News Intel CEO says it's "too late" for them to catch up with AI competition — claims Intel has fallen out of the "top 10 semiconductor companies" a...

[bit_user]

Yes, that's exactly what intel says as well in that link...

Do not do this, which is workload : number of cores, that's what the static threads of console based coding are.

No, I read the link. It still talks about about games creating and managing their own thread pools.

make the multithreaded stuff only use up as much CPU cycles

No, now you're just changing the wording of what they said to be less accurate.

This exchange has ceased to be productive.

 

[rluker5]

No, I wasn't clear enough in what I was saying. I actually did say that the E-cores benefited overall efficiency, as you've shown, but they did that while paradoxically having lower perf/W for much of their operating envelope. The subject was explored quite thoroughly by ChipsAndCheese:

​

​

​

Source: https://chipsandcheese.com/p/alder-lakes-power-efficiency-a-complicated-picture​

​

The first is an example of an scalar integer workload, the second a vector workload. The only problem with that article is in the conclusion, where the author failed to connect the dots and see how you could still end up with more efficient multi-threaded performance.

I took the data from that article and extrapolated it into a few different scenarios, to demonstrate the benefit provided by E-cores:

​

​

​

According to that 8P + 8E was a definite win over a hypothetical 10P + 0E and even 12P + 0E on integer, but had only a narrow lead over the latter for float.

If you divide the productivity by the watts needed at the end of each curve for each type of core for the first 2 graphs ( which is a typical use case at high frequency) then you get about the same ballpark of efficiency advantage for E cores at a little under 2x. P core at efficient low clocks vs E cores at inefficient max clocks isn't a fair comparison.

One could do the same comparison with RPL at whatever minimum clocks are needed for 60 fps gaming vs Ryzen and show a roughly 50-100% efficiency advantage for RPL since it only needs about 20w at a bit under 3GHz to do 60 fps in most games and Ryzen suffers from I/O die overhead. Nobody but me is going to game at low watts on RPL so neither is a realistic comparison.

 

[bit_user]

If you divide the productivity by the watts needed at the end of each curve for each type of core for the first 2 graphs ( which is a typical use case at high frequency) then you get about the same ballpark of efficiency advantage for E cores at a little under 2x.

That's what a lot of people tend to miss, when they look at those graphs. The graphs give the false impression that you need to run all cores at the same power level, but what you should actually do is run all core types at the same efficiency level. That's how I computed the extrapolations I did.

One could do the same comparison with RPL at whatever minimum clocks are needed for 60 fps gaming vs Ryzen and show a roughly 50-100% efficiency advantage for RPL since it only needs about 20w at a bit under 3GHz to do 60 fps in most games and Ryzen suffers from I/O die overhead. Nobody but me is going to game at low watts on RPL so neither is a realistic comparison.

Also, CPU power isn't usually a significant issue, when gaming. So, it ends up being a misplaced concern. In gaming, the substantial majority of your power is going to the GPU.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

Not to mention Google and Microsoft. I guess you'd say Nvidia doesn't count, since Huang was a founder.
🙄

Yes master I will praise and applaud all CEO's going forward. BTW raising Google as a good example destroys your argument entirely. You must be in a cave not to realise the sheer amount of hatred against Google not just from the public, but by many government globally. They are in the firing line to be broken up by the DoJ, and seem to cop massive fines daily for one egregious breach or another. Google has been in a downward spiral since their Indian CEO Picahi took over IMO, and even worse the Indian Srinivasan in charge of ad revenue across platforms like maps and YT.

 

[bit_user]

Yes master I will praise and applaud all CEO's going forward.

It's not for me to force anyone to do anything. I just hope you see my point. There are many more examples I could find, but I think we both know that.

BTW raising Google as a good example destroys your argument entirely. You must be in a cave not to realise the sheer amount of hatred against Google

You seemed to be saying that Tan was trying to drive Intel into the ground. My goal was simply to find examples of non-US born CEOs who were running big companies successfully. Google/Alphabet is very successful, right now, in financial terms. If the standard is actually well-liked companies, there's no shortage of those, either.

However, I think we also both know that many examples exist of big companies run by US-born CEOs that are similarly reviled. To pick on one example, how about United Health? Let's please leave aside the murder itself, but if you just look at the public reaction it provoked, it's very clear that this was not a popular company.

Or, maybe in light of yet another Boeing plane crash, we should talk about that company and how a string of US-born CEOs have run it into the ground.

The problem with these companies isn't where the CEO was born. It's the cut-throat nature of capitalism, in a weakly-regulated society, where investors basically don't care about anything much further out than the next quarter. In that sort of environment, where the CEO is mandated to put shareholder interests first, it's almost a given that companies are going to do some shady things. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

 

[Thretosix]

Intel CEO says it's "too late" for them to catch up with competition and claims Intel has fallen out of the "top 10 semiconductor companies" as the firm lays off thousands across the world and loses contract manufacturing for 18A node.

Intel CEO says it's "too late" for them to catch up with AI competition — claims Intel has fallen out of the "top 10 semiconductor companies" a... : Read more

Intel should market themselves as the non AI chip and enter that niche as there are people already sick of this crap and looking for alternatives without AI.

 

[TerryLaze]

Intel should market themselves as the non AI chip and enter that niche as there are people already sick of this crap and looking for alternatives without AI.

Yeah no, even with nvidia dominating there is still more money to be made in the A.I. market than in the anti A.I. market.

 

[systemBuilder_49]

All these arguments about CPU architecture are irrelevant! The CPU division(s) don't matter anymore - they are too small to keep the foundry running profitably ever again!

This has been a problem for 25 years and Intel has intentionally been whistling past the graveyard as they ignored the thought of becoming a foundry! No single market for chips is growing as fast as the cost of next generation fabs! So anyone trying to keep a foundry busy with just microprocessors is doomed!

The only way Intel survives this is by gaining a lot of outside foundry customers really really fast! Lip Bu-Tan better know this and he'd better sign up lots of customers right away or the company is doomed ...