Recent content by DavidC1

Yes but Sandy Bridge brings innovative new ideas and actually improves performance significantly. -Physical Register Files -uOP Cache, which is a hugely improved Trace Cache -Rebuilt branch predictor for efficiency taking up same space but with twice the targets -Load/Store units that also...

@Exist50 has said that the E core team was subject to being shuttered if they did not execute and also they adopted the new better approach of designing processors years ago. The P core team has been wasting a lot of resources and time exactly because they were on top and became complacent. At...

You can disagree but it's true. Nehalem's main focus is everything other than the core. Which was badly needed for sure. When you isolate the uarch the gains are like a Tick. 5-10%. It's not wider in any way either nor brought any noticeable improvements.

It's true. Arrowlake and Lunarlake is a strange combination of two overlapping era cores together, as if you had Netburst and Core. The MT gains will still be decent, because most is offered by the E cores. The P core would need to be less than half before you start losing performance. The...

Assuming Hyperthreading gives 1.3x benefit, and Lion Cove is 20% faster: Raptorlake -1x P core x 1.3 x 8 -1x E cores x 16 Total: 26.4 Arrowlake -1.2x P core x 8 -1.4 x E cores x 16 Total: 32 21% advantage for Arrowlake assuming a well multi-threaded application. For the P cores it's 9.6 vs...

Bonnell/Saltwell: 1x, 2-wide Silvermont: 1.5x, 2-wide Goldmont: 2x, 3-wide Goldmont Plus: 2.7x, 3-wide Tremont: 3.6x, 6-wide Gracemont: 4.7x, 6-wide Skymont: 6.5x, 9-wide If this continues, the Arctic Wolf should be 8.5x, 12-wide. With another 30% gain they'll have to seriously think of doing a...

Are you sending us hints on how Lion Cove will perform? :)

It's 3:1 not 2:1. It's a massacre. Why not just admit you were wrong? You were expecting 10-20% at best.

Like the results for SpecCPU shows, Golden Cove is 23%/66% faster in Int and FP respectively. If you take 5% for Crestmont and add 38% for Int and 68% for FP, you get my figure. Of course for real world applications it will vary, and Spec is also a composite benchmark so some tests will do...

Those same "reports" are basing it on the "double-digit" claim, not that the double digit might be more than 30%.

Then don't read it. Done.

Not just for spacing but for things such as extra pipeline stages and uop caches(which are a remnant of the high clock speed era). IMO even Atom should pair down on the clocks, and go from 14 stages to 10-12 stages.

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/intel-meteor-arrow-lunar-panther-lakes-discussion-threads.2606448/post-41195835 18% faster with 3x the core size difference. Saying the P core is in shambles is an understatement. This is what I mean that the uop cache is doomed folks. I agree with Eric...

If the 38%/68% gains are against Crestmont: It'll be 18% faster than Golden Cove in Integer and 6% faster in FP. It's near Cortex X4 level, not X2. We don't know.

The Austin Atom team has been far more innovative and willing to try new ideas than IDC ever was, even back during their peak. Read back into Anandtech's article about Bonnell. -Goldmont with pre-decode cache -Tremont with clustered decode -Skymont with the Nanocode Atom team is beating the P...