Question Intel Mont thread

[igor_kavinski]

https://store.acer.com/en-us/aspire-3-laptop-a315-510p-3905

First Gracemont laptop available for sale.

Anybody got disposable $500 to buy and test this laptop?

 

[511]

hmm https://chipsandcheese.com/p/skymont-in-desktop-form-atom-unleashed ?

There is no SpecInt Graph 🙁btw I forgot about the Ring Skymont article from Chips and 🧀 🤣.

 

[Doug S]

I'd be surprised if the ARM64 and x86/64 schedulers weren't pretty separate.

I don't know how Microsoft does things but in Linux there aren't dozens of different schedulers for all the architectures it supports. It is a single scheduler that supports them all (well two schedulers if you count the default and the real time scheduler, and maybe there are others you can choose for special cases like batch loads) You can make that work if you have tunables that can be set up to represent the CPU, i.e. stuff like NUMA boundaries, number of SMT threads, different core types with "weights" for their relative capabilities and so forth.

Given that the Windows kernel in its earlier incarnations as Windows NT has supported a lot of different architectures and its original architect was big on building things for portability I'd be surprised if Microsoft doesn't do something similar. Of course both ISAs running the same scheduler doesn't mean it would work as well, its comes down to whether they willing to devote effort to do fine tuning on the niche platform. They are probably devoting more resources towards insuring their scheduler is performing optimally when a new mass market x86 platform arrives like say Zen 5.

 

[soresu]

I don't know how Microsoft does things but in Linux there aren't dozens of different schedulers for all the architectures it supports. It is a single scheduler that supports them all

I'd be surprised if MS does things the same way.

They are famously very lumbering about making significant changes to their scheduler, so it's clearly not exactly the well oiled machine that Linux has.

Also the thing about Linux is that it works on OSS best principles of reusing as much code as possible to reduce bloat and increase efficiency.

Have you ever known MS to miss a chance to bloat Windows?

 

[MS_AT]

They are famously very lumbering about making significant changes to their scheduler, so it's clearly not exactly the well oiled machine that Linux has.

I am afraid the greatness of Linux scheduler is overstated by the same degree Windows one is understated.

Also the thing about Linux is that it works on OSS best principles of reusing as much code as possible to reduce bloat and increase efficiency.

Have you ever known MS to miss a chance to bloat Windows?

Your Linux will not be bloated if you build and configure it yourself You can't do that with Windows.

Also then you have articles like this:

谈谈Linux与ITMT调度器与多簇处理器 | David Huang's Blog

So your mileage may wary, and I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Windows kernel just because Windows Home edition is the test vehicle for enterprise users. I mean the execs decision make the final experience worse, but it's not necessarily the kernel people fault. Not to mention things that Windows got right, like DLLs vs shared libraries, etc.

There is no SpecInt Graph

You mean score vs power? Yes, my bad, was thinking you wanted to see general scores

 

[soresu]

Your Linux will not be bloated if you build and configure it yourself You can't do that with Windows.

I mean, you can do it with Windows (or at least it used to be possible), it's just a helluva lot harder than with Linux.

 

[511]

Well I actually have a answer File windows 11 install but that can't turn the react native search bar into native UI 🙁.

 

[moinmoin]

Not to mention things that Windows got right, like DLLs vs shared libraries, etc.

How is the versioning nightmare of DLLs something Windows got right?

 

[MS_AT]

How is the versioning nightmare of DLLs something Windows got right

No interposition. No lazy binding with GOT open for writes for program duration. Of course you can opt-out from defaults. I am new to the subject, might be I missed some thing, but when trying to get up to speed I have heard rather negative opinion on current defaults.

 

[DavidC1]

Also @Thunder 57 Raichu leaked a while ago about 20% over Darkmont for arctic wolf.

Raichu was not expecting much for Skymont actually.

As I said, performant yes in perf/mm² metric.

But in perf/watt they are significantly worse than the *Cove cores.

While the *mont cores were originally targeted for a more balanced PPA type efficiency along the lines of Cortex A7x/7xx, since Gracemont they are targeted at adding compute density per mm² specifically in order to increase core counts per package.

Skymont seem noticeably better on power efficiency part looking at Lunarlake results.

Also, 30%+ better in Int and 60-70% better in FP per clock cannot be ignored, if Gracemont is the experience you had with the most modern cores.

As to underselling it I've actually used Gracemont laptop only a couple of years ago as a work computer and it was miserable even doing basic Google apps, so I've got good reason to be unimpressed as the presentation for the 6 wide Tremont sounded very impressive too.

Intel said 32% per clock over the previous generation so if people were expecting something way beyond that, then the fault is on them. Also the core size was under 1mm2 so it indeed was impressive.