9 ms·

Intel 10nm Chip Gets Mixed Reviews

120 points by JoachimS 7y ago

greatjack613 7y ago
Intel has been digging this hole for a while, due to the delay of 10nm, they have just shipped rebadged 14nm chips with higher and higher clock speeds. No way a brand new node can match these clocks with decent yields, so even with a healthy IPC increase, they are still fighting an uphill battle.
- skohan 7y ago
  Not to mention consumer expectations. It seems as if we've been hearing "just wait until 10 nm" for so long, I think a lot of people have been expecting a big generational leap.
- techntoke 7y ago
  One thing that Intel has that AMD doesn't is graphics integrated into nearly all their chips and virtual GPU for KVM. If AMD can add something similar then Intel will be decimated, especially if AMD really starts to take over laptops. Unfortunately I don't even think Ryzen 3rd gen laptops exist right now.
  - PedroBatista 7y ago
    It’s a timing mismatch, Intel always releases their mobile parts first, AMD it’s the other way around.
  - tempguy9999 7y ago
    I don't see why on-chip graphics support is necessary. An off-chip, independent graphics chip would surely suffice as redrawing the screen is loosely coupled with computation (describe screen, send to GPU, 60 times a second). Other than some extra power draw needed to couple the 2 chips together, which I assume is minimal, splitting computation from rendering seems like a very good idea - where am I wrong? Would the extra monetary cost be significant - if so roughly by how much?
    - djsumdog 7y ago
      I recently build this AMD based development rig with an ITX board and the cheapest GPU I could find: https://penguindreams.org/blog/louqe-ghost-s1-build-and-review/ https://penguindreams.org/blog/louqe-ghost-s1-build-and-revi... I would have much rather left the GPU out entirely and used the space for something else, but the high end Ryzens don't have any graphics supports. I'd have to go down to the APU units, where I'd trade off power. There's little point to even having HDMI/DisplayPort outs on the board itself; they're unusable except for a small subset of APUs.
    - wmf 7y ago
      13" or smaller laptops don't really have room for a discrete GPU (I supposed they could fit one by shrinking the battery, but why would you do that) and IGPs are generally "free" compared to ~$50 for a cheap discrete GPU. Logically the GPU is a separate unit whether it's on the same chip as the CPU or a separate chip.
  - beatgammit 7y ago
    Sure, AMD doesn't have mobile chips on Zen 2, but that's not far down the road and AMD does have a decent Zen+ mobile chip and it's being built into relatively high-end laptops (Lenovo T series, for example). I'm guessing AMD will release mobile chips on Zen 2 before Intel can fix their issues with 10nm, which will make for an interesting 2020.
hectormalot 7y ago
I don't think the title is doing Intel justice in this case. The graphics performance went up substantially, as did the IPC. Intel decided to trade-off part of the IPC improvements for a lower power consumption. Combined, Ice Lake seems like an improvement across all dimensions for me. Perhaps we've just been spoiled with the leaps that AMD has been making recently.
- w0utert 7y ago
  > Intel decided to trade-off part of the IPC improvements for a lower power consumption It's probably not a deliberate trade-off, their 10nm process is simply not good enough yet to get high yields when pushing clock speed. Their 14nm process was excellent in this regard, after they optimized it for so long, it is the only main advantage 9th-generation Intel parts still have compared to Ryzen 2. It's not a surprise they have to take a step back in that regard until 10nm improves.
  - kristofferR 7y ago
    Did you mean Ryzen 3000/Zen 2?
    - w0utert 7y ago
      You're right, I keep getting confused by this ;-)
  - baybal2 7y ago
    > Intel decided to trade-off part of the IPC improvements for a lower power consumption That's not something given. The "more performant under same power envelope" chips in the lineups all have more cache, more vector extensions, smt unlocked, more turboboost, but no actual qualitative improvements. Some even argued that Ice Lake is less power efficient than latest Skylakes derivatives.
- onion2k 7y ago
  I don't think the title is doing Intel justice in this case. The chip is getting mixed reviews.
raxxorrax 7y ago
I am actually not that interested in CPU performance increases but the lower frequency could be advantageous for thermal properties, which are often a problem in mobile devices. They might also be more energy efficient which I think is the most relevant advantage Intel has against their competitors. So I don't really get the impression that the new chips don't perform well. Spectre probably knocked of Intels performance advantage, but is CPU performance really our current bottleneck?
- jbverschoor 7y ago
  Programmers using layers upon layers are the problem. Programmers are like cake faces, women with layers upon layers of makeup.
  - Tharkun 7y ago
    That's a bit of a silly statement. And misogynist to boot. Hardware is cheap. Programmers are not. It makes much more economic sense to have programmers "use layers upon layers" and buy extra CPU, than to have a couple of x86 assembly gurus hand craft every opcode of your application.
    - throwaway8941 7y ago
      And force your users to buy extra CPU* Development time may be more expensive than hardware if you're developing internal software for a small-ish company, or something extremely niche, but less so when the bloat saves some time for your relatively small team in exchange for bringing massive pain to the thousands/millions of your users. I personally refuse to use "bloated" software even when there's no alternative, but it's a drop in the ocean. Some of the folks I know can't take the same stance simply because they don't know that a text messenger doesn't have to eat half of your machine resources and slurp the battery to zero in half an hour of usage. For them it's just something you have to deal with.
    - FakeComments 7y ago
      How is it misogynist?
tuananh 7y ago
Intel Xeon is getting slaughter as well. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-epyc-7742-vs-intel-xeon-benchmarks,40089.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-epyc-7742-vs-intel-xeo...
- std_throwaway 7y ago
  Those aren't 10nm Xeons.
  - ch_123 7y ago
    While that is true, it is also important to keep in mind that Intel is quite conservative with the Xeons, meaning that they lag behind the consumer chips by one tick/tock cycle (or whatever they call it these days) IOW - by the time we see 10nm Xeons hit the market, AMD will most likely be on the next iteration of the Zen architecture.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - 0x64 7y ago
      10 nm Ice Lake Xeons are coming in H1 2020.
    - dr_zoidberg 7y ago
      I think now it's process-architecture-optimize (but the 10nm took so long that they just kept optimizing and Sunny Cove became a process and architecture change).
    - mort96 7y ago
      I believe they call it the tick-tock-tock-tock-tock-tock cycle; shrink, microarchitecture, optimization, optimization, rebranding, rebranding.
  - HelloNurse 7y ago
    They are Intel's latest and greatest processors in the respective product lines. 10 nm Xeons belong in a somewhat hypothetical future; comparing actual AMD products with Intel roadmaps and projections wouldn't be fair.
std_throwaway 7y ago
Have these tests been run with or without the security patches? Since Spectre/Meltdown/etc. it has increasingly been difficult to compare numbers. Lately intels IPC advantage compared to AMD has been melted away completely by these patches. It will probably take some time until we can judge if these new IPC gains are solid or if they have been bought with new compromises. EDIT: To clarify: If you compare both "out of the box" then the old one would be unsafe while the new one hopefully is safe because it comes with hardware/firmware patches built in. If you compare both patched, the old architecture gets a large performance hit compared to when it was launched. With time the patches usually evolve and change the performance characteristic. So you have to be careful which OS or firmware revision you are using. However way you do it, it's not an easy apples-to-apples comparison anymore unless you're talking about a very specific use case at a very specific point in time.
- w0utert 7y ago
  How many of these security leaks still need software patches for Sunny Cove? I thought Intel implemented hardware mitigations for pretty much all of them in the 10th generation chips?
  - nik736 7y ago
    I read somewhere that it would take several years and generations for them to be fixed on the hardware side.
    - std_throwaway 7y ago
      Some "hardware patches" are microcode changes that also result in performance degradation.
      - w0utert 7y ago
        Maybe, but that's hardly relevant when comparing performance of these chips to e.g. Ryzen 2, as there is no way to disable these mitigations on Ice Lake anyway, it's simply what you get out of the box.
alluro2 7y ago
The relative IPC performance is impressive, since with (a big surprise) much lower base clocks (e.g. ~1.0-1.2Ghz vs ~1.8Ghz of previous gen) and slightly lower boost, these are getting slightly lower, equal or slightly better results in CPU tests (not looking at GPU). That said, it seems like they just couldn't clock them more and get better graphics in within the same TDPs, and overall performance is completely unimpressive compared to 8th gen, and, for top level ones, even worse. Ok, obviously they focused on the GPU and the results are great compared with HD graphics, but I didn't see any comparison with Iris, and I doubt it looks that good. 3700U is currently a mediocre mobile CPU, between 8th gen i7 and i5. Base clock is 2.3Ghz. But that's the Zen+ architecture and the graphic performance is already on the Iris Pro level. If AMD can get the same IPC, clock and TDP improvements as on the desktop for mobile Zen2, where the clocks have not been reduced 30% like Intel did, I think Ice Lake won't be able to compete at all, from what we've seen so far. Of course, there is much more nuance there in terms of heat / power envelopes and now it all ends up together while boosting, but definitely doesn't look very good for Intel based on this...
iopq 7y ago
Oh well, better Lake than never
bitL 7y ago
Perfect for a NUC-based 1080p SteamBox...
gameswithgo 7y ago
overall there are many positive changes for the laptop domain. integrated thunderbolt and a better gpu means cost power and soace savings for many laptops.
mafuyu 7y ago
Anandtech articles looking at the Ice Lake uarch and performance: https://www.anandtech.com/show/14514/examining-intels-ice-lake-microarchitecture-and-sunny-cove https://www.anandtech.com/show/14514/examining-intels-ice-la... https://www.anandtech.com/show/14664/testing-intel-ice-lake-10nm https://www.anandtech.com/show/14664/testing-intel-ice-lake-... I'm personally still excited about these chips for laptops. Lower power and higher IPC mean same-ish performance as the previous generations, but with better battery life and thermals. Plus you get better turbo boost, better graphics, built-in support for TB3, WiFi 6, etc. Seems perfect for something like the Surface Pro. The Core uarch is getting dated, yeah, but Intel is going for breadth and better integration here and it looks compelling.

120 points by JoachimS 7y ago

Intel has been digging this hole for a while, due to the delay of 10nm, they have just shipped rebadged 14nm chips with higher and higher clock speeds. No way a brand new node can match these clocks with decent yields, so even with a healthy IPC increase, they are still fighting an uphill battle.

skohan 7y ago
Not to mention consumer expectations. It seems as if we've been hearing "just wait until 10 nm" for so long, I think a lot of people have been expecting a big generational leap.
techntoke 7y ago
One thing that Intel has that AMD doesn't is graphics integrated into nearly all their chips and virtual GPU for KVM. If AMD can add something similar then Intel will be decimated, especially if AMD really starts to take over laptops. Unfortunately I don't even think Ryzen 3rd gen laptops exist right now.
- PedroBatista 7y ago
  It’s a timing mismatch, Intel always releases their mobile parts first, AMD it’s the other way around.
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  I don't see why on-chip graphics support is necessary. An off-chip, independent graphics chip would surely suffice as redrawing the screen is loosely coupled with computation (describe screen, send to GPU, 60 times a second). Other than some extra power draw needed to couple the 2 chips together, which I assume is minimal, splitting computation from rendering seems like a very good idea - where am I wrong? Would the extra monetary cost be significant - if so roughly by how much?
  - djsumdog 7y ago
    I recently build this AMD based development rig with an ITX board and the cheapest GPU I could find: https://penguindreams.org/blog/louqe-ghost-s1-build-and-review/ https://penguindreams.org/blog/louqe-ghost-s1-build-and-revi... I would have much rather left the GPU out entirely and used the space for something else, but the high end Ryzens don't have any graphics supports. I'd have to go down to the APU units, where I'd trade off power. There's little point to even having HDMI/DisplayPort outs on the board itself; they're unusable except for a small subset of APUs.
  - wmf 7y ago
    13" or smaller laptops don't really have room for a discrete GPU (I supposed they could fit one by shrinking the battery, but why would you do that) and IGPs are generally "free" compared to ~$50 for a cheap discrete GPU. Logically the GPU is a separate unit whether it's on the same chip as the CPU or a separate chip.
- beatgammit 7y ago
  Sure, AMD doesn't have mobile chips on Zen 2, but that's not far down the road and AMD does have a decent Zen+ mobile chip and it's being built into relatively high-end laptops (Lenovo T series, for example). I'm guessing AMD will release mobile chips on Zen 2 before Intel can fix their issues with 10nm, which will make for an interesting 2020.

hectormalot 7y ago

I don't think the title is doing Intel justice in this case. The graphics performance went up substantially, as did the IPC. Intel decided to trade-off part of the IPC improvements for a lower power consumption. Combined, Ice Lake seems like an improvement across all dimensions for me. Perhaps we've just been spoiled with the leaps that AMD has been making recently.

w0utert 7y ago
> Intel decided to trade-off part of the IPC improvements for a lower power consumption It's probably not a deliberate trade-off, their 10nm process is simply not good enough yet to get high yields when pushing clock speed. Their 14nm process was excellent in this regard, after they optimized it for so long, it is the only main advantage 9th-generation Intel parts still have compared to Ryzen 2. It's not a surprise they have to take a step back in that regard until 10nm improves.
- kristofferR 7y ago
  Did you mean Ryzen 3000/Zen 2?
  - w0utert 7y ago
    You're right, I keep getting confused by this ;-)
- baybal2 7y ago
  > Intel decided to trade-off part of the IPC improvements for a lower power consumption That's not something given. The "more performant under same power envelope" chips in the lineups all have more cache, more vector extensions, smt unlocked, more turboboost, but no actual qualitative improvements. Some even argued that Ice Lake is less power efficient than latest Skylakes derivatives.
onion2k 7y ago
I don't think the title is doing Intel justice in this case. The chip is getting mixed reviews.

raxxorrax 7y ago

I am actually not that interested in CPU performance increases but the lower frequency could be advantageous for thermal properties, which are often a problem in mobile devices. They might also be more energy efficient which I think is the most relevant advantage Intel has against their competitors. So I don't really get the impression that the new chips don't perform well. Spectre probably knocked of Intels performance advantage, but is CPU performance really our current bottleneck?

jbverschoor 7y ago
Programmers using layers upon layers are the problem. Programmers are like cake faces, women with layers upon layers of makeup.
- Tharkun 7y ago
  That's a bit of a silly statement. And misogynist to boot. Hardware is cheap. Programmers are not. It makes much more economic sense to have programmers "use layers upon layers" and buy extra CPU, than to have a couple of x86 assembly gurus hand craft every opcode of your application.
  - throwaway8941 7y ago
    And force your users to buy extra CPU* Development time may be more expensive than hardware if you're developing internal software for a small-ish company, or something extremely niche, but less so when the bloat saves some time for your relatively small team in exchange for bringing massive pain to the thousands/millions of your users. I personally refuse to use "bloated" software even when there's no alternative, but it's a drop in the ocean. Some of the folks I know can't take the same stance simply because they don't know that a text messenger doesn't have to eat half of your machine resources and slurp the battery to zero in half an hour of usage. For them it's just something you have to deal with.
  - FakeComments 7y ago
    How is it misogynist?

tuananh 7y ago

Intel Xeon is getting slaughter as well. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-epyc-7742-vs-intel-xeon-benchmarks,40089.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-epyc-7742-vs-intel-xeo...

std_throwaway 7y ago
Those aren't 10nm Xeons.
- ch_123 7y ago
  While that is true, it is also important to keep in mind that Intel is quite conservative with the Xeons, meaning that they lag behind the consumer chips by one tick/tock cycle (or whatever they call it these days) IOW - by the time we see 10nm Xeons hit the market, AMD will most likely be on the next iteration of the Zen architecture.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - 0x64 7y ago
    10 nm Ice Lake Xeons are coming in H1 2020.
  - dr_zoidberg 7y ago
    I think now it's process-architecture-optimize (but the 10nm took so long that they just kept optimizing and Sunny Cove became a process and architecture change).
  - mort96 7y ago
    I believe they call it the tick-tock-tock-tock-tock-tock cycle; shrink, microarchitecture, optimization, optimization, rebranding, rebranding.
- HelloNurse 7y ago
  They are Intel's latest and greatest processors in the respective product lines. 10 nm Xeons belong in a somewhat hypothetical future; comparing actual AMD products with Intel roadmaps and projections wouldn't be fair.

std_throwaway 7y ago

Have these tests been run with or without the security patches? Since Spectre/Meltdown/etc. it has increasingly been difficult to compare numbers. Lately intels IPC advantage compared to AMD has been melted away completely by these patches. It will probably take some time until we can judge if these new IPC gains are solid or if they have been bought with new compromises. EDIT: To clarify: If you compare both "out of the box" then the old one would be unsafe while the new one hopefully is safe because it comes with hardware/firmware patches built in. If you compare both patched, the old architecture gets a large performance hit compared to when it was launched. With time the patches usually evolve and change the performance characteristic. So you have to be careful which OS or firmware revision you are using. However way you do it, it's not an easy apples-to-apples comparison anymore unless you're talking about a very specific use case at a very specific point in time.

w0utert 7y ago
How many of these security leaks still need software patches for Sunny Cove? I thought Intel implemented hardware mitigations for pretty much all of them in the 10th generation chips?
- nik736 7y ago
  I read somewhere that it would take several years and generations for them to be fixed on the hardware side.
  - std_throwaway 7y ago
    Some "hardware patches" are microcode changes that also result in performance degradation.
    - w0utert 7y ago
      Maybe, but that's hardly relevant when comparing performance of these chips to e.g. Ryzen 2, as there is no way to disable these mitigations on Ice Lake anyway, it's simply what you get out of the box.

alluro2 7y ago

The relative IPC performance is impressive, since with (a big surprise) much lower base clocks (e.g. ~1.0-1.2Ghz vs ~1.8Ghz of previous gen) and slightly lower boost, these are getting slightly lower, equal or slightly better results in CPU tests (not looking at GPU). That said, it seems like they just couldn't clock them more and get better graphics in within the same TDPs, and overall performance is completely unimpressive compared to 8th gen, and, for top level ones, even worse. Ok, obviously they focused on the GPU and the results are great compared with HD graphics, but I didn't see any comparison with Iris, and I doubt it looks that good. 3700U is currently a mediocre mobile CPU, between 8th gen i7 and i5. Base clock is 2.3Ghz. But that's the Zen+ architecture and the graphic performance is already on the Iris Pro level. If AMD can get the same IPC, clock and TDP improvements as on the desktop for mobile Zen2, where the clocks have not been reduced 30% like Intel did, I think Ice Lake won't be able to compete at all, from what we've seen so far. Of course, there is much more nuance there in terms of heat / power envelopes and now it all ends up together while boosting, but definitely doesn't look very good for Intel based on this...

iopq 7y ago

Oh well, better Lake than never

bitL 7y ago

Perfect for a NUC-based 1080p SteamBox...

gameswithgo 7y ago

overall there are many positive changes for the laptop domain. integrated thunderbolt and a better gpu means cost power and soace savings for many laptops.

mafuyu 7y ago

Anandtech articles looking at the Ice Lake uarch and performance: https://www.anandtech.com/show/14514/examining-intels-ice-lake-microarchitecture-and-sunny-cove https://www.anandtech.com/show/14514/examining-intels-ice-la... https://www.anandtech.com/show/14664/testing-intel-ice-lake-10nm https://www.anandtech.com/show/14664/testing-intel-ice-lake-... I'm personally still excited about these chips for laptops. Lower power and higher IPC mean same-ish performance as the previous generations, but with better battery life and thermals. Plus you get better turbo boost, better graphics, built-in support for TB3, WiFi 6, etc. Seems perfect for something like the Surface Pro. The Core uarch is getting dated, yeah, but Intel is going for breadth and better integration here and it looks compelling.