Intel 15th-Generation Arrow Lake-S Could Abandon Hyper-Threading Technology

[Nekajo]

Safe for thier wallet


Nope... Linux dominates servers

For desktop? No

Linux dominates servers yeah, but desktop, Linux is at a sub 1% marketshare, even MacOS is much higher but Windows dominate by 90-95% or so

I use Arch Linux and Debi for my own servers, but for desktop I'd not be touching it for sure

 

[Aquinus]

For desktop? No

Linux dominates servers yeah, but desktop, Linux is at a sub 1% marketshare, even MacOS is much higher but Windows dominate by 90-95% or so

I use Arch Linux and Debi for my own servers, but for desktop I'd not be touching it for sure

Try 76% 72% if you actually tried to find numbers. Linux is closer to 4% and MacOS at just over 16%

For the server market it's more like 84% for *nix like systems as seen here.

You seem to have an impoverished idea of what the market actually looks like. Next time, do some research before spouting baseless claims.

 

[Nekajo]

Try 76% 72% if you actually tried to find numbers. Linux is closer to 4% and MacOS at just over 16%

For the server market it's more like 84% for *nix like systems as seen here.

You seem to have an impoverished idea of what the market actually looks like. Next time, do some research before spouting baseless claims.

Talking about desktop OS marketshare in the enterprise segment.

 

[Aquinus]

Talking about desktop OS marketshare in the enterprise segment.

That's the first line, bub. 72% is the desktop number. Also, I have a business provided Macbook Pro, so does the rest of the team I manage. In fact, I've had a Mac provided by my previous other 2 jobs as well over the last 13 years. I haven't had a Windows machine provided by my job during that entire time except for one case where I was allowed (and did,) run Linux on an HP Spectre.

If you're going to challenge that, then produce some sources like I did because I can't find anything that supports your claim.

 

[TechLurker]

I don't see this as big of a deal as it appears to be. Intel may be doing it simply for security and/or power and/or performance reasons and throwing more E-Cores to compensate. It isn't going to suddenly change the ecosystem where multi-threaded tech is so pervasive, and even a unique marketing feature of some boutique chips from the likes of IBM with 4-way and 8-way SMT (which IIRC, still have considerable value for the fields it's targeted at). Even ARM has started shifting towards multi-threading, starting with the Cortex-A65AE, which it says was needed in order to compete in certain markets and plans to expand upon.

Conversely, AMD already has the "compact core" concept down with the Zen 4c, while still having considerable performance due to not needing to rewrite schedulers for. So if SMT was disabled on those, they'd still have a reasonably competitive edge. Moreso, if they tweak the design further to omit SMT in favor of more speed.

 

[Beermotor]

That's the first line, bub. 72% is the desktop number. Also, I have a business provided Macbook Pro, so does the rest of the team I manage. In fact, I've had a Mac provided by my previous other 2 jobs as well over the last 13 years. I haven't had a Windows machine provided by my job during that entire time except for one case where I was allowed (and did,) run Linux on an HP Spectre.

<snip>

Same here. Every team I've been on since 2008 or so has been exclusively Mac Pros or Macbook Pros. I work for a Fortune 50 in the US.

 

[remixedcat]

well with music production less and less ppl are using windows and to me that's enterprise and professional use. I use Bitwig studio on Linux. Many ppl are switching to linux or mac for any creative work.

Windows is terrible for audio work the dpc latency is way too high, the OS is too bloated and way too janky. Linux is far lower latency on even the same systems.

My laptop (specs in sig) has iffy bitwig performance in windows compared to Linux. Same projects even.

Most creatives are on mac or linux cuz microsoft won't get thier shit together and stop making it so bloated and laggy!



oh and another thing to add about intel.....


When I was hunting for a dell latitude or precision laptop I noticed tons of 4 core only systems and these were 7th and 8th and 9th gen i5/7s. So they've been nudging hyperthreading away for a while now, Same with Lenovo too... Also a ton of xeon processors are 4c or 8c only too... no HT

 

[Nordic]

Just go back to Intel, no one cares. You are arguing about a 2% difference in performance that no one really notices most of the time.

It isn't as simple as 2%. Some games benefit more from the larger cache while others benefit more from Intels speed. Looking at TechPowerUp's most recent CPU review shows the 7800x3d 5.7% faster on average than the 14900k. In CyberPunk 2077 the 7800x3d is 25.4% faster than the 14900k on average. In CS:GO the 14900k is 11.9% faster than the 7800x3d on average.

 

[dyonoctis]

oh and another thing to add about intel.....


When I was hunting for a dell latitude or precision laptop I noticed tons of 4 core only systems and these were 7th and 8th and 9th gen i5/7s. So they've been nudging hyperthreading away for a while now, Same with Lenovo too... Also a ton of xeon processors are 4c or 8c only too... no HT

Those were lower end CPUs. (but 9th gen on laptop all had HT) Back then, Intel disabled HT for product segmentation, not directly comparable to what's happening here where they are looking for an alternative. Intel is actually in try hard mode right now, the current refresh are not laziness, but more a mean to not let AMD pull too much ahead while they fix their internal issues and delays.

 

[FoulOnWhite]

It isn't as simple as 2%. Some games benefit more from the larger cache while others benefit more from Intels speed. Looking at TechPowerUp's most recent CPU review shows the 7800x3d 5.7% faster on average than the 14900k. In CyberPunk 2077 the 7800x3d is 25.4% faster than the 14900k on average. In CS:GO the 14900k is 11.9% faster than the 7800x3d on average.

Imo the main advantage of intel over AMD is you biuld it and it just works, which is in some cases not the case with AMD, with the constant updates required to make it work stably, and with intel it is better memory compatability. If gaming is not your main use, then surely these things are more important than the x% better gaming performance.

A 16 core CPU with no HT would be good for everything. HT in some cases is only to make a lower core CPU seem better as the avg non tech competent user will not understand what HT is and just see the numbers.

Now for most home users there is really no need to have a CPU with more than 16 cores(no HT) for gaming or most other general home use requirements. If you need something for any work or productivity related use then you should be using a more productivity aimed CPU/PC with a xeon or threadripper.

 

[efikkan]

I'm curious to see when proper workstation motherboards will arrive for this new platform.
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be a top priority.

For reference, with Alder Lake arriving November 2021, and W680 launching Q1 2022, the first motherboards still weren't available by early March 2022 (Supermicro and ASRock), and the excellent Asus Pro WS W680-ACE was only announced November 7th 2022, that's over 1 year after the CPUs launched.

I use Arch Linux and Debi for my own servers, but for desktop I'd not be touching it for sure

Well for gaming and specific applications, sure.
But as a desktop, Linux isn't lacking at all. Linux is much more responsive, stable and not to mention configurable. For a development setup it's outstanding. After over 16 years of doing most of my development on Linux, having to use Windows at work is a huge step backwards.

Windows is certainly dominating the consumer market, but not so much the enterprise market. I don't think there is a precise metric for this, and those web traffic analyzers most certainly under-sample enterprises heavily, many of which can't even browse the web freely, or are hidden behind proxys etc. But given the fact that brands like HP, Lenovo and even Dell have offered more and more Linux options, so clearly there is demand. I wouldn't be surprised if the real market share for Linux in the enterprise desktop space is >10%, and Mac even higher. Especially workstations for CAD/modelling, simulations, sysadmin and increasingly development Linux is a serious contender.

From time to time I still hear about companies where thousands of computers got infected from someone like a secretary opening an email, I think we all know what kind of OS they are running…

 

[remixedcat]

I'm curious to see when proper workstation motherboards will arrive for this new platform.
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be a top priority.

For reference, with Alder Lake arriving November 2021, and W680 launching Q1 2022, the first motherboards still weren't available by early March 2022 (Supermicro and ASRock), and the excellent Asus Pro WS W680-ACE was only announced November 7th 2022, that's over 1 year after the CPUs launched.


Well for gaming and specific applications, sure.
But as a desktop, Linux isn't lacking at all. Linux is much more responsive, stable and not to mention configurable. For a development setup it's outstanding. After over 16 years of doing most of my development on Linux, having to use Windows at work is a huge step backwards.

Windows is certainly dominating the consumer market, but not so much the enterprise market. I don't think there is a precise metric for this, and those web traffic analyzers most certainly under-sample enterprises heavily, many of which can't even browse the web freely, or are hidden behind proxys etc. But given the fact that brands like HP, Lenovo and even Dell have offered more and more Linux options, so clearly there is demand. I wouldn't be surprised if the real market share for Linux in the enterprise desktop space is >10%, and Mac even higher. Especially workstations for CAD/modelling, simulations, sysadmin and increasingly development Linux is a serious contender.

From time to time I still hear about companies where thousands of computers got infected from someone like a secretary opening an email, I think we all know what kind of OS they are running…

you can't customize windows to look like this either lol

I'm curious to see when proper workstation motherboards will arrive for this new platform.
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be a top priority.

For reference, with Alder Lake arriving November 2021, and W680 launching Q1 2022, the first motherboards still weren't available by early March 2022 (Supermicro and ASRock), and the excellent Asus Pro WS W680-ACE was only announced November 7th 2022, that's over 1 year after the CPUs launched.


Well for gaming and specific applications, sure.
But as a desktop, Linux isn't lacking at all. Linux is much more responsive, stable and not to mention configurable. For a development setup it's outstanding. After over 16 years of doing most of my development on Linux, having to use Windows at work is a huge step backwards.

Windows is certainly dominating the consumer market, but not so much the enterprise market. I don't think there is a precise metric for this, and those web traffic analyzers most certainly under-sample enterprises heavily, many of which can't even browse the web freely, or are hidden behind proxys etc. But given the fact that brands like HP, Lenovo and even Dell have offered more and more Linux options, so clearly there is demand. I wouldn't be surprised if the real market share for Linux in the enterprise desktop space is >10%, and Mac even higher. Especially workstations for CAD/modelling, simulations, sysadmin and increasingly development Linux is a serious contender.

From time to time I still hear about companies where thousands of computers got infected from someone like a secretary opening an email, I think we all know what kind of OS they are running…

a Lot of dell workstations have linux as an option and even a choice of 2 to 3 distros as well... and for consumers they got the xps dev edition and for biz they have a few latitudes with linux options.

and the rest of thier systems like 98% is ubuntu certified to run linux so you know everything works, my dells are all running linux nicely.

Well for gaming and specific applications, sure.
But as a desktop, Linux isn't lacking at all. Linux is much more responsive, stable and not to mention configurable. For a development setup it's outstanding. After over 16 years of doing most of my development on Linux, having to use Windows at work is a huge step backwards.

same for me with audio production! Linux has way lower latency and is way more responsive and the audio is definitely better too...

 

[efikkan]

you can't customize windows to look like this either lol

Sure, if pink is your choice then by all means!
I go the other way, gnome classic with as little bloat as possible to make everything snappy.

But I was actually thinking much wider in terms of customization, as Linux allows you to customize virtually everything; to fit your workflow.

People haven't really tried Linux until they've embraced the terminal, preferably a dropdown one (and possibly a terminal multiplexer), and all kinds of goodies to speed up their workflow. This is especially relevant for developers and sysadmins.
I've trained a bunch of developers, both fresh and "seniors", in using Linux, terminal, git, grep, etc., and those who dive into it really get super efficient, even though they all end up with their own "quirky" workflow. (I of course use a lot of GUI tools to, but the terminal is a large part of the workflow.)
It's fascinating to see how much faster and efficient people get when they get out of the typical "Visual Studio" or "Eclipse" way of doing things through heavy slow GUIs. I try to use whatever gives me the control I want and the information I want, so I can stay in "the zone" and not be distracted.

same for me with audio production! Linux has way lower latency and is way more responsive and the audio is definitely better too...

For sure, not to mention faster IO in general. What annoys me is the typing lag on Windows, I have to slow down to avoid a lot of typos. It even sometimes enters the characters in the wrong order if I do it fast enough.

-----

Luckily, Intel systems have generally worked well at launch with Linux. I know Bulldozer, Zen 1 and Zen 2 had some issues, but I haven't seen any on my Zen 3. Granted I didn't buy that at launch, but I haven't heard anything regarding Zen 3 and 4 like with the previous iterations at launch.

 

[remixedcat]

Sure, if pink is your choice then by all means!
I go the other way, gnome classic with as little bloat as possible to make everything snappy.

But I was actually thinking much wider in terms of customization, as Linux allows you to customize virtually everything; to fit your workflow.

People haven't really tried Linux until they've embraced the terminal, preferably a dropdown one (and possibly a terminal multiplexer), and all kinds of goodies to speed up their workflow. This is especially relevant for developers and sysadmins.
I've trained a bunch of developers, both fresh and "seniors", in using Linux, terminal, git, grep, etc., and those who dive into it really get super efficient, even though they all end up with their own "quirky" workflow. (I of course use a lot of GUI tools to, but the terminal is a large part of the workflow.)
It's fascinating to see how much faster and efficient people get when they get out of the typical "Visual Studio" or "Eclipse" way of doing things through heavy slow GUIs. I try to use whatever gives me the control I want and the information I want, so I can stay in "the zone" and not be distracted.


For sure, not to mention faster IO in general. What annoys me is the typing lag on Windows, I have to slow down to avoid a lot of typos. It even sometimes enters the characters in the wrong order if I do it fast enough.

-----

Luckily, Intel systems have generally worked well at launch with Linux. I know Bulldozer, Zen 1 and Zen 2 had some issues, but I haven't seen any on my Zen 3. Granted I didn't buy that at launch, but I haven't heard anything regarding Zen 3 and 4 like with the previous iterations at launch.

yeah I can have so much info on the bottom bar to where I can just take a quick peak at stuff and not have to fiddle w menus too. I also can have stuff easily on hotkeys of stuff I type out a lot even terminal commands and such. I type my system specs, album links, and other things a lot and rather than copy n paste from text files or URLs I can have hotkeys for all of it

it's so easy to do that too...

 

[Nordic]

If gaming is not your main use, then surely these things are more important than the x% better gaming performance.

This is what I am saying. It is not as simple as 2%. It depends on the application you want the best performance for. There are applications that favor X3d and applications that favor intel.

 

[dyonoctis]

Imo the main advantage of intel over AMD is you biuld it and it just works, which is in some cases not the case with AMD, with the constant updates required to make it work stably, and with intel it is better memory compatability. If gaming is not your main use, then surely these things are more important than the x% better gaming performance.

A 16 core CPU with no HT would be good for everything. HT in some cases is only to make a lower core CPU seem better as the avg non tech competent user will not understand what HT is and just see the numbers.

Now for most home users there is really no need to have a CPU with more than 16 cores(no HT) for gaming or most other general home use requirements. If you need something for any work or productivity related use then you should be using a more productivity aimed CPU/PC with a xeon or threadripper.

I don't totally agree, a Xeon/TR platforms are overkill for some type of work. Dell, HP and Lenovo are also selling workstation with core CPUs for that reason.

you can't customize windows to look like this either lol

View attachment 331281

You can, it just requires more efforts, and windows might break it at each update . The terminal is the only thing where Microsoft officially allow a deep visual modification

 

[remixedcat]

I don't totally agree, a Xeon/TR platforms are overkill for some type of work. Dell, HP and Lenovo are also selling workstation with core CPUs for that reason.

You can, it just requires more efforts, and windows might break it at each update . The terminal is the only thing where Microsoft officially allow a deep visual modification
View attachment 331329
View attachment 331332

that would be a lot of work to get windows like that for sure.

had someone from another forum say intel is partaking in shrinkflation for CPUS.... that's a thought,

 

[Melvis]

While it's true that HT is heavily workload dependent, and for most software its benefit is not that high, there are ones that do scale well. Try running a 7-zip benchmark on a modern (Zen/Alder Lake and newer) CPU. My 5800X is able to achieve almost 100% scaling in decompression.

Thats right and this is why SMT is much more superior then HT is or soon to be was.

 

[londiste]

Thats right and this is why SMT is much more superior then HT is or soon to be was.

HT is SMT.

 

[Melvis]

HT is SMT.

No not exactly, they do a similar thing but SMT does it better! and without the holes.....

 

[londiste]

No not exactly, they do a similar thing but SMT does it better! and without the holes.....

HT is SMT. Hyper-Threading is Intel's marketing name for their SMT implementation.

 

[Melvis]

HT is SMT. Hyper-Threading is Intel's marketing name for their SMT implementation.

No not exactly, Because Intel uses a 'port' design where floating point and integer instructions can only be issued in different clock cycles per port, whereas Ryzen has ten dedicated execution pipelines.
It also has more execution pipelines, period. Haswell (and probably Skylake as well) has three scheduler ports for ALU & FPU operations. Each of those ports has dedicated pathways for different instructions.

On Haswell, the unified scheduler can actually hold 60 entries which are pending execution (waiting for data), Skylake upgraded that to 97 entries. Ryzen holds 14 dedicated entries per ALU/AGU pipeline. Floating point is treated like a co-processor in Ryzen and is largely decoupled via a large 96-entry (IIRC) scheduler feeding four flexible pipelines. Ryzen can have 180 entries in the scheduler queues - almost double Skylake. This was clearly done to mitigate Intel's patented unified scheduler advantage (which allows getting results back to dependent operations very quickly) while allowing the FPU to work freely.

Sometimes this situation benefits Intel, sometimes it benefits Ryzen. For Intel, if code is running heavily on a small set of instructions (with relevant memory ops), then you might have 60~97 ops in the scheduler all pertaining to the same task, each finding its way into an execution pipeline efficiently as data is found (a definite IPC advantage in these scenarios is seen, but these are relatively rare situations in natural code - this happens with processor-specific optimizations). On Ryzen, you have to have pipelines with the necessary support and use that specific pipeline's scheduling queue, which can only hold 14 entries. This is why Ryzen's ALUs and AGUs are made to be extremely flexible while Intel's pipelines are very purpose-built.

Ryzen can do four adds, shifts, LEAs, and many many other common operations in each and every cycle while Intel's best can only do three - and frequently fewer. Intel focuses on getting into and out of the core - a full half of Skylake's scheduler ports are dedicated for memory operations, whereas AMD only has two pipelines dedicated for memory operations.

AMD Zen Microarchiture Part 2: Extracting Instruction-Level Parallelism

www.anandtech.com

 

[remixedcat]

No not exactly, Because Intel uses a 'port' design where floating point and integer instructions can only be issued in different clock cycles per port, whereas Ryzen has ten dedicated execution pipelines.
It also has more execution pipelines, period. Haswell (and probably Skylake as well) has three scheduler ports for ALU & FPU operations. Each of those ports has dedicated pathways for different instructions.

On Haswell, the unified scheduler can actually hold 60 entries which are pending execution (waiting for data), Skylake upgraded that to 97 entries. Ryzen holds 14 dedicated entries per ALU/AGU pipeline. Floating point is treated like a co-processor in Ryzen and is largely decoupled via a large 96-entry (IIRC) scheduler feeding four flexible pipelines. Ryzen can have 180 entries in the scheduler queues - almost double Skylake. This was clearly done to mitigate Intel's patented unified scheduler advantage (which allows getting results back to dependent operations very quickly) while allowing the FPU to work freely.

Sometimes this situation benefits Intel, sometimes it benefits Ryzen. For Intel, if code is running heavily on a small set of instructions (with relevant memory ops), then you might have 60~97 ops in the scheduler all pertaining to the same task, each finding its way into an execution pipeline efficiently as data is found (a definite IPC advantage in these scenarios is seen, but these are relatively rare situations in natural code - this happens with processor-specific optimizations). On Ryzen, you have to have pipelines with the necessary support and use that specific pipeline's scheduling queue, which can only hold 14 entries. This is why Ryzen's ALUs and AGUs are made to be extremely flexible while Intel's pipelines are very purpose-built.

Ryzen can do four adds, shifts, LEAs, and many many other common operations in each and every cycle while Intel's best can only do three - and frequently fewer. Intel focuses on getting into and out of the core - a full half of Skylake's scheduler ports are dedicated for memory operations, whereas AMD only has two pipelines dedicated for memory operations.

AMD Zen Microarchiture Part 2: Extracting Instruction-Level Parallelism

www.anandtech.com

How would each of the different cpu scheduling governors in Linux treat this?? Wonder how different each acts in ryzen vs intel of the same gen

 

[londiste]

No not exactly, Because Intel uses a 'port' design where floating point and integer instructions can only be issued in different clock cycles per port, whereas Ryzen has ten dedicated execution pipelines.
It also has more execution pipelines, period. Haswell (and probably Skylake as well) has three scheduler ports for ALU & FPU operations. Each of those ports has dedicated pathways for different instructions.

On Haswell, the unified scheduler can actually hold 60 entries which are pending execution (waiting for data), Skylake upgraded that to 97 entries. Ryzen holds 14 dedicated entries per ALU/AGU pipeline. Floating point is treated like a co-processor in Ryzen and is largely decoupled via a large 96-entry (IIRC) scheduler feeding four flexible pipelines. Ryzen can have 180 entries in the scheduler queues - almost double Skylake. This was clearly done to mitigate Intel's patented unified scheduler advantage (which allows getting results back to dependent operations very quickly) while allowing the FPU to work freely.

Sometimes this situation benefits Intel, sometimes it benefits Ryzen. For Intel, if code is running heavily on a small set of instructions (with relevant memory ops), then you might have 60~97 ops in the scheduler all pertaining to the same task, each finding its way into an execution pipeline efficiently as data is found (a definite IPC advantage in these scenarios is seen, but these are relatively rare situations in natural code - this happens with processor-specific optimizations). On Ryzen, you have to have pipelines with the necessary support and use that specific pipeline's scheduling queue, which can only hold 14 entries. This is why Ryzen's ALUs and AGUs are made to be extremely flexible while Intel's pipelines are very purpose-built.

Ryzen can do four adds, shifts, LEAs, and many many other common operations in each and every cycle while Intel's best can only do three - and frequently fewer. Intel focuses on getting into and out of the core - a full half of Skylake's scheduler ports are dedicated for memory operations, whereas AMD only has two pipelines dedicated for memory operations.

AMD Zen Microarchiture Part 2: Extracting Instruction-Level Parallelism

www.anandtech.com

True enough, but these are all implementation details. What AMD does is not more or less SMT than approach Intel or ARM or others have taken.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

True enough, but these are all implementation details. What AMD does is not more or less SMT than approach Intel or ARM or others have taken.

SMT more performance but cost more energy. I forgot where's read this.