Details of New Intel Dunnington and Nehalem Architectures Leaked 147
Daily Tech is reporting that details about Intel's new processor models were leaked over the weekend. Both the six core Dunnington and Nehalem architectures were featured in this leak. "Dunnington includes 16MB of L3 cache shared by all six processors. Each pair of cores can also access 3MB of local L2 cache. The end result is a design very similar to the AMD Barcelona quad-core processor; however, each Barcelona core contains 512KB L2 cache, whereas Dunnington cores share L2 cache in pairs. [...] Nehalem is everything Penryn is -- 45nm, SSE4, quad-core -- and then some. For starters, Intel will abandon the front-side bus model in favor of QuickPath Interconnect; a serial bus similar to HyperTransport."
QuickPath vs HyperTransport (Score:5, Interesting)
Imagine a Beowulf of those
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
FSB (Score:2, Interesting)
I think I speak for us all when I say ABOUT FSCKING TIME!
Re:Intel still playing the Chuck Norris of vendors (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't really know the situation surrounding the technology, but even if Intel could use it for free, they would lose a huge battle in the PR War. I can see it now, "Remember that interconnect AMD has been using for years now? Well our design has finally caught up with theirs enough to use it." Remember that to the masses, the non-slashdot crowd, they have no idea what the techno-jargon spouted by Intel marketing means.
Intel currently has the superior technology, this is because of superior fabrication capabilities, not because of a superior architecture, if I've been following this correctly over the last few years. The general public is oblivious to the fact that internally the AMD architecture is cleaner and more elegant, the only thing they have to go on is marketing. If Intel were to adopt HyperTransport, which IIRC is trademarked by AMD, that would be a huge step backwards for Intel marketing, which is just recovering now that the Core 2 architecture has put them back on top.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:FSB (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, hopefully Intel will open the new bus to third party apps (like that FPGA opteron drop-in). I'll admit I'm an Intel fanboy, but I'd buy an opteron system in a heartbeat if I could pony up the $5K for that co-processor...
What surprises me is the current lack of complaints that you can't drop these new processors into an old board, as a new socket will be required (this is because the northbridge is rolling into the CPU IIRC). I don't see it as a big deal, because usually when upgrading the CPU one also is upgrading the memory and MB as well.
-nB
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
For the cache, the matter is simple. If you can fit 12 MB, but not 16, then 12 is still better than 8. You build them in 3 units of 4 MB each, so no big deal.
Re:Welll.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Dunnington and Nehalem? (Score:3, Interesting)
But there was also, The Tualatin [wikipedia.org], the last of the P3's. [wikipedia.org] .
True, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
Intel's hand was effectively forced because they learned their lesson from Itanium, don't screw with an incumbent variation of your flagship instruction set. With AMD's lead they would've risked yet another Itanium fiasco, so they picked the safe path and tried to PR dance around the existence of AMD's 64-bit stuff.
Itanium was an odd path in the history of Intel proving they truly thought they alone dictated the course of x86 technology. It stands in stark contrast to the history of supporting legacy all the way back to the 8086 days.
In this case, it's not the end-user or software developers being impacted, just hardware implementors who already have to do whatever the processor architecture dictates. Despite that freedom, Intel's unable to offer something that isn't obviously similar to the competing offering since it just is such a damn good idea. AMD has led some revolutionary changes in x86 architecture, while Intel has been able to follow up with evolutionary advances, fabrication, and marketing to continue eating the more significant profit margin space.
Re:QuickPath vs HyperTransport (Score:3, Interesting)