11 ms·
Intel, SiFive Demo High-Performance RISC-V on Intel 4
- wyldfire 4y agoScore one for freedom. And that's certainly worth something. But how well does it perform when stacked up against less free architectures?
- pabs3 4y agoThe RISC-V implementations are unlikely to be libre, certainly the parts provided by the Intel 4 process node are not libre.
- panick21_ 4y agoHaving commercial developments on RISC-V helps the whole ecosystem and makes it possible to eventually have open cores that can run the standard software. So its kind of like Linux could eventually run much of the software developed for unix and took most of that market. Currently its simply not possible that an open core can actually compete against x86 or ARM. Fabs being open will take longer.
- mhh__ 4y agoScore nothing for freedom, has absolutely no bearing at all on our freedom as users.
- booi 4y agoI hope they’re careful with that engineering sample because it’s probably the only one they were able to make
- hajile 4y agoIntel's 10nm mistake was trying too many new things at one time. Now that they've fixed that, they've not only fixed 10nm, but also fixed problems other fabs had pushed off until later, so catching up will take a lot less time.
- dev_tty01 4y agoNo, it was the opposite. Getting stuck at 10nm was actually due to being unwilling to do new things. They refused to transition to extreme UV lithography. Gelsinger himself has admitted this in interviews.
- LegitShady 4y agoI had no idea intel was actually fabbing anything on the intel 4 process at this time.
- simfree 4y agoThe size of this chip at 4 square millimeters is pretty small, it probably makes for a good test chip before trying to tape out chonkier chips that would have a much higher fault rate.
- wmf 4y agoThey also have Meteor Lake in testing.
- atty 4y agoFrom investor calls (where they actually can’t lie, at least not without fines and losing their jobs), they’ve had test samples of meteor lake for awhile already, which uses Intel 4. They’ve even had successful power-on samples for their 20A node (maybe also 18A?). It sounds like Intel is finally making some advancements on their process roadmap. Of course we’ll have to wait and see if they can hit acceptable yields, or if 4 becomes the next Intel 7 debacle. (Hopefully not)
- etempleton 4y agoI think Intel’s current leadership is slowing righting the ship, it just takes time in this space. It seems like Intel is making the right moves for 5-10 years from now instead of trying to maximize short term returns.
- LegitShady 4y agoI would argue that intel has been surprisingly successful even in the short term, in terms of CPUs. They had the 10th gen where AMD was clearly better performing and more efficient, but they competed. They had 11th gen which was a failure. But until recent price cuts, Alder Lake wins on performance and price against a lot of AMD chips. Alder lake is doing that at a serious process disadvantage vs AMD - alder lake is not TSMC but intel 7 which is their 10nm enhanced finfet process. That intel is even close to competing with AMD when so far behind on process is pretty amazing, a testament to their chip design. If they get their manufacturing and research back under control in the medium to long term they're golden. But even without that, I bet they're making a whole lot more money per chip fabbing it themselves than AMD is buying TSMC.
- rektide 4y agoMeh. Good for Intel. Frankly it's souring to me to see a fresh core with the same usual suspects providing the usual IP blocks though. Cores are easy. But all the un-core is ridiculously propeietary & ultra far from libre here, and in a lot of RISC-V.
- ngcc_hk 4y agoIs it freedom or is it buying the totalitarian counties way to slave the world? Any competition is good. Until it kill your very Systerms.
- hajile 4y agoChina already makes x86 and ARM knockoffs. x86 up through SSE2 (and maybe SSE3) is already patent-free too.
- getcrunk 4y agoAfter apple silicon was released, I was wondering if intel and amd would respond with some arm socs down the line due to the seeming "end of road" for x86. But now what if they are intending to hold out on x86 long enough (~5-7 years) to be able to go all in on riscV?
- vosper 4y agoIs x86 at the end of the road? I don’t follow closely, but I impression is it’s been getting faster and faster ever since AMD stepped up and provided some competition with Ryzen.
- ahartmetz 4y agoAlmost like AMD is saving Intel from itself... In any case, if Intel needs to diversify, open source (RISC-V) does seem better than proprietary mortal enemy (ARM).
- baruch 4y agoAny Intel server comes with an ARM chip (at least one that I know of), the BMC.
- tim-- 4y agoAnd most modern AMD chips ship with ARM cores in them... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processor https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Proces...
- acomjean 4y agoCompetition works wonders.. having both of them (what happened to cyrix?) keeps them honest to some extent.
- atty 4y agoBoth AMD and Intel have released some truly impressive CPUs lately, and this month both of them are releasing their next-gen products (ryzen 7000 and raptor lake respectively, I believe). The new ryzen chips are looking very impressive, and if Intel’s announced numbers are to be believed, raptor lake is going to be pretty great. Where they fall down is on perf/watt, not raw performance. However there’s a lot of things that go into that difference, not just ISA, so I’m not sure if anyone has really decided if x86 is fundamentally less efficient, or just currently less efficient due to current design choices and constraints.
- tromp 4y ago> It also integrates Intel’s DDR5 PHYs supporting 5600 MT/s rates I had to look up [1] that MT/s is short for megatransfers (or million transfers) per second. Compared to specifying memory speed in Mhz, it better reflects that DDR doubles the amount of transfers per clock cycle. [1] https://www.kingston.com/en/blog/pc-performance/mts-vs-mhz https://www.kingston.com/en/blog/pc-performance/mts-vs-mhz
- abainbridge 4y agoAhhh, that's why MT/s exists. All I need to know now is how many data bits are in a transfer and how many memory channels there are, and I'll be able to calculate how fast the memory interface is.
- retskrad 4y agoThe M1 was released in 2020 and AMD and Intel are still unable to compete in performance per watt. I can't believe that Intel and AMD have their current market cap. Investors should know by now that they make gasoline cars and Apple makes EV's. They are that far ahead.
- phendrenad2 4y agoPerformance per watt is something no one cares about. Laptops are a tiny market compared to servers. I'm pretty sure desktops are even a larger market. I'd rather have a beefy desktop PC than a laptop that's fundamentally handicapped by cooling problems.
- brucehoult 4y agoThe only people who don't care about performance per Watt are those who have only one computer with a handful of cores and it is running off mains power. People running from batteries care a lot about performance per Watt. So do people running thousands or tens of thousands of computers in a warehouse. Not only does the electricity to run the computers cost more than the computers themselves, but it also costs a lot of money to build and run the cooling systems.
- phendrenad2 4y ago> People running from batteries care a lot about performance per Watt This is a small market compared to servers. > So do people running thousands or tens of thousands of computers in a warehouse No, they care about total cost of ownership. Please set yourself a reminder for 5 years from now to check if server farms are using Apple M chips yet.
- snvzz 4y ago>Please set yourself a reminder for 5 years from now to check if server farms are using Apple M chips yet. Apple would have to start selling these chips to third parties, first.
- klelatti 4y agoLots of comment here about Intel adopting RISC-V or Arm and what this means for x86. I think it's worth considering the commercial issues from Intel's (and AMD's) perspective. Firstly, adopting Arm would mean giving their blessing to an architecture that is now competing with x86 head on in key markets. That would only accelerate the demise of x86. So unless they have absolutely world beating products available on day 1, I don't think that's going to happen. Secondly, adopting either architecture means that they would remove a key part of the 'x86 moat' and open up competition from anyone else with deep pockets who can put together a top quality silicon design team. So I think it's likely that ultimately - whatever ISA they adopt - they will look for any way they can to distinguish themselves from the competition and avoid the commoditisation of their products. Finally, just to add that supporting RISC-V - which is clearly competing successfully with Arm at the low end at the moment - helps to weaken a competitor so might be seen as a shrewd commercial move irrespective of any longer term plans.
- fmajid 4y agoChina is moving to RISC-V to remove its dependency on amd64 and arm64, and thus to US sanctions since Intel/AMD and ARM are subject to US law. Intel wants to keep the ability to serve the Chinese market, that means in the long terms having RISC-V offerings, hence the investment in SiFive. Unlike Ottelini, Gelsinger is not a bean-counter who sold off StrongARM/XScale to Marvell and thus made Intel irrelevant to the ARM market, and by extension to mobile computing.
- jabl 4y agoThis. I wonder why so many seem so eager to engage in the fantasy that Intel (and AMD) are planning to jump ship to ARM or RISC-V. Yes, ISA's matter, to a point. And yes, ARM64 and RISC-V are much closer to 'best practice' ISA design than x86 with all its legacy baggage. But enough better to make AMD&Intel throw away the x86 market and their position in that as explained in the parent comment? No effing way.
- klelatti 4y agoI forgot to add that there is the risk of 'Osborning'[1] x86 on day 1 of announcing a move to a new architecture as they effectively declare it a 'legacy' product. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect
- sylware 4y agoRISC-V is an ISA free from toxic IP "à la" mpeg/hdmi/arm/x86 (only barbaric countries where this IP is legal though). "Write RISC-V assembly, run everywhere..." It seems they are cheeky people trying to link RISC-V with the current tensions between the US and China. China saw the opportunity of RISC-V and it is pushing hard (like literaly the entire world should). But RISC-V is a US initiative, with the obsvious intention to become a international standard for interoperability of CPUs as the assembly level, that extremely stable in time. India has also RISC-V CPUs, and if everything goes well for RISC-V, its spread should reach more and more CPU designers all around the world further in time. But ARM and x86_64 licence holders (where this licence is legal) may try to torpedo it (probably from the shadows ofc).
- retrocryptid 4y agoFormer SiFive employee here... Sure, RISC-V is the wave of the future, but there's more to a hot chip than an open/free ISA. RISC-V is a few years out from directly competing w/ Intel, but it's advancing very quickly. Also worth looking at what StarFive is doing. They seemed to avoid a few corporate missteps SiFive fell prey to (no. I'm not saying SiFive is dying. I'm saying StarFive was able to learn from SiFive's mistakes and seem to be growing even faster.) The RISC-V community still feels very "academic" and seems to eschew people with real-world experience. Maybe that's for the better. Maybe it's better to ignore the things industry did wrong in the past. But If you're from the Arm or MIPS communities, it feels a tiny bit stuffy. Also, you need a Ph.D. to be taken seriously. Most importantly... I would really love to buy one of these boards. But it sounds like that's in the distant future.
- gautamcgoel 4y ago"The SoC integrates Intel’s own PCIe 5.0 PHY with x8 lanes along with Synopsys PCIe 5 Controller. It also integrates Intel’s DDR5 PHYs supporting 5600 MT/s rates along with Cadence’s memory controller." Naive question: why didn't they just use Intel memory controllers and Intel PCI controllers?
- mhh__ 4y agoSynopsys and Cadence sell a lot of that kind of thing so they might've been things they were already using whereas the PCIe is more process-specific.