Intel's Nehalem has integrated memory controllers

[Major_Spittle]

Yes it is the Inq. http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38232

Sounds like Intel plans to release IMCs on EE/XE parts. It sounds logical to me because it is cheaper for them to make nonIMC parts which they can mix and match chips to make Quad cores and get higher yeilds (important for selecting mobile parts) and they can also be made more energy effiecient (also important for mobile chips). Then they can put IMCs on the high end product and charge a fortune.

I wonder how the chipsets will work out for the different products though. Could they make a chipset that will autosense the CPU type and configure itself to operate in differently or do you have to run a certain chipset??? Should be interesting. 8O

 

[xpresso]

Charlie at his best :!:

When questioned why, Intel spokespeople say "we can not comment on future products", but other sources give us a range of answers. Some cite flexibility in memory architectures, others engineering bandwith, and that guy asking for quarters outside Moscone said it was sunspots interfering with the CIA mind control orbital lasers. No two will give you the same answer though, and that we find worrying.

Toss in that there are at least four sockets coming for each application, and you have the potential for a right royal mess. Add in Jasper, a year or so later, and you have the potential for a short lived mess to be supplanted by a slightly longer life short lived mess.

 

[mazzapan]

funny to see Intel stealing ideas from amd.. i can only imagine the outcry in forumz will be incredible.

 

[Heyyou27]

funny to see Intel stealing ideas from amd.. i can only imagine the outcry in forumz will be incredible.

And AMD stole x86 from Intel; both companies constantly license their technologies.

 

[darious00777]

funny to see Intel stealing ideas from amd.. i can only imagine the outcry in forumz will be incredible.

Amd from Intel - x86
Intel from AMD - 64-bit extentions
AMD from Intel - SSE instruction sets
Intel from AMD - Integrated Memory Controllers... which AMD people have been crying out that Intel chips desperately needed for years.

Cry aloud, very loud.

 

[Major_Spittle]

Yet strangely enough, neither complany is willing to share the letters in their names.

Intel has 100% more vowels than AMD, but still refuses to give one to AMD? How Monopolistic of 'em.

 

[darious00777]

Yes, but Advanced Micro Devices has 400% more vowels then Intel does, and the same percentage more for consanants.

 

[Major_Spittle]

But Intel is 400% more efficient to type than Advanced Micro Devices.

You're just an AMD fanboi. :roll:

 

[Major_Spittle]

Intel stole space heater technology from G.E. when they made the P4s. :lol:

 

[eregular]

Intel stole space heater technology from G.E. when they made the P4s.

LOL!! ROLFMAO!!

I'm so glad I never owned a p4! went from p3 to athlon (thoroughbred) I could never imagine such a hot monster remember those inquier articles from 04 saying prescott was going to hit over 5 ghz!!! without AMD we'd be using 300 TDP p4's! there'd be no C2D for AMD to squash again...GO L3 Cache and IMC!! Individual core voltage control!! RAWR!

how long will it take intel to get the imc right? amd will have already been building native quadcore imc'ed superbeasts for a year....unless they get bought by some gay company that chops their balls off.

 

[polopolo]

In computer industry, it is very difficult to claim "inventing something" unless you were already in the business 40 years ago. Almost all concepts can actually found their root back in the 50s and 60s, it just take 40 years for these ideas to become even remotely practical. In some cases, the ideas were practical but then became completely waste of efforts, only to become practical again due to changing requirements.

 

[HotFoot]

Are they serious about the IMC being excluded from most desktop chips? If that's the case, then Intel must be going down the line AMD just started with the move to server-class sockets for FX chips and desktop-class sockets for the remiander. This is actually quite annoying, since people with AM2 boards can't get the highest-performing FX processor (then again, the 6000+ has all the features except unlocked multiplier). Still, puting the XE parts in a special socket of their own means those who want extreme performance are going to have to pay even more. The QFX board isn't cheap, and not everyone who uses the XE C2Ds buys a Striker Extreme.

Anyway, 4 concurrent sockets doesn't sound that scary or messy. There are 3 for Intel right now, of which I'm aware. There's the mobile, desktop, and server sockets. That makes sense to me. What's the fourth supposed to be?

 

[Major_Spittle]

Intel most likely has already looked at IMCs and decided not to go with it for their own reasons (most like no need with the C2D and production costs being higher). I seriously doubt with the money Intel puts into R&D that this is terribly new to them.

Intel applies for more patents in a year than any other IC company. AMD is way way down on the list. Remember, Intel will go the route that will make them the most money and make the best bussiness sense just like any other manufacturer. I am sure they pass on developing and producing a lot of technologies just because it doesn't make good bussiness sense. This is why they are so profitable.

 

[polopolo]

Intel stole space heater technology from G.E. when they made the P4s. :lol:

My point is an on die memory controller for microprocessors was not an AMD idea nor is it exclusive to AMD....

If the poster wants to track who followed who in what.... we can start a list...

AMD implemented Cu interconnects, Intel followed...
Intel implemented stress engineering technology (stress layers), AMD followed.
Intel implemented CoSi, AMD followed
Intel implemetned NiSi, AMD just now followed
Intel implemented eSiGe, AMD just now followed...

The list goes on.... AMD also barrowed, then reverse engineered the x86 microcode... which was Intel...

I really despise these 'who copied who' arguments, they are mundane and ridiculous.

Also, I find people who start these types of arguments, particularly on the IMC, do not really understand why the design is good in the first place, nor will acknowledge the weakness (disadvantages) of said technology.

I believe it was IBM did Cu (AMD's contribution was very limited), and Intel delayed to the next node due to some issues. For people who claimed "AMD forced Intel to do C2D", let me remind you it takes at least four years for a company to develop a modern microprocessor. Five years ago Intel were beating crap out of AMD with P4C. The reality was that P4 were designed long before heat were even an issue (mid-late 90s, when energy was cheap, oil costed 10 bucks, data centers were running RISC processors). However, it was widely believed that improving IPC were just a pipe dream (which I still believe is true, the cost of improving IPC meaningfully is simply too high in term of complexity and power comsumption), so the only foreseeable way to get performance must be high freq. There were some multi-core projects, the earliest one I can recalled was done at MIT using a lot of SPARC cores, but they were not even close to mainstream belief. By the way, for people who say C2D is a step in the right direction, all multi-core projects I knwo were looking for many simple low IPC cores running at high freq, which is also the model employed by tera-scale chip done by Intel a few months back. C2D is merely a stop loss solution that fixed some urgent problems before a real answer is provided, very much like SMT (i.e. hyperthreading).

 

[korbin44]

Jack, I really like your style. You back up everything you comment on, and call out others who spit out garbage hoping no one will catch their mistakes.

I can't wait to see the performance an on die controller gives Intel chips. That will be a sight to see. Especially with the release of DDR3. It's going to be an interesting couple of years.

 

[the_vorlon]

Intel from AMD - Integrated Memory Controllers... which AMD people have been crying out that Intel chips desperately needed for years.

.

Actually, AMD Stole the integrated memory controller from the DEC Alpha EV7

(Reportedly) Intel will do a better job of stealing the IMC from DEC than AMD has (thus far) done with the full 5 link configuration originally planned for the murdered EV8 design that Intel and HP commited Alphacide upon to bring us the glorious Itanium chip...

Just a small note in the interest oof historical accuracy

 

[chiefwonk]

Intel stole space heater technology from G.E. when they made the P4s. :lol:

Doood nice ATTACK!!!!!!!!Yeah your right "but Who has watched "THE CORE" starring Hillary swank......Intel Engineers where inspired in that movie .... so i wonder if they coined that name in that movie

 

[qcmadness]

Yes it is the Inq. http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38232

Sounds like Intel plans to release IMCs on EE/XE parts. It sounds logical to me because it is cheaper for them to make nonIMC parts which they can mix and match chips to make Quad cores and get higher yeilds (important for selecting mobile parts) and they can also be made more energy effiecient (also important for mobile chips). Then they can put IMCs on the high end product and charge a fortune.

I wonder how the chipsets will work out for the different products though. Could they make a chipset that will autosense the CPU type and configure itself to operate in differently or do you have to run a certain chipset??? Should be interesting. 8O

The efficiency of incorporating memory controller depends on the architecture. So for an IMC-expected system, when you add the manual memory controller, the system will be slower than a natively EMC system.

 

[makaka]

Yes it is the Inq. http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38232

Sounds like Intel plans to release IMCs on EE/XE parts. It sounds logical to me because it is cheaper for them to make nonIMC parts which they can mix and match chips to make Quad cores and get higher yeilds (important for selecting mobile parts) and they can also be made more energy effiecient (also important for mobile chips). Then they can put IMCs on the high end product and charge a fortune.

I wonder how the chipsets will work out for the different products though. Could they make a chipset that will autosense the CPU type and configure itself to operate in differently or do you have to run a certain chipset??? Should be interesting. 8O

according to this Nehalem memory controller intel will integrated this last only in server cpu witch will have socket LGA 1366 . other desktop and low end cpu will not have the memory controler and here intel can use the good old 775 socket

 

[qcmadness]

according to this Nehalem memory controller intel will integrated this last only in server cpu witch will have socket LGA 1366 . other desktop and low end cpu will not have the memory controler and here intel can use the good old 775 socket

No, Socket H (715 contacts) will be introduced in 2008 to replace Socket 775.

 

[makaka]

according to this Nehalem memory controller intel will integrated this last only in server cpu witch will have socket LGA 1366 . other desktop and low end cpu will not have the memory controler and here intel can use the good old 775 socket

No, Socket H (715 contacts) will be introduced in 2008 to replace Socket 775.

if there is no memory controler i can't see clear reason why intel will move to new socket

 

[qcmadness]

if there is no memory controler i can't see clear reason why intel will move to new socket

Different CPU-Northbridge interconnect (CSI vs FSB).

 

[makaka]

can u please point me to some additinal info about this new CPU-Northbridge interconnect

 

[qcmadness]

can u please point me to some additinal info about this new CPU-Northbridge interconnect

The Common System Interface (CSI), is a high bandwidth Hypertransport-like bus which can be used for CPU-Northbridge interconnect or CPU-CPU interconnect.

 

[dasickninja]

You spoke of disadvantages and inherent weaknesses in the integrated memory controller. Could you expand on that please?
Thanks