9 ms·

Intel Launches New Sandy Bridge Processors, Benchmarks Show Big Gains

39 points by MojoKid 16y ago

acconrad 16y ago
I love how these processors are already debuting on Amazon and the like for under $200, and to throw it into a MacBook cover triples the price.
Symmetry 16y ago
The most exciting thing about the new processors are the AVX instructions and we're going to have to wait a bit more to see gains from those.
- tocomment 16y ago
  Explain?
  - Symmetry 16y ago
    With Sandybridge Intel created a new set of instructions to replace/supplement SSE. There are some nice things about them that ought to mean that they should have higher performance. However, no existing software uses them so the AVX stuff isn't being used right now. In N months when software has code execution paths using AVX we might see these guys pull ahead of Nehalem processors. AMD will have its own processors using AVX coming out soon too.
    - Symmetry 16y ago
      On thing I didn't realize immediately. Since the larger registers are program state that has to be stored and restored between thread switches you need operating system support before you can enable AVX. Apparently this is coming to Windows in service pack 1 of Windows 7.
  - Tuna-Fish 16y ago
    The AVX extension adds a set of new instructions that can operate on 256 bits of data at once (in the form of 4 64-bit floats, 8 32-bit floats, or various other data types), and the new registers to fit them in. These new instructions promise to significantly increase throughput for a limited set of operations -- but to do that, the software has to be compiled to use them, and often entirely rewritten to use the wider vectors. Few will bother to do that until the new instructions have significant market penetration -- which will take years. I am not quite as optimistic as Symmetry is about the usefulness of these latest extensions to x86 -- while many fringe tasks will benefit a lot, most of what you do on a computer just isn't limited by the width of the vectors or the amount of SIMD operations you can do per clock. IMHO, the insanely fast caches are a much more significant improvement.
    - adrianN 16y ago
      Those extensions may not be very interesting for the consumer market, but scientific applications will probably see more benefits.
    - xpaulbettsx 16y ago
      They also allow the CPU register context to be saved/loaded with a single instruction as well, User-Mode Scheduler in Win7 SP1 uses it (the normal scheduler too afaik).
      - Tuna-Fish 16y ago
        That's a single microcoded instruction -- those are not typically any faster than a bunch of normal instructions.
2mur 16y ago
Desktop: Pentium 4 3.20GHz, 2 GB RAM (circa 2004) Laptop: Pentium 4 3.0GHz, 1 GB RAM (circa 1Q2005) {It's a Sager (Clevo rebrand) and has been an absolute tank, but the screen is starting to dim) Both run Ubuntu pretty well, for what I usually hack on (python/django) and the desktop used to run the Source engine games pretty well (under XP). I've recently started learning Android and Eclipse (and especially the AVD emulator) and both of those machines just thrash. I'm looking to build a new box and pick up a Thinkpad when they update. Going to be an expensive year.
- davidj 16y ago
  ha, my Sager 8xxx was a great laptop and lasted quite a while. Would you like to buy it for parts? When it died I switched to a thinkpad t42 from 2004 that I bought for $100.
Alex3917 16y ago
It's amazing that you can get their top-of-the-line processor for only $294. The best Pentium 4 cost $637 when it launched in June 2003, which is $757 in today's dollars. This means the best Intel processor money can buy is 2.5x cheaper today as compared with only 7.5 ago.
- Tuna-Fish 16y ago
  This is only an artifact of market segmentation and release schedules. LGA1155 is their budget line. 2600K is not the best processor they can make -- it is the best processor they can make give very stringent whole platform cost limits. In addition to having the desktop budget line, they also have a desktop high-end line. Last generation, these were the LGA1156 and LGA1366 respectively. The processors they just released are the budget line for this gen, and the high-end line fits a socket called LGA2011, which will be released later, and on which the processor cost will range from 300$ to about 1000$. In every generation, new Intel processors gain roughly as much more power as is the difference between the budget and high-end product lines, so it's normal for todays budget processors to win over yesterday's high end. Usually Intel releases the high-end first for better margins and to avoid this kind of confusion -- this time, they started on the budget end, probably to pummel AMD, who previously only competed on the budget segment and now cannot really compete much at all.
  - Retric 16y ago
    Intel adding integrated graphics to their CPU's is basically spending ~20% of their chip on something that most mid to high end consumers are not going to use, and would be more cheaply produced as a separate chip on the low end. Intel's basic assumption is AMD is so far behind they can't exploit it, and they can exploit their monopoly to crush the ultra low end GPU market. But, it's still risky. IMO Intel focusing on the low to mid range of this release cycle is vital or they are going to be eaten.
    - kenjackson 16y ago
      How is this more cheaply produced as a separate chip? If that's the case then AMD could exploit it. I thought the point was that producing this would be cheaper, passing on the cost savings to the consumer, while at the same time offering better perf than low-end GPUs. Everything I've seen seems to indicate that this is true. Did I miss something?
Construct 16y ago
Great progress, especially in the power consumption. However, last generation processors are already very fast. A better upgrade for most developers would be an SSD though. All of this speed is great, but useless as long as the processor is waiting on a mechanical hard disk. Once you get used to your applications opening almost instantly, it's tough to go back to a mechanical HDD.
- m_myers 16y ago
  I've been watching for them to drop into my price range for over a year now. Are they really worth the premium?
  - khafra 16y ago
    I bought a 60GB one last year, which is plenty for my OS and applications--I use a 1.5TB external for storage. It's the most tangible difference in my computing experience since 4 years ago when I bought 8GB of RAM and got rid of my swap file. If you're willing to spend money to make things faster, spend it on an SSD.
raganwald 16y ago
Any HN perspective on the alleged DRM features built into the chips?
- wmf 16y ago
  My "perspective" is that Sandy Bridge has nothing new on the trusted computing front and Microsoft isn't smart enough to use that hardware anyway (see Palladium).

39 points by MojoKid 16y ago

I love how these processors are already debuting on Amazon and the like for under $200, and to throw it into a MacBook cover triples the price.

Symmetry 16y ago

The most exciting thing about the new processors are the AVX instructions and we're going to have to wait a bit more to see gains from those.

tocomment 16y ago
Explain?
- Symmetry 16y ago
  With Sandybridge Intel created a new set of instructions to replace/supplement SSE. There are some nice things about them that ought to mean that they should have higher performance. However, no existing software uses them so the AVX stuff isn't being used right now. In N months when software has code execution paths using AVX we might see these guys pull ahead of Nehalem processors. AMD will have its own processors using AVX coming out soon too.
  - Symmetry 16y ago
    On thing I didn't realize immediately. Since the larger registers are program state that has to be stored and restored between thread switches you need operating system support before you can enable AVX. Apparently this is coming to Windows in service pack 1 of Windows 7.
- Tuna-Fish 16y ago
  The AVX extension adds a set of new instructions that can operate on 256 bits of data at once (in the form of 4 64-bit floats, 8 32-bit floats, or various other data types), and the new registers to fit them in. These new instructions promise to significantly increase throughput for a limited set of operations -- but to do that, the software has to be compiled to use them, and often entirely rewritten to use the wider vectors. Few will bother to do that until the new instructions have significant market penetration -- which will take years. I am not quite as optimistic as Symmetry is about the usefulness of these latest extensions to x86 -- while many fringe tasks will benefit a lot, most of what you do on a computer just isn't limited by the width of the vectors or the amount of SIMD operations you can do per clock. IMHO, the insanely fast caches are a much more significant improvement.
  - adrianN 16y ago
    Those extensions may not be very interesting for the consumer market, but scientific applications will probably see more benefits.
  - xpaulbettsx 16y ago
    They also allow the CPU register context to be saved/loaded with a single instruction as well, User-Mode Scheduler in Win7 SP1 uses it (the normal scheduler too afaik).
    - Tuna-Fish 16y ago
      That's a single microcoded instruction -- those are not typically any faster than a bunch of normal instructions.

2mur 16y ago

Desktop: Pentium 4 3.20GHz, 2 GB RAM (circa 2004) Laptop: Pentium 4 3.0GHz, 1 GB RAM (circa 1Q2005) {It's a Sager (Clevo rebrand) and has been an absolute tank, but the screen is starting to dim) Both run Ubuntu pretty well, for what I usually hack on (python/django) and the desktop used to run the Source engine games pretty well (under XP). I've recently started learning Android and Eclipse (and especially the AVD emulator) and both of those machines just thrash. I'm looking to build a new box and pick up a Thinkpad when they update. Going to be an expensive year.

davidj 16y ago
ha, my Sager 8xxx was a great laptop and lasted quite a while. Would you like to buy it for parts? When it died I switched to a thinkpad t42 from 2004 that I bought for $100.

Alex3917 16y ago

It's amazing that you can get their top-of-the-line processor for only $294. The best Pentium 4 cost $637 when it launched in June 2003, which is $757 in today's dollars. This means the best Intel processor money can buy is 2.5x cheaper today as compared with only 7.5 ago.

Tuna-Fish 16y ago
This is only an artifact of market segmentation and release schedules. LGA1155 is their budget line. 2600K is not the best processor they can make -- it is the best processor they can make give very stringent whole platform cost limits. In addition to having the desktop budget line, they also have a desktop high-end line. Last generation, these were the LGA1156 and LGA1366 respectively. The processors they just released are the budget line for this gen, and the high-end line fits a socket called LGA2011, which will be released later, and on which the processor cost will range from 300$ to about 1000$. In every generation, new Intel processors gain roughly as much more power as is the difference between the budget and high-end product lines, so it's normal for todays budget processors to win over yesterday's high end. Usually Intel releases the high-end first for better margins and to avoid this kind of confusion -- this time, they started on the budget end, probably to pummel AMD, who previously only competed on the budget segment and now cannot really compete much at all.
- Retric 16y ago
  Intel adding integrated graphics to their CPU's is basically spending ~20% of their chip on something that most mid to high end consumers are not going to use, and would be more cheaply produced as a separate chip on the low end. Intel's basic assumption is AMD is so far behind they can't exploit it, and they can exploit their monopoly to crush the ultra low end GPU market. But, it's still risky. IMO Intel focusing on the low to mid range of this release cycle is vital or they are going to be eaten.
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    How is this more cheaply produced as a separate chip? If that's the case then AMD could exploit it. I thought the point was that producing this would be cheaper, passing on the cost savings to the consumer, while at the same time offering better perf than low-end GPUs. Everything I've seen seems to indicate that this is true. Did I miss something?

Construct 16y ago

Great progress, especially in the power consumption. However, last generation processors are already very fast. A better upgrade for most developers would be an SSD though. All of this speed is great, but useless as long as the processor is waiting on a mechanical hard disk. Once you get used to your applications opening almost instantly, it's tough to go back to a mechanical HDD.

m_myers 16y ago
I've been watching for them to drop into my price range for over a year now. Are they really worth the premium?
- khafra 16y ago
  I bought a 60GB one last year, which is plenty for my OS and applications--I use a 1.5TB external for storage. It's the most tangible difference in my computing experience since 4 years ago when I bought 8GB of RAM and got rid of my swap file. If you're willing to spend money to make things faster, spend it on an SSD.

raganwald 16y ago

Any HN perspective on the alleged DRM features built into the chips?

wmf 16y ago
My "perspective" is that Sandy Bridge has nothing new on the trusted computing front and Microsoft isn't smart enough to use that hardware anyway (see Palladium).