Intel Unveils 10th-Generation 'Comet Lake' Chips With Speeds Over 5GHz

[konqerror]

Your program have to support different version of AVX512 to make it runs on different Intel CPUs.
By support different version you have to provide different binaries.

No you don't. You just call Intel MKL and it takes care of it for you with hand-written assembly code optimized for each individual processor. 90% of all serious computational software does this.

AMD couldn't compete so they gave up on their imitation (ACML). The funny thing was that MKL and Intel Compilers are so good, it was found that MKL ran better on AMD processors than AMD's own software.

Even if you write it yourself, you simply put your AVX256 and AVX512 behind different code paths, that is, with a big if statement. There is no need for "different binaries". That is plain wrong.

 

[cube]

There's no such thing called AVX-512

Your program have to support different version of AVX512 to make it runs on different Intel CPUs.
By support different version you have to provide different binaries.

If your program support AVX512 VNNI then it will not run on my Skylake-X Xeon even it support AVX512F.

So currently if you want to support ALL AVX512 Intel CPUs you need at least 5 different executables.
Intel itself is not able to run all of them why would AMD cares about this?

Program should use correct compiler flag to support AMD CPU.

It's a hard fact that Intel lose to AMD after a decade. AMD is winning in all directions.
This time AMD brought no compromised performance to the table and Intel is still stuck on 14nm forever.

So? You program for the servers that you have.

 

[chucker23n1]

Both AMD and Intel have ultra-mobile parts.

I'm assuming you mean ~5W by "ultra-mobile". In which case: Intel Atom is pretty terrible compared to Apple Ax. And AMD still has Geode, but that's very old. Ryzen exists in an embedded version, but that only goes down to 12 W. It's kind of interesting due to the beefy graphics, but a complete non-starter for an iPhone or iPad.

 

[cube]

I'm assuming you mean ~5W by "ultra-mobile". In which case: Intel Atom is pretty terrible compared to Apple Ax. And AMD still has Geode, but that's very old. Ryzen exists in an embedded version, but that only goes down to 12 W. It's kind of interesting due to the beefy graphics, but a complete non-starter for an iPhone or iPad.

AMD has 6W Excavator parts.

 

[ssgbryan]

I'm assuming you mean ~5W by "ultra-mobile". In which case: Intel Atom is pretty terrible compared to Apple Ax. And AMD still has Geode, but that's very old. Ryzen exists in an embedded version, but that only goes down to 12 W. It's kind of interesting due to the beefy graphics, but a complete non-starter for an iPhone or iPad.

Dr. Su announced the Ryzen 2 4800U - 8 cores/16 threads radeon 8 graphics @ 15 watts.

 

[konqerror]

I'm assuming you mean ~5W by "ultra-mobile". In which case: Intel Atom is pretty terrible compared to Apple Ax. And AMD still has Geode, but that's very old. Ryzen exists in an embedded version, but that only goes down to 12 W. It's kind of interesting due to the beefy graphics, but a complete non-starter for an iPhone or iPad.

No, Geode is long gone. It's AMD's cat-named cores that compete against Apple Ax and Atom. AMD doesn't have a separate branding for them, but they're the cores they use in the Xbox and Playstation.

Puma (microarchitecture) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[cube]

No, Geode is long gone. It's AMD's cat-named cores that compete against Apple Ax and Atom. AMD doesn't have a separate branding for them, but they're the cores they use in the Xbox and Playstation.

Puma (microarchitecture) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The cats are history. They went down to 3.95W but now AMD only targets a minimum of 6W with Stoney Ridge.

Zen is not a given in the medium term. They could bring Excavator to 22FDX and later to 12FDX.

 

[chucker23n1]

Sorry you made a jump that doesn't hold here. While from the surface you have a point a air cool chip is a lot different than an actively cooled chip. But its more than just that! At the core of it is the difference between a CISC (intel) and a RISC (Arm) chip design as well as the weight of the OS. iOS is a lightweight OS unlike macOS. When you look at both of these factors you see the RISC design if fully developed to be equal to CISC won't really offer much difference in performance.

And yet Apple moved from RISC to CISC back in 2006. Perhaps because the CISC-RISC dichotomy is way exaggerated by pundits. x86 has been internally RISC for a long time. Only its external interface pretends to be CISC.

As for iOS, it really isn't that much more lightweight compared to macOS. It threw a lot of legacy stuff like QuickTime and AppleScript away when it launched, sure, but the two have since converged a lot.

 

[PickUrPoison]

The Mac mini would use Comet Lake-S (late 2019; up to ten cores) or Coffee Lake Refresh-S (early 2019; up to eight cores). Apple could've revised it twice already if they wanted to.

Not really. There are no B versions of the Coffee Lake Refresh chips, but it would have been nice to have a 8C/16T or even a 8C/8T part in the mini.

Presumably, Apple didn’t ask Intel for a BGA package of the ninth gen S parts because they had really just released the mini, and were (are still) waiting for the Comet Lake S chips you mention. But those weren’t released last year; they should be this quarter or at least by Q2.

The mini will get a nice refresh with 8- and 10-core CPUs added to the lineup. Hopefully WiFi 6 but the leaks only have that as “under evaluation”. Depending on Intel’s release schedule of volume shipping for the BGA package parts, it could be summer or fall before the new mini is released. My personal expectation is fall.

 

[chucker23n1]

Dr. Su announced the Ryzen 2 4800U - 8 cores/16 threads radeon 8 graphics @ 15 watts.

Not sure why you would bring that up in response to my post?

 

[cube]

Dr. Su announced the Ryzen 2 4800U - 8 cores/16 threads radeon 8 graphics @ 15 watts.

Almost twice the multi-threaded performance as Ice Lake.

I assume it is about the same in SIMD (8x256 vs 4x512).

 

[konqerror]

Perhaps because the CISC-RISC dichotomy is way exaggerated by pundits. x86 has been internally RISC for a long time.

Execution cores yes, but you have a huge complex front end to translate. Intel spends as many transistors doing instruction decode as actual execution. That's cost and energy and a huge amount of engineering. AMD and Intel are the only two companies in the world who can make a competitive x86 CPU because of this, whereas there are tons of performant ARM cores from different vendors (Apple, Qualcomm, Samsung, Marvell, Broadcom...)

File:skylake core die (annotated).png - WikiChip

Intel Skylake core annotated by WikiChip. Cut out from the Intel Skylake dual-core die shot.

en.wikichip.org

 

[Ursadorable]

And I'm sure they'll have the same exploits baked in that the rest of their core series processors have. No thanks, I switched the AMD CPU and not regretting it one bit. AMD GPUs on the other hand, drivers are complete crap.

 

[PickUrPoison]

You do realize there has been TB3 support on Macbook Pro and AIr in the past few years right?

Here's MacBook Air with TB3 port: https://www.apple.com/macbook-air/specs/

The difference is that Intel is moving TB controller onboard their CPU, while it has been external since the beginning.

Yup. Technically not to the CPU itself but the PCH. But since the PCH is on-package with the CPU it’s a distinction without much difference.

 

[chucker23n1]

AMD has 6W Excavator parts.

OK, but… you want to pitch a 2015 microarchitecture with poor IPC against Apple Ax?

I mean… it's really bad. https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/search?q=a6-9220c

It basically competes with an iPhone 6.

It almost makes Intel Atom look good.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Even $50 Athalon CPUs support ECC memory

AMD does support ECC in their less expensive parts but threadripper doesn’t have the capacities that Xeon does. People talk about TR for the Mac Pro but that would limit max RAM to 256GB, and quad channel also.

 

[cube]

OK, but… you want to pitch a 2015 microarchitecture with poor IPC against Apple Ax?

I mean… it's really bad. https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/search?q=a6-9220c

It basically competes with an iPhone 6.

It almost makes Intel Atom look good.

One could say it is a 2009 architecture.

But with low evolution cost and footprint (for x86).

 

[chucker23n1]

Not really. There are no B versions of the Coffee Lake Refresh chips, but it would have been nice to have a 8C/16T or even a 8C/8T part in the mini.

Presumably, Apple didn’t ask Intel for a BGA package of the ninth gen S parts because they had really just released the mini, and were (are still) waiting for the Comet Lake S chips you mention.

Yeah, I dunno. It would have been nice to get that as a BTO option when the new iMac upgrade happened.

(It's not unprecedented. See, for example, Apple adding Vega BTO options a few months after just having upgraded the MBP.)

But those weren’t released last year; they should be this quarter or at least by Q2.

Yeah. I was wrong on both counts.

The mini will get a nice refresh with 8- and 10-core CPUs added to the lineup. Hopefully WiFi 6 but the leaks only have that as “under evaluation”. Depending on Intel’s release schedule of volume shipping for the BGA package parts, it could be summer or fall before the new mini is released. My personal expectation is fall.

The Mac mini doesn't seem to use Intel's Wi-Fi anyway.

OTOH, Murata doesn't seem to have Wi-Fi 6 parts yet. So regardless, seems Apple is waiting for suppliers.
[automerge]1578353656[/automerge]

One could say it is a 2009 architecture.

But with low evolution cost and footprint.

Right, it's essentially an evolved 2011 Bulldozer. Which was kind of ill-fated, really.

(Especially compared to the huge success of early Athlon 64 / Opteron.)

 

[cube]

Right, it's essentially an evolved 2011 Bulldozer. Which was kind of ill-fated, really.

(Especially compared to the huge success of early Athlon 64 / Opteron.)

The worst of Bulldozer was fixed with Piledriver.

After that they took a low-cost orientation while still making improvements.

 

[Speedy2]

Most of what Apple sells is mobile and AMD is woefully behind there. If AMD can beat Intel at mobile, THAT’S when you can seriously consider that Apple may move to AMD.

AMD released new mobile CPUs today, which extend their desktop and server dominance over Intel into the mobile space. Check out the new Ryzen 4000. Zen2 cores, 7nm process, 8 cores at 15W suitable for 13" MacBooks, VEGA GPU. The greatest of the latest while Intel is still stuck on its SIX year old 14nm process and struggling to get their 10nm process running (which could compete with TSMC's 7nm, but they will be at 5nm soon...)
Not to mention their pathetic GPUs.

It's high time Apple considers AMD for all their desktops and laptops. The Mac Pro was a huge missed opportunity, since AMDs latest Epyc CPUs are so much faster than Xeons, it's a joke really! Apple could've offered twice the performance at the same price!! They are ALREADY outdated from the start.

By the way, what Intel "unveiled" today was nothing but a preview born out of desperation. Nobody knows when they will actually ship these chips. AMD on the other hand has their new CPUs available in Q1

 

[techwhiz]

These discussions are funny.
The only thing that really matters is performance with real workloads not some synthetic benchmarks.
The other thing that doesn't matter unless you know the design rules, is minimum feature size.
Minimum features are used for making RAM in a process, not logic.
So what TSMC advertises a 5nm process. That is the smallest feature size, not all features.
At higher frequencies those wires need to be spaced at larger distances. The wires need to be larger to carry more current. So your minimum features don't mean crap when you've got a heavily loaded net that needs to travel distance. Now you worry about crosstalk, capacitance and mutual inductance. Signal integrity issues just get worse.

So what Intel s shipping a 14nm++ or whatever. Is the thermal adequate for the application and does it meet the performance goal?

Those things matter and a minimum feature size doesn't matter a whole lot.
As far as an ARM processor in an iPad? When you start adding support for lots of channels DDR, PCIe 4.0 and all the peripheral stuff, it will generate a lot more heat. PCIe is power hungry with differential IO. The need to drive board traces that are multiple inches long requires beefy drivers.

Anyway, you can do lots with ARM processors and Ampere and others show you can, but lets be clear an A13 mobile processor is not up to the task in it's current form.

 

[827538]

So glad I bought AMD stock before Ryzen arrived. Just hit an all time high and looks like things will keep shooting up.

Intel just cannot compete, 10nm is DoA, 7/5nm process is still not ready. Meanwhile AMD is going from strength to strength with their chiplet design and fabbing on TSMC's latest and greatest (who I also own stock for).

Intel is being kept afloat with a very strong server market which AMD is eating into like a fat guy at a Chinese buffet.

I wonder if Apple is considering AMD's new 4000 series APU's which look to be excellent chips. I'm honestly a little surprised they chose Intel over AMD's Threadripper for the Mac Pro, similar IPC and clocks but AMD is more efficient, cheaper and with a lot more cores.

 

[Metrosey]

AMD released new mobile CPUs today, which extend their desktop and server dominance over Intel into the mobile space. Check out the new Ryzen 4000. Zen2 cores, 7nm process, 8 cores at 15W suitable for 13" MacBooks, VEGA GPU. The greatest of the latest while Intel is still stuck on its SIX year old 14nm process and struggling to get their 10nm process running (which could compete with TSMC's 7nm, but they will be at 5nm soon...)
Not to mention their pathetic GPUs.

It's high time Apple considers AMD for all their desktops and laptops. The Mac Pro was a huge missed opportunity, since AMDs latest Epyc CPUs are so much faster than Xeons, it's a joke really! Apple could've offered twice the performance at the same price!! They are ALREADY outdated from the start.

By the way, what Intel "unveiled" today was nothing but a preview born out of desperation. Nobody knows when they will actually ship these chips. AMD on the other hand has their new CPUs available in Q1

Extend their dominance? AMD doesn't have dominance in the laptop market. Yet another person who is focused on the nanometer marketing term. I shan't repeat what I, nor a few others put in the comments section. Apple hasn't considered AMD in the mobile market because they aren't good in comparison, Intel has a solid lead in the mobile market. It's highly expected that Intel will have them ready for Q2/Q3, since it's 14nm and nanometer is solid.

I mean look at these for an example.

AMD vs. Intel in the 15-Inch Surface Laptop 3: Both Models Benchmarked

Intel and AMD fight on the Surface battlefield.

www.tomshardware.com

We benchmark AMD’s mobile Ryzen 7 vs. Intel’s mobile Core i7: Which is the best laptop processor?

We benchmark two Microsoft Surface Laptop 3s, one with AMD's latest mobile Ryzen 7, the other with Intel's Core i7 Ice Lake. Which comes out on top?

www.pcworld.com

Apple should keep Intel CPUs and go NVIDIA GPUs but sadly that won't happen. Either way, I'm sure Apple will go ARM, which judging by how Apple designs components, will be better than both AMD and Intel.
[automerge]1578355684[/automerge]

So glad I bought AMD stock before Ryzen arrived. Just hit an all time high and looks like things will keep shooting up.

Intel just cannot compete, 10nm is DoA, 7/5nm process is still not ready. Meanwhile AMD is going from strength to strength with their chiplet design and fabbing on TSMC's latest and greatest (who I also own stock for).

Intel is being kept afloat with a very strong server market which AMD is eating into like a fat guy at a Chinese buffet.

I wonder if Apple is considering AMD's new 4000 series APU's which look to be excellent chips. I'm honestly a little surprised they chose Intel over AMD's Threadripper for the Mac Pro, similar IPC and clocks but AMD is more efficient, cheaper and with a lot more cores.

I assume you haven't seen the performance on Icelake?

 

[827538]

AMD released new mobile CPUs today, which extend their desktop and server dominance over Intel into the mobile space. Check out the new Ryzen 4000. Zen2 cores, 7nm process, 8 cores at 15W suitable for 13" MacBooks, VEGA GPU. The greatest of the latest while Intel is still stuck on its SIX year old 14nm process and struggling to get their 10nm process running (which could compete with TSMC's 7nm, but they will be at 5nm soon...)
Not to mention their pathetic GPUs.

It's high time Apple considers AMD for all their desktops and laptops. The Mac Pro was a huge missed opportunity, since AMDs latest Epyc CPUs are so much faster than Xeons, it's a joke really! Apple could've offered twice the performance at the same price!! They are ALREADY outdated from the start.

By the way, what Intel "unveiled" today was nothing but a preview born out of desperation. Nobody knows when they will actually ship these chips. AMD on the other hand has their new CPUs available in Q1

As an AMD and TSMC stock holder I just wrote this exact thing. AMD is no longer second place, it's absolutely dominating Intel. I saw those new 4000's APU's as well, very impressive stuff.

TSMC's 5nm EUV process is going to be a nightmare for Intel as its so far ahead I don't know what Intel can do to catch up - there's only so many EUV machines produced each year.

 

[cube]

I assume you haven't seen the performance on Icelake?

They also showed the top H part beating a 95W Intel desktop part.