News 14 Core Intel Alder Lake Mobile CPU Spotted on Geekbench

Giroro

Honorable
Jan 22, 2015
775
170
11,190
13
We absolutely need to NEVER call what ever this Realcore/Fakecore architecture is a "14 core" processor (6RC/12T+8fc?). I know Intel is building this product to mislead customers into thinking Intel is core-competitive with Ryzen, but as a community we must reject that marketing, wholesale.

And that is completely aside to how I do not have any idea whatsoever why a high performance desktop user would want die space wasted on throwing weak "power saving" cores in the mix, probably messing up Window's scheduler. This is an idea they had to try and add a good thread or two into their extreme-low-end Atom processors, which at makes some sense. Absolutely terrible idea to essentially cut out a chunk of their desktop processor and replace it with cores that Google doesn't even want in their Chromebooks.
 

Kamen Rider Blade

Distinguished
Dec 2, 2013
158
61
18,660
0
On the HomePC / DeskTop side, I totally agree with you, there is no need for "little" cores outside of small HTPC/NAS/IoT type usage.

But on Mobile Side, I can see the value proposition for "little" atom cores to save on power.

But that's a side effect of just bad power consuming architecture & design & manufacturing process from the beginning to compete against AMD/TSMC.

Anyways, it's a interesting choice moving foreward.

I hope they get their Process/Thread scheduler implemented correctly on day one, or else they're going to catch alot of flak for it.
 

spongiemaster

Commendable
Dec 12, 2019
1,002
468
1,560
0
And that is completely aside to how I do not have any idea whatsoever why a high performance desktop user would want die space wasted on throwing weak "power saving" cores in the mix, probably messing up Window's scheduler.
Well then, it stands to reason you're in no position to be trashing this product if you have no idea how it is going to be implemented or how it will perform. None of us do at this point. So how about we wait and see what Intel releases before completely dismissing it? Unbelievable how negative this community has become whenever a company tries something new these days.
 
Last edited:

hotaru.hino

Commendable
Sep 1, 2020
1,560
486
1,640
34
And that is completely aside to how I do not have any idea whatsoever why a high performance desktop user would want die space wasted on throwing weak "power saving" cores in the mix, probably messing up Window's scheduler. This is an idea they had to try and add a good thread or two into their extreme-low-end Atom processors, which at makes some sense. Absolutely terrible idea to essentially cut out a chunk of their desktop processor and replace it with cores that Google doesn't even want in their Chromebooks.
Microsoft can adapt its scheduler to whatever processor it detects, just like how they have to make special considerations for AMD's processors.

I for one, however, would like heterogenous cores in my processors. I'm not gaming 24/7 or doing some other task that requires high performance and it's kind of headscratching to me that my Ryzen 3700X needs as much power, if not more, running low-end tasks than what my laptop, which has a Ryzen 4900HS, takes in its entirety running those same tasks. And yet I see almost no practical performance benefit on my desktop.

If you need raw power, there's another market segment for you.
 
Reactions: panathas

JayNor

Prominent
May 31, 2019
230
36
610
0
The Gracemont cores are similar to AMD cores wrt the SIMD limitation of avx2. I believe Gracemont includes dlboost in avx2. They will have a smaller branch prediction circuit than the large Golden Cove cores, but it is possible that won't impact performance while doing SIMD... which is an interesting thought.

The Gracemont cores also have some instructions that support faster networking, similar to the Tremont cores. How Intel expects to take advantage of this in Alder Lake is a puzzle, as is the intended use of PCIE5 lanes.
 

escksu

Prominent
Aug 8, 2019
242
76
660
0
We absolutely need to NEVER call what ever this Realcore/Fakecore architecture is a "14 core" processor (6RC/12T+8fc?). I know Intel is building this product to mislead customers into thinking Intel is core-competitive with Ryzen, but as a community we must reject that marketing, wholesale.

And that is completely aside to how I do not have any idea whatsoever why a high performance desktop user would want die space wasted on throwing weak "power saving" cores in the mix, probably messing up Window's scheduler. This is an idea they had to try and add a good thread or two into their extreme-low-end Atom processors, which at makes some sense. Absolutely terrible idea to essentially cut out a chunk of their desktop processor and replace it with cores that Google doesn't even want in their Chromebooks.
Read the title..... it clearly says

Alder Lake Mobile CPU
 
Reactions: JfromNucleon

escksu

Prominent
Aug 8, 2019
242
76
660
0
On the HomePC / DeskTop side, I totally agree with you, there is no need for "little" cores outside of small HTPC/NAS/IoT type usage.

But on Mobile Side, I can see the value proposition for "little" atom cores to save on power.

But that's a side effect of just bad power consuming architecture & design & manufacturing process from the beginning to compete against AMD/TSMC.

Anyways, it's a interesting choice moving foreward.

I hope they get their Process/Thread scheduler implemented correctly on day one, or else they're going to catch alot of flak for it.
WEll, thats precisely why this is a mobile CPU. Be it Intel or AMD, both are still nowhere near the power efficiency of ARM.
 

Kamen Rider Blade

Distinguished
Dec 2, 2013
158
61
18,660
0
WEll, thats precisely why this is a mobile CPU. Be it Intel or AMD, both are still nowhere near the power efficiency of ARM.
And ARM's power efficiency is nowhere near RISC-V =D

^_^

I want RISC-V to eat ARM's entire market little by little until ARM disappears or is left a husk of it's old self.
 

hotaru.hino

Commendable
Sep 1, 2020
1,560
486
1,640
34
WEll, thats precisely why this is a mobile CPU. Be it Intel or AMD, both are still nowhere near the power efficiency of ARM.
And ARM's power efficiency is nowhere near RISC-V =D

^_^

I want RISC-V to eat ARM's entire market little by little until ARM disappears or is left a husk of it's old self.
ISA has nothing to do with the power efficiency of a part. It's solely about the implementation of it in hardware. Case in point, one of the big reasons why Apple ditched PowerPC for x86 was because the manufacturers of PowerPC weren't making efficient enough parts.

Also on a side note, just because the ISA is open, doesn't mean the implementation is. Let's not delude ourselves into thinking that RISC-V is going to usher in some golden age of CPUs. It just makes it more convenient for other hardware manufacturers to roll out their own secret sauce.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY