I have a distinct feeling that neither of them have even the slightest clue what they are talking about. If they did understand processor design and had seen pa

I have a distinct feeling that neither of them have even the slightest clue what they are talking about. If they did understand processor design and had seen pages like this[0], they’d realize that a Goldmont cpu is not dramatically different from a other Intel cores and “microcoding” had virtually no bearing on “why it’s cheaper to make”. The real reasons it’s cheaper: - only three instruction decoders - max IPC of 3 - no AVX, AVX2, AVX512 - vector registers are limited to 128bit - generally tops out below 2ghz as base clock with turbo boost into the mid 2s at best - very basic integrated GPU on non-server versions running at 200-600mhz Less registers, less IPC, lower clock frequencies, and less execution units = cheaper cost. So explain how microcode had something to do with that again? [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20210117163607/https://www.extremetech.com/computing/239347-intel-finally-shares-details-new-goldmont-cpu-architecture-heart-apollo-lake https://web.archive.org/web/20210117163607/https://www.extre...