News Intel optimizes slimmed-down X86S instruction set — revision 1.2 eliminates 16-bit and 32-bit features

[Eximo]

Could Intel release a PCIe card to complement X86S with classic X86 features in case someone needs it?

You would just emulate at that point.

 

[TheSecondPower]

The article you linked shows N3 (i.e. N3B) as performing 10-15% better than N5. It also shows N3E performing 18% better than N5.

A table in the article I linked shows N3 available in late 2022, N3E in H2 2023, N3B in H2 2024, and N3X in 2025. Hence my confusion about the M3-series chips; they were released in H2 2023 which implies that they would use N3E. I guess the dates are only for customers that aren't Apple or the table is wrong.

 

[bit_user]

A table in the article I linked shows N3 available in late 2022, N3E in H2 2023, N3B in H2 2024, and N3X in 2025. Hence my confusion about the M3-series chips; they were released in H2 2023 which implies that they would use N3E. I guess the dates are only for customers that aren't Apple or the table is wrong.

It takes a while for a new process node to ramp production volumes. Anyway, it's not a good idea to make assumptions based on launch dates, or else you'd not only be assuming Lunar Lake uses N3E but also Zen 5!

 

[bit_user]

Excellent point. Some drivers would be problematic, such is life.

How many drivers on a 64-bit OS actually use 32-bit mode? Is this a real issue, or is the lack of 32-bit ring 0 just a 32-bit OS issue?

The front ends on modern x86-64 processors are eating more and more power - X86S would be a great way to reduce power at, or above, the same performance.

I'm not sure it's only (or even primarily) about front-end simplifications. I'm sure some of the removed features required complexity in the backend to implement.

X86S and APX can reduce the complexity of code streams using these architectural changes. Perhaps there would be even be better optimizations available in compilers as well (speculation obsv).

I wouldn't lump them together, in terms of code-generation. They might both be introduced in the same CPU, but they have different goals. X86S is about streamlining the hardware implementation, while APX is about improving the efficiency of generated code.

 

[RUSerious]

How many drivers on a 64-bit OS actually use 32-bit mode? Is this a real issue, or is the lack of 32-bit ring 0 just a 32-bit OS issue?

I'm thinking here about corporate users on legacy hardware and OSes that would like to upgrade to a faster system for some particular application (which may rely on an older driver that will never be updated). I ran into that problem with an old Win95 system when I worked in IT. So, with some effort, I kept it running well past it's expiration date!

I'm not sure it's only (or even primarily) about front-end simplifications. I'm sure some of the removed features required complexity in the backend to implement.

Well, modern front end eat a lot of xtors. I'd need some well explained technical details vis-a-vis the architecture to understand backend changes. I've been out of the details of CPU design too long to grok a lot of this stuff myself.

 

[thestryker]

I'm thinking here about corporate users on legacy hardware and OSes that would like to upgrade to a faster system for some particular application (which may rely on an older driver that will never be updated). I ran into that problem with an old Win95 system when I worked in IT. So, with some effort, I kept it running well past it's expiration date!

A ton of hurdles already exist for this now especially since Intel has already messed with boot capability (I'm not familiar with this on the AMD side). I would think to do something along these lines today virtualization would be almost mandatory. It is a very real problem though just the same.

 

[Endre]

X86S:
I am all for it!
Let's get rid of crappy legacy code, in order to be able to compete against ARM & RISC-V in the future!
Intel & AMD should've done this a decade ago!

There's also a lot of crappy legacy code in Windows 10 & 11!
Certain menus are as old as Windows 2000!

 

[RUSerious]

Certain menus are as old as Windows 2000!

Wow, really - I thought they were updated with WinXP. Though, computer management UI does look very dated.

 

[Endre]

Wow, really - I thought they were updated with WinXP. Though, computer management UI does look very dated.

Yes. It does look dated.

 

[DS426]

...
Certain menus are as old as Windows 2000!

Yes, it's crazy how long it's taking MS to migrate everything over to Settings from the Control Panel. Yep, CP is still there in W11 24H2, probably to no one's surprise. That said, at least Settings has a lot of, well, settings, lol; it's finally really useful. Some of the new power settings are nice in 24H2, for example, particularly for laptops.