|
|
 |
 |
Membership: |
 |
Latest:
havilandp |
 |
New Today:
0 |
 |
New Yesterday:
0 |
 |
Overall:
108 |
 |
People Online: |
 |
Visitors:
0 |
 |
Members:
0 |
 |
Total:
0 |
Online Now:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apr
23
Written by:
George Ou
4/23/2008 3:19 PM
 Intel's new sub-2.5 watt Atom CPU (codenamed Silverthorne) is showing it can run two process threads at the same time better than competing processors. The Atom's hyperthreading feature (in-order SMT) allows the single-core processor to be seen as two logical processors by an operating system. When both processors are used whenever more than one task is being performed in the computer, substantial gains in performance can be made.
According to these slides presented at IDF on page 17, the Atom is showing an whopping 39% performance gain on SPECint_rate2000 when running two process threads at a mere 17% increase in power consumption. Hexus.net found that the Atom's hyperthreading feature allowed it to improve CINEBENCH 9.5 performance by more than 53%. It should be noted that SPECint_rate2000 doesn't really stress the memory subsystem so one would expect the SPECint_rate2006 gains on Atom hyperthreading to be lower. However it's not really practical to expect a small mobile or embedded device to have 4 Gigabytes of RAM with high memory bandwidth.
Some like Linus Torvalds criticized these Hyperthreading results because he feels that good Hyperthreading performance could be viewed in the glass-half-empty perspective of poor single-threaded performance. I disagree with him because having a second processor is very beneficial to a computer especially when a single process locks up. Modern compilers also have the auto-parallelization features that will try to take advantage of the second processor for single-threaded applications.
The closest competitor for the Intel Atom is Via's Isaiah processor. Recent benchmarks from Eeepcnew.de seem to have indicated that Via's C7 Isaiah processor performs approximately 39% better on raw integer performance and approximately 3.5% better on raw floating point performance. While the Isaiah processor performs well and has reasonable power consumption for a desktop and some larger notebooks, it consumes nearly 10 times more power than the Intel Atom. Furthermore, the results from Eeepcnew.de are for single threading so once you factor in SMT performance gains, the Atom may actually perform better than the Isaiah.
Tags:
14 comments so far...
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
This news may fall on deaf ears
While Atom's performance specs are impressive, the news of Apple purchasing their own chip designer, P.A. Semi Chip.
This is good news from Intel, now knowing that they can produce impressive Hyper-threading results does add some padding to sales points.
As much as I normally agree with Linus, the application of the processor is the determining factor. When single threaded performance is needed, the Atom will fall short. Where when faulty code locks up a thread, and a second logical core is needed to break the system, the Atom will prevail. Which is the common user more likely to experience in the real world scenario?
By nuCrash on
4/27/2008 4:35 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
The single threaded performance isn't all that bad
The single threaded performance isn't all that bad considering its clock speed and the amount of power it consumes.
By George Ou on
4/27/2008 4:35 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
So you censored me, eh George? I'm not surprised. Hide your head in the sand!
By Franz on
4/27/2008 4:36 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
No censorship. If you log in, you won't need moderator approval.
No censorship. If you log in, you won't need moderator approval. I approved your comment in this particular case, no hiding here.
By George Ou on
4/27/2008 4:36 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
The only downside that I see, (so far), is that there is no real competition, not even on the horizon. Intel may monopolize the small electronic devices market (cell phones, PDAs, ultra portable PCs) with this chip. Monopolies are never good for the consumer.
By Gordon on
4/27/2008 4:36 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
Yes, we do need more competition, but it's not Intel's fault for producing a great chip
Yes, we do need more competition, but it's not Intel's fault for producing a great chip. AMD is behind on their ultra low power competitor and Via is targeting the 25 watt TDP range. It’s unfortunate that the competition is lacking, but the competitors need to get cracking.
By George Ou on
4/27/2008 4:37 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
Gordon: Apple just bought another competitor
In my first post, I linked to, well sort of... a link about Apple buying a low wattage competitor. Though this was a different architecture, this is still competition in the low wattage field.
As for AMD, I thought their Geode was supposed to be a big deal, but now I think Via has a better shot at taking the low end.
Sorry for the double post. Apparently refreshing posts again.
By nuCrash on
4/27/2008 4:37 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
Host: (would that be you George?) I'm not complaining nor faulting Intel. Just hoping that AMD, VIA and Apple can survive enough to bring some competition in.
By Gordon on
4/27/2008 4:38 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
nuCrash: Apple
I didn't really understand your post because the first sentence seemed to lack an ending and then you switched back to talking about Intel again.
Now that you have clarified what you meant to say, that is good news. The iPhone has market share and if Apple will be using their own chip manufacturing plant then there is some competition to Intel.
By Gordon on
4/27/2008 4:38 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
iPhone competition?
If the iPhone is considered competition and having a market share, then I don't think intel has anything to worry about from Apple or anyone else for that matter. I maybe out on the limb here, but I bet that there are more Moto Qs, or whatever they are called, out on the market than the iPhone. And that is just one phone.
By fredferrell on
4/27/2008 4:38 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
Yes, "host" is George Ou. There seems to be a problem displaying the real name instead of the user name. I configured it to display real name but it's not working.
By fredferrell on
4/27/2008 4:39 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
Nix the Competition from Apple
Apparently Apple on wants the engineers from P A. The chip fab was just added luggage. Apple has a way with making items disappear as they no longer seem relevant. See the Newton. In fact, if people didn't stop jumping up and down about the Mini, I thought it was going to disappear as well.
By nuCrash on
4/27/2008 4:39 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
Apple has already said they're going to end-of-life the current products from PA
Apple has already said they're going to end-of-life the current products from PA. They just want this small team of elite chip designers who are seen as some sort of special forces unit in the chip world.
By George Ou on
4/27/2008 4:39 PM
|
Re: Intel's Atom CPU flexes multithreading muscle
I could be wrong here—I frequently am wrong about these types of things—but I don't think Atom is targeted at phones proper, but rather at slightly more powerful devices: think everything between and including Archos-type PMPs to EeePC and friends. Phones, even smart ones, use less juice than even Atom can live off of.
By Scruggs on
4/28/2008 3:21 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You must be logged in and have permission to create or edit a blog.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|