64 core processor from Chinese chip maker Phytium

While the world awaits the AMD K12 and Qualcomm Hydra ARM server chips to join the ranks of the Applied Micro X-Gene and Cavium ThunderX processors already in the market, it could be upstart Chinese chip maker Phytium Technology that gets a brawny chip into the field first and also gets traction among actual datacenter server customers, not just tire kickers.

Phytium Technology has announced a 64-core ARM server CPU, which according to the press release will deliver 512 gigaflops of performance. The new chip, known as FT-2000/64, is aimed at “high throughput and high performance servers.”

Phytium is a chip design enterprise, based in Tianjin, China. In March 2015, the company released its first products: the FT-1500A/4 and FT-1500A/16, 4-core and 16-core implementations, respectively of the ARMv8 design.

Phytium was on hand at last week’s Hot Chips 28 conference, showing off its chippery and laptop, desktop and server machines employing its “Earth” and “Mars” FT series of ARM chips. Most of the interest that people showed in the server variants, which are both based on variants of the “Xiaomi” core design that the company has cooked up based on ARMv8 intellectual property licensed from ARM Holdings. There is chatter that one of the three Chinese exascale machines, which we wrote about here, will employ a future Phytium processor, but we were unable to confirm this with the Phytium executives at the event. What we can tell you is that the first engineering samples of the two Earth ARM chips, the FT-1500A/4 and the FT-1500A/16, as well as the one Mars ARM chip, the FT-2000/64, are back from Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp and that we saw systems running the Kylin Linux operating system (a variant of Canonical’s Ubuntu) at the Hot Chips event.

Here are the key chip features from the FT-2000/64 product page: 

• Process：Manufacturing with 28nm process
• Core：Integrating sixty-four FTC661 cores
• Frequency：Running at 1.5GHz~2.0GHz
• Cache：Integrating 32MB L2 cache and extending 128MB LLC
• Extension Interface：Integrating eight proprietary extension interfaces, each delivering 19.2GB/s effective r/w bandwidth
• Memory Interface：Extending sixteen DDR3-1600 memory controllers, which can deliver 204.8GB/s memory access bandwidth.
• I/O Interface：Integrating two x16 or four x8 PCIE Gen3 interface
• Power：Max. power 100W
• Package：FCBGA package with 2892 pins

No pricing was provided on the new chips, and it’s unclear from the press release if the product is available today. The next time we hear about the FT-2000/64 might very well be when it shows up in a TOP500 supercomputer. Stay tuned.

Mega Processor to Understand Micro Processor

Have you ever imagine how the work or what's going on inside? Think about a bigger version of a microprocessor where you can walk inside and look how it is working in real.

You may have heard that your smartphone contains more computing power than all the computers used on the Apollo mission combined. But imagine taking the computing power of a Super Nintendo, and packing it into a computer the size of--a living room?

The "mega-processor" is essentially a blown up version of a tiny chip that allows you to see how all the elements of a computer chip join together and how it actually works.

A Cambridge resident has finished building a 10-metre wide and 2-metre high computer in his living room, which he uses to play the video game Tetris.

James Newman took four years and £40,000 to build the processor which works exactly like a small microprocessor chip in a regular desktop computer or laptop that's about the size of a sim card.

This room-sized megaprocessor has 40,000 transistors, 10,000 LED lights, weighs around half a tonne (500kg) and burns 500W of electricity, according to Newman, who explains the entire contraption in a video.

James Newman said his Mega Processor relies almost entirely on the hand-soldered components, and will ultimately demonstrate how data travels through and is processed in a simple CPU core. He's just finished putting together the general purpose registers, and in May completed the arithmetic and logic unit.

Each transistor acts like a digital switch, and can be chained together to form huge decision-making circuits that execute software, instruction by instruction.

Newman, whose background is in software development and FPGA programming, told The Register he has spent about £40k on the project to date. He started planning the processor in 2012, and began building the beast a year later.

Intel marks 40 years of the 4004 microprocessor

A 1971 breakthrough that changed the world

CHIPMAKER Intel today celebrates the 40th anniversary of the 4004, the world's first commercially available microprocessor.

To call Intel's 4004 just a microprocessor is to do the microelectronics world a great disservice. Not only was the Intel 4004 the first commercial microprocessor, shattering what people thought of computers, it signaled Intel's shift away from manufacturing memory and into what was going to become the industry that changed the world forever.

Back in 1969 when Japanese calculator outfit Nippon Calculating Machine Corporation asked Intel to design 12 chips for a business calculator called Busicom, Intel had already achieved some success with its memory business. Although Intel was far from being a market leader, the two 'Fairchildren', Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore were busy making money fabbing RAM chips, but not for much longer.

Back in 1969, Intel didn't have the luxury of saying no to business and Federico Faggin, Ted Hoff and Masatoshi Shima got to work on designing a processor for the relatively mundane business calculator. Later Hoff remarked that in the late 1960s it simply wasn't feasible to talk about personal computers.

Like the birth of many revolutionary pieces of engineering, the 4004 was designed by a bunch of engineers working into the night on the promise of creating something completely different.

While Faggin, who had also worked at Fairchild Semiconductor with Noyce and Moore, was busy designing the 4004 Hoff is widely credited with coming up with the architecture. Faggin built Hoff's architecture, with the legend saying that the first wafers came back to Intel's Santa Clara offices at 6PM just as everyone was clocking out for the day. Faggin pulled an all nighter in the lab to check whether the first baked 4004 actually worked, and at 3AM, overcome with exhaustion and satisfied that the radical 4004 did the job, he went home to tell his wife, "It works!".

Faggin was so proud of his design that he etched his initials, FF, on one side of the 4004's design. In later iterations of the 4004 the initials were moved, but just like an artist, Faggin signed his own work. And make no mistake, the 4004 processor is a work of art.

It might sound bashful, but Intel's 4004 wasn't particularly powerful, and the firm admitted, "The 4004 was not very powerful, it was primarily used to perform simple mathematical operations in a calculator called Busicom." However Noyce and Moore realised that it wasn't the 4004 itself that was important but its architecture.

In terms of complexity, Intel's 4004 had 2,300 MOS transistors and was fabricated on a 10,000nm process node on 60mm wafers. In a graphic illustration of Moore's law, processors from Intel and AMD today typically have hundreds of millions of transistors and are fabricated on the 32nm process node on 300mm wafers. But the numbers simply don't tell the whole story, the fact is that the 4004 was not just a new chip with a new micro-architecture, but it was a radical new way of thinking and building processors.

What Faggin, Hoff and Shima had created with the 4004 was the ability to commoditise computing by adding the micro in microprocessors. Prior to the 4004, general purpose computers were the hulking machines you saw in black-and-white films as room-sized equipment. Henry Ford brought the motorcar to the wider public through mass production, while Intel brought computing to the masses by miniaturising it.

Intel showed what would become perhaps the first known example of its shrewd business policies by offering Busicom, now a company in its own right, a reported $60,000 for the design and marketing rights for the 4004. Busicom agreed to the deal and, even though a year later the firm went bust, Intel was left with the ability to sell the 4004, which it did in 1971.

In what would become standard Intel behaviour, the firm courted developers for its 4004 processor. Even at that time, Intel knew that software held the key to its success, and it wasn't wrong.

Like Noyce and Moore, Faggin chose to form his own company in 1974 called Zilog. The firm is extremely successful in embedded CISC processors but is best known for producing chips that were found in the Sinclair ZX Spectrum. Faggin still heads up Zilog but his name will forever be associated with the creation of arguably the 20th century's most important innovation in electronics. Shima followed Faggin to Zilog in 1975 and worked on the Z80 and Z8000.

Hoff stayed on at Intel, becoming an Intel Fellow and more recently was awarded the National Medal of Technology and Innovation in 2009 by US President Barack Obama, a year before Faggin received the same award.

What Faggin, Hoff and Shima created wasn't just a microprocessor, it was a blueprint for others to follow and quite simply extended what was thought possible. Credit should be given to Noyce, Moore and Intel's third co-founder, Andy Grove, for letting the electronics engineers have the time and resources to develop what was perhaps the most important, ground-breaking electronic component created in the past century. µ

Comparison Of Intel and AMD Processors

An overview of notebook and desktop processors offered by Intel and AMD.

What’s the big deal about choosing a processor?

The processor (also called CPU, short for Central Processing Unit) is the "engine" of a computer. It is the most important component in determining how fast or 'snappy' the system will operate across applications both now and in the near future.  Like the engine of an automobile, a processor can be fast, slow, power hungry or power efficient subject to the kind of work the computer is being considered for. It is important to round out what kind of things you will be doing on the system to best select a computer with a CPU most suitable to your needs.

Unlike other components of a notebook computer, the CPU is -- with rare exception -- a fixed component. This is in contrast to RAM and hard disk storage which can typically be upgraded. Therefore, another consideration is the fact that (important as the CPU is) the CPU you choose will be the same throughout the life of the system. This implies that as programs become more sophisticated, the computer's ability to handle such programs will be directly affected by the decision made at purchase all that time ago. This choice may mean the difference between a system that is useful for another year or two versus one that isn't -- much sooner. As a final consideration in choosing a CPU is the suggested or minimum requirements of either the programs that is planning on being run, or academic department recommendations as a guide as to the relative kind of performance required for a particular field of study.

The product line comparisons hierarchy 

Currently, the two largest manufacturers of CPUs in the world are Intel and AMD. The following provides a short profile of the companies and the current state of their products.

Intel

The current performance and market leader at the time of this writing is Intel.  Intel is currently the sole supplier of processors for all recent Apple computers (Macbook, Macbook Pro, Mini, iMac etc.) and are found in virtually all major computer manufacturer's product lineups. Intel's most current crop of CPUs are the Core iX-series processors which include the i3, i5 and i7; as of January 2011, these series of processors entered their 2nd generation (codenamed "Sandy Bridge" where the 1st generation was codenamed "Nehalem", differences explained under the special features section).  

AMD

AMD is the second largest supplier of processors for personal computers.  Many of their products are found in both high-performance and budget-oriented notebooks as well as low-cost, enthusiast-oriented desktop builds.  The Phenom II and Fusion platforms comprise AMD's most popular and mainstream offerings at the time of this writing.

Beneath, we provide a chart which compares the relative performance between competing product lines within Intel's and AMD's offerings. These are organized by the following three classes: high-end, mid-range and economy.  It is important to note that though this comparison offers a reference of relative performance within each brand, it does not necessarily indicate absolute rankings between competing Intel and AMD products (for instance, the Core i7 is in the same row and category as the Phenom II series but offers superior general performance). Further, the Core iX Mobile series only indicate relative performance for notebook platforms -- that is, it is generally not useful to compare them to desktop processors such as the Intel Core i7 or the Phenom II series.

High End Processors : Intensive Statistical Analysis, Professional Video/Audio Creation, Advanced 3D Graphics

(2nd generation "Sandy Bridge")

Intel Core i7 As Intel's flagship processor, the i7 is a 64-bit processor offering either 2, 4, or 6 cores of the highest levels of general performance available.  The i7 combines Hyper Threading and Turbo Boost technologies for the most demanding and advanced of applications.

Intel Core i7 Mobile Intel's Core i7 Mobile features unparalleled performance on notebooks, incorporating significant power savings while implementing the same features as the non-mobile i7, Hyper Threading and Turbo Boost. The i7 Mobile is available on notebooks with 2 or 4 cores; currently the 4 core version offers higher performance in some respects but heat and battery life are concerns.

AMD Phenom II X6 AMD's Phenom II X6 represents the industry's first consumer class six-core processor. The X6 offers the highest levels of performance ideal for the most intensive of tasks - bolstered by AMD's new Turbo Core technology, the X6 is able to optimize performance in a variety of situations.

(2nd generation "Sandy Bridge")

Intel Core i5 Based upon the same architecture as the i7, the i5 is also a 64-bit processor that features 2 or 4 cores at a similar class of performance of the i7 processor at a lower cost. The i5 features Turbo Boost and Hyper-Threading technology but do not possess as much cache memory as the i7.

Intel Core i5 Mobile The Intel Core i5 Mobile while also featuring Hyper Threading and Turbo Boost possesses a similar but lesser class of performance than the Core i7 Mobile with less cache and available in notebooks only with 2 cores. The Core i5 Mobile is a high performance processor with low energy requirements.

AMD Phenom II X4 AMD's latest generation of consumer class 4 core processors, the quad-core Phenom II X4 chips are designed to deliver performance ideal for all kinds of multimedia as well as in the most demanding of applications such as virtualization.

(2nd generation "Sandy Bridge")

Intel Core i3 Derived from the same architecture as the higher end i5 and i7, the i3 is available strictly as a dual core processor. Though Hyper Threading is available, it does not feature TurboBoost. The Core i3 processor presents higher levels of performance than the Core 2 at a smaller cost.

Intel Core i3 Mobile The Intel Core i3 Mobile descends similarly from the i3, presenting a fast, 64-bit computing experience with the intelligent architecture of the i5 Mobile and i7 Mobile. The i3 Mobile features 2 cores and Hyper Threading but does not include Turbo Boost technology

AMD Phenom II X3 & X2 AMD's Phenom X3 and X2 processors boast 3 or 2 cores that offer excellent performance value; great for all around usage on a small budget all while utilizing AMD's latest architecture technology seen in the Phenom II X4 series

Intel Core 2 Quad The Core 2 Quad features 4 processing cores to optimize gaming, video, and image processing. Built on the same architecture as the Core 2 Duo, this processor excels on multi-tasking with performance hungry applications.

Intel Core 2 Extreme Available in both 2 and 4 core versions, distinguishing features of the Extreme series include higher bus speeds than the non-extreme versions, and an unlocked clock multiplier for further customization of your computing performance.

Mid Range Processors : Speed & Multi-tasking, Adobe Creative Suit, All-Around Use, Basic 3D Graphics

Intel Core 2 Duo Contains two processing cores to optimize gaming, video, and image processing. Laptops with this chip tend to be thinner and and more energy-efficient.

AMD Phenom I X3 & Phenom I X4 AMD's first generation of consumer class processors featuring quad and triple core performance found in desktop builds. Features 64-bit computing performance as well as AMD's HyperTransport bus technology.

Intel Pentium Dual Core Dual core processor based on the Core microarchitecture. A class beneath the Core 2 Duo and Core Duo of Intel's processor offerings, the Pentium Dual Core is available in current desktops and laptops.

AMD Turion II Ultra / AMD Turion II The Turion II and Turion II Ultra are AMD's mainstream mobile processor platform; they provide excellent all-around performance for multimedia such as high definition video. As these are often paired with AMD/ATI graphics, budget configurations containing these processors are also sufficient for basic 3D graphics and gaming.

Intel Core Duo / Intel Core Solo The Intel Core Duo and Core Solo are dual and single core processors based on the Core microarchitecture. The Core Duo and Core Solo offers modest performance for office and limited multimedia oriented tasks.

AMD Athlon II X2 The AMD Athlon II X2 is a 2 core desktop processor that is 80% faster than it's single core counterpart. Great for multitasking and multimedia consumption on a budget.

Economy Processors : Internet Browsing, E-mail, Microsoft Office, Simple Graphics and Games

Intel Centrino/Centrino Duo A mobile-oriented processor based upon Pentium M or Core Duo architectures; the Centrino also integrates wireless networking technology allowing for smaller sized laptops. Offers slight performance boost over simply choosing a core duo and dell wireless card (which is typically less expensive.)

AMD Sempron The AMD Sempron is a budget class processor seen in low cost notebooks and desktops and are considered a class above netbook/nettop processors such as the Intel Atom or the AMD Neo platforms.

Intel Atom Primarily found in netbooks and nettops, this processor has been designed with price and power consumption in mind. As a result, it offers much less processing power than other current Intel alternatives. This processor is available in 1 or 2 cores, with the single core option being far more prevalent.

AMD Athlon Neo / Neo X2 The Athlon Neo and Neo X2 are single and dual core processors seen in ultra-mobile platforms such as netbook and nettops. They are featured with ATI integrated graphics for reasonable multimedia playback performance.

Intel Celeron Intel's economy model processor. It is the most basic, and thus the slowest. It has less cache than other Intel processors, so even if it has the same Ghz rating as another processor, it will be slower. We usually do not recommend this processor because it offers the least in terms of longevity.

 

Benchmarks

This is not meant to be a comprehensive list, but rather a way to identify different branches in processors. To see a more comprehensive comparison of specific processor types, follow the benchmark links below. Benchmark websites rank processors within and between series. The highest rated processors are typically used for server applications and for simplicity, those products are omitted in the set of rankings above (eg. Intel Xeon and AMD Opteron); rather the processors that are found in desktops and notebooks are included.

It is further important to recognize that general processor speed is not solely atttributed by its frequency -- these are the Mhz and Ghz numbers often seen -- of the processor when comparing between different product lines as is the common misconception. For instance, an Intel Pentium 4 3.8 Ghz processor is slower than an Intel Core Duo or AMD Phenom. The primary reasons for this is a function of the architecture and the associated features therein (particulrly additional physical cores, advancing of bus technology, etc). It is thus, only applicable comparing frequency ratings to ascertain relative performance within exact product lines (eg. Core 2 Duo vs. Core 2 Duo). The chart beneath will give a rough idea of the hierarchy of performance expected in faring against competing product lines at the time of this writing. It may also be helpful to understand that versions of processors found in desktops tend to be higher in performance than their notebook counterparts of the same product line; this is done to maintain thermal requirements, battery life and minimize size at the cost of speed.

Benchmark Links:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/

Desktop CPU Benchmarks:

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/benchmarks,31.html

Mobile CPU Benchmarks:

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/mobile-cpu-charts/benchmarks,19.html

Product Information from Manufacturers:

Intel's Processor site:

http://www.intel.com/products/processor/index.htm

AMD's Processor site:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118,00.html

 

Special Features Explained

In this section, we breakdown the practical meaning of some important technical features included in the various processors available. Please not that this is not a comprehensive listing and what is described are the most common/relevant features offered.

Special Features	Explanation	Processors Using Feature
Intel Features
Hyper Threading	The operating system treats the processor as two processors instead of one. This increases the speed of the computer.	Pentium 4, Core i7, Core i5, Core i3
Turbo Boost	Allows the processor to intelligently overclock themselves so long as thermal and electrical requirements are still met.	Core i7, Core i5
Intel QuickPath Interconnect (QPI)	A new Intel technology which replaced Front Side Bus (FSB) -- similar in purpose to AMD's competing HyperTransport technology.	Implemented in some fashion in all Intel core iX series processors
Execute Disable Bit	Prevents certain viruses from infecting the system by labeling some data "executable."	Current Intel processors
vPro	Best for IT people trying to maintain several workstations. It is able to detect systems, even in powered-off states. Synchronizes remote desktop, security, and other multi-station support features. Decreases desk-side maintenance visits.	Core Duo, Core 2 Duo
ViiV technology	Intel's bundle for enhancing multimedia. Supports HD resolutions 720p up to 1080i.	Pentium D, Extreme, Core Duo, Core 2: Duo, Extreme, Quad.
AMD Features
Hyper Transport	Feature that allows for faster processing speed and better energy efficiency.	Current AMD processors
Cool'n'Quiet	Reduces heat and noise of processors allowing for increased energy efficiency.	Phenom I & II, Athlon, Sempron (with exceptions)
Turbo Core	Turbo Core allows for contextual overclocking of the processor to optimize performance subject to electrical and thermal requirements/specifications.	Phenom II X6
CoolCore	Limits unused elements of the processor such that power is conserved -- allows for increased notebook battery life on a single charge.	Phenom I & II, Turion
Dynamic Power Management	Allows for dynamic power management to optimize energy consumption while maintaining performance levels.	Phenom I & II, Turion

Intel’s Haswell Microarchitecture

Haswell is the codename for a processor microarchitecture to be developed by Intel's Oregon team as successor to the Sandy Bridge architecture.Haswell will use a 22 nm process.CPUs based on the Haswell microarchitecture are expected to be released in 2013. There are currently no details regarding this microarchitecture's development.

Haswell is confirmed to have:

• A 22 nm process.
• 3D tri-gate transistors.
• Advanced Vector Extensions 2(AVX2) instruction set (or Haswell New Instructions)

Haswell is expected to have:

• FMA3 instructions.
• A 14 stage pipeline.
• A new cache design.
• Up to 8 cores available.
• New advanced power-saving system.
• 64 kB data + 64 kB instruction L1 cache per core, 8-way associativity
• 1 MB L2 cache per core, 8-way associativity.
• Up to 32 MB L3 cache shared by all cores, 16-way associativity.

Sandy Bridge

Sandy Bridge is the codename for a processor microarchitecture developed by Intel's Israel Development Center. Development began in 2005 targeting the 32 nm process. The codename for this architecture was previously "Gesher" (which means "bridge" in Hebrew). Sandy Bridge processors were first released on January 9, 2011. Intel first previewed a Sandy Bridge processor with A1 stepping at 2 GHz during the Intel Developer Forum in 2009. The yet-to-be released 22 nm die shrink of Sandy Bridge has the codename Ivy Bridge.

Sandy Bridge is one of the most ambitious and aggressive microprocessors designed at Intel. The degree of complexity and integration is simply astounding. It combines a new CPU microarchitecture, a new graphics microarchitecture, each of which is a substantial departure from the previous generation. On top of that, the chip level integration has taken a huge step forward; with a much more complex system agent and a new L3 cache and ring interconnect shared by all the components. Coherent communication between the CPU and GPU in Sandy Bridge is a substantial advance for the industry and presents many opportunities. Dealing with all these different facets of Sandy Bridge in a single discussion is impossible given the scope of changes.

Sandy Bridge is a fundamentally new microarchitecture for Intel. While it outwardly resembles Nehalem and the P6, it is internally far different. The essence of an out-of-order microarchitecture is tracking, re-ordering, renaming and dynamically scheduling operations to achieve the limit of data flow. Nehalem and Westmere rely on the same mechanisms that date back to the original P6. Sandy Bridge changes the underlying out-of-order engine and uses the more efficient approach taken by the EV6 and P4. That one change alone qualifies Sandy Bridge as a different breed entirely from the P6. But, there are changes in almost every other aspect of the design. The uop cache is a huge improvement for the front-end, largely by eliminating many of the vagaries of x86 fetch and decode. The implementation is quite clever and achieves many of the aims of the P4’s trace cache, but in a far more efficient and reliable manner. AVX improves execution throughput and most importantly, the more flexible memory pipelines benefit almost all workloads.

In the coming year, three new microarchitectures will grace the x86 world. This abundance of new designs is exciting; especially since each one embodies a different philosophy. At the high-end, Sandy Bridge focuses on efficient per-core performance, while Bulldozer explicitly trades away some per-core performance for higher aggregate throughput. AMD’s Bobcat takes an entirely different road, emphasizing low-power, but retaining performance. In contrast, Intel’s Atom is truly intended to reach the most power sensitive applications. The two high-end microarchitectures, Sandy Bridge and Bulldozer, are shown below in Figure 7. Note that each Bulldozer module would include two integer cores while sharing the front-end and floating point cluster. Also, the floating point cluster in Bulldozer does not directly access memory, instead it uses the memory pipelines in the two attached cores, which then forward results to the FP cluster.

With the limited details, it is hard to predict the chip level performance for products based on these two microarchitectures. Frequencies are still undisclosed, or have yet to be determined and the client and server products will be rather different. In the case of Sandy Bridge, the clock speed should be in the same vicinity as Nehalem or Westmere – however, Bulldozer is clearly intended to run faster, but the frequency will probably be dictated by power consumption. For Bulldozer, there are also numerous details on the integration (e.g. L3 cache design, snoop filter) that are undisclosed. Nonetheless, it is possible to make some educated estimates about the performance of the two microarchitectures.

In looking at the two designs, it is sensible to compare a multi-threaded Sandy Bridge core to a Bulldozer module and separately consider single threaded operation as a special case. Both support two threads although the resources are very different. At a high level, Sandy Bridge shares everything between threads, whereas Bulldozer flexibly shares the front-end and floating point units, while separating the integer cores.

A Sandy Bridge core should have substantially higher performance than a Bulldozer module across the board for single threaded or lightly threaded code. It will also have an additional advantage for floating point workloads that use AVX, (e.g. numerical analysis for finance, engineering). With AVX, each Sandy Bridge core can have up to 2X the FLOP/cycle of a Bulldozer module, although they would be at parity if the code is compiled to use AMD’s FMA4 (e.g. via OpenCL). FMA4 will be relatively rare because, while elegant, it is likely to be a historical footnote for x86, supplanted by Intel’s FMA3. For software still relying on SSE, the difference between the two should be minimal. In comparison, Bulldozer will favor heavily multi-threaded software. Each module has twice the memory pipelines and slightly more resources (e.g. retirement queue/ROB entries, memory buffers) than a single Sandy Bridge core with two threads, so Bulldozer should do very well in many highly parallel integer workloads that exercise the memory pipelines.

In many ways, the strengths of Sandy Bridge reflect the intentions of the architects. Sandy Bridge is first and foremost a client microprocessor – which requires single threaded performance. Bulldozer is firmly aimed at the server market, where sacrificing single threaded performance for aggregate throughput is an acceptable decision in some cases. Perhaps in future articles, we can examine the components of performance in greater detail (e.g. frequency, IPC, etc.), but for now, high level guidance seems appropriate – given the level of disclosure from both vendors.

Ultimately, we will be waiting for real hardware to see how the Sandy Bridge client performs in the wild. The base clocks, realistic turbo frequencies and power consumption will all be very interesting to observe – and help estimate server performance as well. For now the hardware certainly looks promising and while we await products, we’ll have other reports on different aspects of Sandy Bridge to keep us occupied. The design team certainly deserves a round of congratulations for a job well done, redoing the microarchitecture from the ground up while tackling all the integration challenges.

Intel Nehalem Architecture

Nehalem is the codename for an Intel processor microarchitecture, successor to the Core microarchitecture. Nehalem processors use the 45 nm process. A preview system with two Nehalem processors was shown at Intel Developer Forum in 2007. The first processor released with the Nehalem architecture was the desktop Core i7, which was released in November 2008.

Nehalem, a recycled codename, refers to a completely different architecture from Netburst, although Nehalem still has some things in common with NetBurst. Nehalem-based microprocessors utilize higher clock speeds and are more energy-efficient than Penryn microprocessors. Hyper-Threading is reintroduced along with an L3 Cache missing from most Core-based microprocessors.