A 14-Core Alder Lake CPU has been spotted in Geekbench 5, flexing its IGP in the OpenCL benchmark.
14 Core Intel Alder Lake Mobile CPU Spotted on Geekbench : Read more
14 Core Intel Alder Lake Mobile CPU Spotted on Geekbench : Read more
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.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.
Microsoft can adapt its scheduler to whatever processor it detects, just like how they have to make special considerations for AMD's processors.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.
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.
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.
And ARM's power efficiency is nowhere near RISC-V =DWEll, thats precisely why this is a mobile CPU. Be it Intel or AMD, both are still nowhere near the power efficiency of ARM.
WEll, thats precisely why this is a mobile CPU. Be it Intel or AMD, both are still nowhere near the power efficiency of ARM.
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.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.