are half as many transistors as a Zen3 core and almost the same performance (meaning much higher IPC) or something along those lines. Firestorm is neat but Icestorm didn’t get nearly the attention and it is really insanely fast for how few transistors it uses.

Re: Intel's New Chimera: Alder Lake

#70

I feel that P and E split requires putting an asterisk next to the core count. it is dishonest to sell a CPU with N fully featured cores and M gimped cores as a CPU with N+M cores

That is indeed how they are marketed. Either as 8+4core or 8p4ecore.

I have only seen the 8+8core referred to as a 16 core machine once. And it was Apple making a comparison to Intel and calling Intel's cpu a 16 core.

Post reply on HN