News Posts matching #hyperthreading

Return to Keyword Browsing

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Flagship "Arrow Lake" CPU Box Leaks

Intel's Core Ultra 200 series "Arrow Lake" CPU generation is bringing a complete P/E core redesign and, allegedly, a new package. According to VideoCardz, Intel's flagship SKU—Core Ultra 9 285K—features a completely redesigned box with new accent colors. Colors of choice include blue, black, and gray tones with a futuristic look. At the center of the new box is grey plastic packaging that protects and holds the actual processor. As the recent leaks suggested, this SKU will boast 8 "Lion Cove" P-Cores and 16 "Skymont" E-Cores without Hyper-Threading and with a maximum boost of 5.7 GHz. All of this will be packed inside a 125-watt power envelope. While we await the official launch, supposedly scheduled for October 10 and released on October 24, we can preview the new packaging box that Intel prepared for its new CPU family.

Intel "Sierra Forest" Xeon System Surfaces, Fails in Comparison to AMD Bergamo

Intel's upcoming Sierra Forest Xeon server chip has debuted on Geekbench 6, showcasing its potential in multi-core performance. Slated for release in the first half of 2024, Sierra Forest is equipped with up to 288 Efficiency cores, positioning it to compete with AMD's Zen 4c Bergamo server CPUs and other ARM-based server chips like those from Ampere for the favor of cloud service providers (CSP). In the Geekbench 6 benchmark, a dual-socket configuration featuring two 144-core Sierra Forest CPUs was tested. The benchmark revealed a notable multi-core score of 7,770, surpassing most dual-socket systems powered by Intel's high-end Xeon Platinum 8480+, which typically scores between 6,500 and 7,500. However, Sierra Forest's single-core score of 855 points was considerably lower, not even reaching half of that of the 8480+, which manages 1,897 points.

The difference in single-core performance is a matter of choice, as Sierra Forest uses Crestmont-derived Sierra Glen E-cores, which are more power and area-efficient, unlike the Golden Cove P-cores in the Sapphire Rapids-based 8480+. This design choice is particularly advantageous for server environments where high-core counts are crucial, as CSPs usually partition their instances by the number of CPU cores. However, compared to AMD's Bergamo CPUs, which use Zen 4c cores, Sierra Forest lacks pure computing performance, especially in multi-core. The Sierra Forest lacks hyperthreading, while Bergaamo offers SMT with 256 threads on the 128-core SKU. Comparing the Geekbench 6 scores to AMD Bergamo EPYC 9754 and Sierra Forest results look a lot less impressive. Bergamo scored 1,597 points in single-core, almost double that of Sierra Forest, and 16,455 points in the multi-core benchmarks, which is more than double. This is a significant advantage of the Zen 4c core, which cuts down on caches instead of being an entirely different core, as Intel does with its P and E-cores. However, these are just preliminary numbers; we must wait for real-world benchmarks to see the actual performance.

Ivy Bridge Early Sneak Performance Peek: Any Faster Than Sandy Bridge?

Intel's Ivy Bridge line of processors are not due for release until spring 2012, but it looks like Chinese website Coolaler has scored a sneak peak at the performance level of Intel's 22 nm Ivy Bridge platform by testing an engineering sample of a quad core CPU. The screenshot shows CPU-Z & Task Manager (no HyperThreading) readouts, while the AIDA64 Cache & Memory benchmark has been run. The CPU used is a 2 GHz sample as shown by the photo, which CPU-Z reports as running at its 2.4 GHz turbo boost speed (20% overclock) on a Gigabyte GA-Z68X-UD7-B3 motherboard. Rough and ready verdict: about the same speed as the current Sandy Bridge, but with a significantly enhanced northbridge and graphics core. The AIDA64 scores are actually slightly lower than the current SB scores, but this is likely because the CPU is running unsupported and unoptimized due to a mobo BIOS that's not made for it and a benchmark that cannot measure its true performance. Note the memory speeds, which were run fast at 2134 MHz 6-9-6-24 CR2, further indicating lack of optimization, since these timings suggest somewhat better performance than what was measured.
Return to Keyword Browsing
Nov 21st, 2024 08:49 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts