• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Core-1800 Alder Lake Engineering Sample Spotted with 16C/24T Configuration

AleksandarK

News Editor
Staff member
Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
2,190 (0.91/day)
Intel's upcoming Alder Lake generation of processors is going to be the first iteration of heterogeneous x86 architecture. That means that Intel will for the first time combine smaller, low-power cores, with some big high-performance cores to provide the boost to all the workloads. If a task doesn't need much power, as some background task, for example, the smaller cores are used. And if you need to render something or you want to fire up a game, big cores are used to provide the power needed for the tasks. Intel has decided to provide such an architecture on the advanced 10 nm SuperFin, which represents a major upgrade over the existing 14 nm process.

Today, we got some information from Igor's Lab, showing the leaked specification of the Intel Core-1800 processor engineering sample. While this may not represent the final name, we see that the leaked information shows that the processor is B0 stepping. That means that the CPU will see more changes when the final sample arrives. The CPU has 16 cores with 24 threads. Eight of those cores are big ones with hyperthreading, while the remaining 8 are smaller Atom cores. They are running at the base clock of 1800 MHz, while the boost speeds are 4.6 GHz with two cores, 4.4 GHz with four cores, and 4.2 GHz with 6 cores. When all cores are used, the boost speed is locked at 4.0 GHz. The CPU has a PL1 TDP of 125 Watts, while the PL2 configuration boosts the TDP to 228 Watts. The CPU was reportedly running at 1.3147 Volts during the test. You can check out the complete datasheet below.


View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
5,398 (0.92/day)
Location
Australia
System Name Night Rider | Mini LAN PC | Workhorse
Processor AMD R7 5800X3D | Ryzen 1600X | i7 970
Motherboard MSi AM4 Pro Carbon | GA- | Gigabyte EX58-UD5
Cooling Noctua U9S Twin Fan| Stock Cooler, Copper Core)| Big shairkan B
Memory 2x8GB DDR4 G.Skill Ripjaws 3600MHz| 2x8GB Corsair 3000 | 6x2GB DDR3 1300 Corsair
Video Card(s) MSI AMD 6750XT | 6500XT | MSI RX 580 8GB
Storage 1TB WD Black NVME / 250GB SSD /2TB WD Black | 500GB SSD WD, 2x1TB, 1x750 | WD 500 SSD/Seagate 320
Display(s) LG 27" 1440P| Samsung 20" S20C300L/DELL 15" | 22" DELL/19"DELL
Case LIAN LI PC-18 | Mini ATX Case (custom) | Atrix C4 9001
Audio Device(s) Onboard | Onbaord | Onboard
Power Supply Silverstone 850 | Silverstone Mini 450W | Corsair CX-750
Mouse Coolermaster Pro | Rapoo V900 | Gigabyte 6850X
Keyboard MAX Keyboard Nighthawk X8 | Creative Fatal1ty eluminx | Some POS Logitech
Software Windows 10 Pro 64 | Windows 10 Pro 64 | Windows 7 Pro 64/Windows 10 Home
Welcome to 2019 Intel!

Atom cores? hmmmm Not sure How I feel about that...
 

tabascosauz

Moderator
Supporter
Staff member
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Messages
7,457 (2.33/day)
Location
Western Canada
System Name ab┃ob
Processor 7800X3D┃5800X3D
Motherboard B650E PG-ITX┃B550-I Strix
Cooling PA120+T30┃AXP120x67
Memory 64GB 6000CL30┃32GB 3600CL14
Video Card(s) RTX 4070 Ti Eagle┃RTX A2000
Storage 8TB of SSDs┃1TB SN550
Display(s) 43" QN90B / 32" M32Q / 27" S2721DGF
Case Caselabs S3┃Lone Industries L5
Power Supply Corsair HX1000┃HDPlex
Welcome to 2019 Intel!

Atom cores? hmmmm Not sure How I feel about that...

I do remember reading somewhere that in non-AVX tasks the new Atoms should be approaching Skylake IPC, which really isn't bad at all. Obviously, if you need the throughput of a 5950X, Intel still won't be competitive (and I don't think they're aiming to be).

Bigger issue here is that we've only had one prior preview of this big-little setup in Lakefield and it was pathetic, because Intel treated the big core as an addon to the Atoms. Say what you will about the exponential difference in TDP between Lakefield and Alder Lake etc. but regardless, Alder Lake both needs to be much more appreciative of its Golden Cove cores, and the Windows scheduler also needs to accommodate that and avoid a repeat of Lakefield.

Even though it doesn't do big-little, Ryzen has also taken on some of these ideas as its scheduler has improved over time. Dual CCD Ryzen 5000 segregates the two groups of cores pretty clearly in practice. Even though CCD1 always has the 2 CPPC priority cores, the Ryzens seem to offload a surprising amount of light background processing to one or two preferred CCD2 cores when lightly loaded.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Messages
1,720 (0.63/day)
Location
BGD
Processor Intel I9 7940X
Motherboard Asus Strix Rog Gaming E X299
Cooling Xigmatek LOKI SD963 double-Fan
Memory 64Gb DDR4 2666Mhz
Video Card(s) 1)RX 6700XT Power Color Fighter 12gb***2)MATROX M9120LP
Storage 2 x ssd-Kingston 240Gb A400 in RAID 0+ HDD 500Gb +Samsung 128gbSSD +SSD Kinston 480Gb
Display(s) BenQ 28"EL2870U(4K-HDR) / Acer 24"(1080P) / Eizo 2336W(1080p) / 2x Eizo 19"(1280x1024)
Case Lian Li
Audio Device(s) Realtek/Creative T20 Speakers
Power Supply F S P Hyper S 700W
Mouse Asus TUF-GAMING M3
Keyboard Func FUNC-KB-460/Mechanical Keyboard
VR HMD Oculus Rift DK2
Software Win 11
Benchmark Scores Fire Strike=23905,Cinebench R15=3189,Cinebench R20=3791.Passmark=30689,Geekbench4=32885
Freak-Chip :eek:
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
8,863 (3.36/day)
System Name Good enough
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 7900 - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora Edge
Motherboard ASRock B650 Pro RS
Cooling 2x 360mm NexXxoS ST30 X-Flow, 1x 360mm NexXxoS ST30, 1x 240mm NexXxoS ST30
Memory 32GB - FURY Beast RGB 5600 Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 7900 XT - Alphacool Eisblock Aurora
Storage 1x Kingston KC3000 1TB 1x Kingston A2000 1TB, 1x Samsung 850 EVO 250GB , 1x Samsung 860 EVO 500GB
Display(s) LG UltraGear 32GN650-B + 4K Samsung TV
Case Phanteks NV7
Power Supply GPS-750C
I do remember reading somewhere that in non-AVX tasks the new Atoms should be approaching Skylake IPC, which really isn't bad at all. Obviously, if you need the throughput of a 5950X, Intel still won't be competitive (and I don't think they're aiming to be).

Bigger issue here is that we've only had one prior preview of this big-little setup in Lakefield and it was pathetic, because Intel treated the big core as an addon to the Atoms. Say what you will about the exponential difference in TDP between Lakefield and Alder Lake etc. but regardless, Alder Lake both needs to be much more appreciative of its Golden Cove cores, and the Windows scheduler also needs to accommodate that and avoid a repeat of Lakefield.

Even though it doesn't do big-little, Ryzen has also taken on some of these ideas as its scheduler has improved over time. Dual CCD Ryzen 5000 honestly doesn't behave too differently outside of heavy all-core. Even though CCD1 always has the 2 CPPC priority cores, the Ryzens already significantly discriminate between the 2 CCDs and seem to offload a surprising amount of light background processing to one or two preferred CCD2 cores when lightly loaded.

Even if they have similar IPC to Skylake, they're gonna run at lower clocks and still be pretty slow. No matter how much you mess with the scheduler the small cores will range from worthless (the scheduler never prioritizes them) to detrimental (the scheduler places the wrong threads on them).

big.LITTLE can only work effectively in low power mobile devices where you're fine with things running sub optimally when the device idles or stuff like that. On a desktop you typically want high performance all the time.

Having stuff like maybe the browser running on the low power cores sounds good but it almost never works like it should. Because how do you know that ? You can do stuff like like maybe target code that only contains 32 bit instructions on the small cores and code that contains SIMD on the big cores but it's complicated and it's not gonna work most of the time because applications mix and match different kinds of workloads.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
25,559 (6.52/day)
Intel might be on to something with this. 8 Atom cores would provide solid performance for general computing tasks and the 8 Core-i cores would kick in for more demanding tasks like gaming, Audio/video work other such demanding work. I would love to see @W1zzard's take and review of this...

Atom cores? hmmmm Not sure How I feel about that...
It'll be interesting to see what the actual performance is.
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
159 (0.13/day)
Even if they have similar IPC to Skylake, they're gonna run at lower clocks and still be pretty slow. No matter how much you mess with the scheduler the small cores will range from worthless (the scheduler never prioritizes them) to detrimental (the scheduler places the wrong threads on them).

big.LITTLE can only work effectively in low power mobile devices where you're fine with things running sub optimally when the device idles or stuff like that. On a desktop you typically want high performance all the time.

Having stuff like maybe the browser running on the low power cores sounds good but it almost never works like it should. Because how do you know that ? You can do stuff like like maybe target code that only contains 32 bit instructions on the small cores and code that contains SIMD on the big cores but it's complicated and it's not gonna work most of the time because application mix and match different kinds of workloads.
I assume they'll be able to handle these problems when it comes to scheduling. I mean I doubt you somehow know better than the engineers at Intel & AMD?
 

tabascosauz

Moderator
Supporter
Staff member
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Messages
7,457 (2.33/day)
Location
Western Canada
System Name ab┃ob
Processor 7800X3D┃5800X3D
Motherboard B650E PG-ITX┃B550-I Strix
Cooling PA120+T30┃AXP120x67
Memory 64GB 6000CL30┃32GB 3600CL14
Video Card(s) RTX 4070 Ti Eagle┃RTX A2000
Storage 8TB of SSDs┃1TB SN550
Display(s) 43" QN90B / 32" M32Q / 27" S2721DGF
Case Caselabs S3┃Lone Industries L5
Power Supply Corsair HX1000┃HDPlex
I assume they'll be able to handle these problems when it comes to scheduling. I mean I doubt you somehow know better than the engineers at Intel & AMD?

We also "assumed" in 2019 that the Windows scheduler would be properly set up to handle Matisse, which was a novel product at the time. Look how Q2-Q4 2019 went for us.

The scheduler needs time, and the purported release schedule for Alder Lake doesn't allow for a lot of that. Intel is better positioned than AMD to have MS listen to its needs, but the Rocket Lake launch clearly proved that Intel isn't always 100% prepared on microcode either.

Even though Lakefield might technically have served as Intel's first foray into hybrid arch, if Intel simply follows Lakefield's philosophy then like I said Alder Lake is going to be one hell of a ride.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Messages
1,720 (0.63/day)
Location
BGD
Processor Intel I9 7940X
Motherboard Asus Strix Rog Gaming E X299
Cooling Xigmatek LOKI SD963 double-Fan
Memory 64Gb DDR4 2666Mhz
Video Card(s) 1)RX 6700XT Power Color Fighter 12gb***2)MATROX M9120LP
Storage 2 x ssd-Kingston 240Gb A400 in RAID 0+ HDD 500Gb +Samsung 128gbSSD +SSD Kinston 480Gb
Display(s) BenQ 28"EL2870U(4K-HDR) / Acer 24"(1080P) / Eizo 2336W(1080p) / 2x Eizo 19"(1280x1024)
Case Lian Li
Audio Device(s) Realtek/Creative T20 Speakers
Power Supply F S P Hyper S 700W
Mouse Asus TUF-GAMING M3
Keyboard Func FUNC-KB-460/Mechanical Keyboard
VR HMD Oculus Rift DK2
Software Win 11
Benchmark Scores Fire Strike=23905,Cinebench R15=3189,Cinebench R20=3791.Passmark=30689,Geekbench4=32885
Intel might be on to something with this. 8 Atom cores would provide solid performance for general computing tasks and the 8 Core-i cores would kick in for more demanding tasks like gaming, Audio/video work other such demanding work. I would love to see @W1zzard's take and review of this...


It'll be interesting to see what the actual performance is.
I agree...this actually maybe is not bad idea at all if they figure how to share the load properly between those different cores.....
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
8,863 (3.36/day)
System Name Good enough
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 7900 - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora Edge
Motherboard ASRock B650 Pro RS
Cooling 2x 360mm NexXxoS ST30 X-Flow, 1x 360mm NexXxoS ST30, 1x 240mm NexXxoS ST30
Memory 32GB - FURY Beast RGB 5600 Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 7900 XT - Alphacool Eisblock Aurora
Storage 1x Kingston KC3000 1TB 1x Kingston A2000 1TB, 1x Samsung 850 EVO 250GB , 1x Samsung 860 EVO 500GB
Display(s) LG UltraGear 32GN650-B + 4K Samsung TV
Case Phanteks NV7
Power Supply GPS-750C
I assume they'll be able to handle these problems when it comes to scheduling.
They can handle it, I just pointed out that the best they can do is prevent the small cores from tanking performance.

I mean I doubt you somehow know better than the engineers at Intel & AMD?
It doesn't take an army of engineers to know that there is no "correct" solution to this. And you're making a wrong assumption here, even if the engineers know better the end product can still be a failure. I am sure the engineers knew how to build a better processor back in the day when they came up with Netburst but the end result was obviously terrible because the upper management wanted a marketable product with more Ghz on the box than the competition. See, it's not that simple.

I feel like this is the exact same situation, I suspect that the engineers know that this architecture makes no sense on a desktop but the management wants a marketable product with many cores because the competition is totally crushing them in that department.
 
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
5,389 (0.98/day)
System Name Cyberline
Processor Intel Core i7 2600k -> 12600k
Motherboard Asus P8P67 LE Rev 3.0 -> Gigabyte Z690 Auros Elite DDR4
Cooling Tuniq Tower 120 -> Custom Watercoolingloop
Memory Corsair (4x2) 8gb 1600mhz -> Crucial (8x2) 16gb 3600mhz
Video Card(s) AMD RX480 -> ... nope still the same :'(
Storage Samsung 750 Evo 250gb SSD + WD 1tb x 2 + WD 2tb -> 2tb MVMe SSD
Display(s) Philips 32inch LPF5605H (television) -> Dell S3220DGF
Case antec 600 -> Thermaltake Tenor HTCP case
Audio Device(s) Focusrite 2i4 (USB)
Power Supply Seasonic 620watt 80+ Platinum
Mouse Elecom EX-G
Keyboard Rapoo V700
Software Windows 10 Pro 64bit
is this not old news? we already knew it would max out at 8 (big) cores with hyper threating and then 8 (little) cores making a total of 24 threads.

I just wonder how CPU-Z and Task Manager will report on it, really Task Manager should sepparate it in 3 sets of graphs for each.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Messages
1,720 (0.63/day)
Location
BGD
Processor Intel I9 7940X
Motherboard Asus Strix Rog Gaming E X299
Cooling Xigmatek LOKI SD963 double-Fan
Memory 64Gb DDR4 2666Mhz
Video Card(s) 1)RX 6700XT Power Color Fighter 12gb***2)MATROX M9120LP
Storage 2 x ssd-Kingston 240Gb A400 in RAID 0+ HDD 500Gb +Samsung 128gbSSD +SSD Kinston 480Gb
Display(s) BenQ 28"EL2870U(4K-HDR) / Acer 24"(1080P) / Eizo 2336W(1080p) / 2x Eizo 19"(1280x1024)
Case Lian Li
Audio Device(s) Realtek/Creative T20 Speakers
Power Supply F S P Hyper S 700W
Mouse Asus TUF-GAMING M3
Keyboard Func FUNC-KB-460/Mechanical Keyboard
VR HMD Oculus Rift DK2
Software Win 11
Benchmark Scores Fire Strike=23905,Cinebench R15=3189,Cinebench R20=3791.Passmark=30689,Geekbench4=32885
is this not old news? we already knew it would max out at 8 (big) cores with hyper threating and then 8 (little) cores making a total of 24 threads.

I just wonder how CPU-Z and Task Manager will report on it, really Task Manager should sepparate it in 3 sets of graphs for each.
I guess we knew they working on it but now we know that the work is complete..........
P.S. It will be reported as a Freak :D
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
2,889 (0.81/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X ||| Intel Core i7-3930K
Motherboard ASUS ProArt B550-CREATOR ||| Asus P9X79 WS
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S ||| Be Quiet Pure Rock
Memory Crucial 2 x 16 GB 3200 MHz ||| Corsair 8 x 8 GB 1333 MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1060 3GB ||| MSI GTX 680 4GB
Storage Samsung 970 PRO 512 GB + 1 TB ||| Intel 545s 512 GB + 256 GB
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG278QR 27" ||| Eizo EV2416W 24"
Case Fractal Design Define 7 XL x 2
Audio Device(s) Cambridge Audio DacMagic Plus
Power Supply Seasonic Focus PX-850 x 2
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard CM Storm QuickFire XT
Software Ubuntu
Even if they have similar IPC to Skylake, they're gonna run at lower clocks and still be pretty slow. No matter how much you mess with the scheduler the small cores will range from worthless (the scheduler never prioritizes them) to detrimental (the scheduler places the wrong threads on them).

big.LITTLE can only work effectively in low power mobile devices where you're fine with things running sub optimally when the device idles or stuff like that. On a desktop you typically want high performance all the time.
Unless Windows (and Linux) chooses to only delegate background services to the slow cores, there is bound to be a lot of cases of sub-optimal performance. And while synthetic workloads are likely to look impressive, there could be a lot of edge cases causing both lag and sustained poor performance.

Besides the point that I think hybrid cores are a nonsense feature on desktops, I think Intel made a huge mistake by having different ISA support on the cores. It would be much better if the slow had all the same features, including AVX-512, but implemented them using more clock cycles if needed. Then the scheduler wouldn't have to worry, and only use heuristics to move around threads. I haven't yet found details on how schedulers will determine whether an application will use AVX or not.

Having stuff like maybe the browser running on the low power cores sounds good but it almost never works like it should. Because how do you know that ? You can do stuff like like maybe target code that only contains 32 bit instructions on the small cores and code that contains SIMD on the big cores but it's complicated and it's not gonna work most of the time because applications mix and match different kinds of workloads.
Pretty much any user application would have to run on the fast cores, especially the web browser. Otherwise the user experience will be painfully slow.

I assume they'll be able to handle these problems when it comes to scheduling. I mean I doubt you somehow know better than the engineers at Intel & AMD?
The engineers at Intel & AMD don't write the scheduler of Windows.
Also remember that this scheduler has to be flexible enough to work with all the supported microarchitectures.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
2,593 (2.20/day)
Location
Slovenia
Processor i5-6600K
Motherboard Asus Z170A
Cooling some cheap Cooler Master Hyper 103 or similar
Memory 16GB DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) IGP
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250GB
Display(s) 2x Oldell 24" 1920x1200
Case Bitfenix Nova white windowless non-mesh
Audio Device(s) E-mu 1212m PCI
Power Supply Seasonic G-360
Mouse Logitech Marble trackball, never had a mouse
Keyboard Key Tronic KT2000, no Win key because 1994
Software Oldwin
Besides the point that I think hybrid cores are a nonsense feature on desktops
It's obvious that Alder Lake is designed for notebooks first and foremost, and desktops chips come as an afterthought. I expect desktop CPUs to come with fewer small cores, or none.

I think Intel made a huge mistake by having different ISA support on the cores. It would be much better if the slow had all the same features, including AVX-512, but implemented them using more clock cycles if needed. Then the scheduler wouldn't have to worry, and only use heuristics to move around threads. I haven't yet found details on how schedulers will determine whether an application will use AVX or not.
A core can resort to software emulation when it encounters an unknown instruction. So a thread that runs on a small core and uses AVX doesn't need to crash; but the scheduler needs to detect such a situation quickly and move the thread to a large core.

Pretty much any user application would have to run on the fast cores, especially the web browser. Otherwise the user experience will be painfully slow.
Browsers are multithreaded too. Of course, someone (developers? compiler? scheduler?) needs to know which tasks may be offloaded to slower cores.

The engineers at Intel & AMD don't write the scheduler of Windows.
I'm wondering to what extent this is true. Intel, AMD and Arm engineers certainly have a lot of input in the development process. As Intel is a major contributor to the Linux project, I'm sure they are busy tweaking its scheduler all the time, too.

Also remember that this scheduler has to be flexible enough to work with all the supported microarchitectures.
Absolutely, but it also needs to be aware of the peculiarities of each architecture. It also needs to be very fast, which limits its flexibility and the ability to gather runtime statistics, do complex calculations and adapt. We had a similar discussion about Zen 5 recently, here.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2020
Messages
498 (0.39/day)
Location
Greece
System Name Office / HP Prodesk 490 G3 MT (ex-office)
Processor Intel 13700 (90° limit) / Intel i7-6700
Motherboard Asus TUF Gaming H770 Pro / HP 805F H170
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S / Stock
Memory G. Skill Trident XMP 2x16gb DDR5 6400MHz cl32 / Samsung 2x8gb 2133MHz DDR4
Video Card(s) Asus RTX 3060 Ti Dual OC GDDR6X / Zotac GTX 1650 GDDR6 OC
Storage Samsung 2tb 980 PRO MZ / Samsung SSD 1TB 860 EVO + WD blue HDD 1TB (WD10EZEX)
Display(s) Eizo FlexScan EV2455 - 1920x1200 / Panasonic TX-32LS490E 32'' LED 1920x1080
Case Nanoxia Deep Silence 8 Pro / HP microtower
Audio Device(s) On board
Power Supply Seasonic Prime PX750 / OEM 300W bronze
Mouse MS cheap wired / Logitech cheap wired m90
Keyboard MS cheap wired / HP cheap wired
Software W11 / W7 Pro ->10 Pro
Joined
Jan 14, 2019
Messages
9,725 (5.12/day)
Location
Midlands, UK
System Name Nebulon-B Mk. 4
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Motherboard MSi PRO B650M-A WiFi
Cooling be quiet! Dark Rock 4
Memory 2x 24 GB Corsair Vengeance EXPO DDR5-6000
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 7800 XT
Storage 2 TB Corsair MP600 GS, 2 TB Corsair MP600 R2, 4 + 8 TB Seagate Barracuda 3.5"
Display(s) Dell S3422DWG, 7" Waveshare touchscreen
Case Kolink Citadel Mesh black
Power Supply Seasonic Prime GX-750
Mouse Logitech MX Master 2S
Keyboard Logitech G413 SE
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Cinebench R23 single-core: 1,800, multi-core: 18,000. Superposition 1080p Extreme: 9,900.
"Intel has decided to provide such an architecture on the advanced 10 nm SuperFin, which represents a major upgrade over the existing 14 nm process."

125 W PL1, while PL2 is up in the sky again. If it was really such a major upgrade, we'd se way over 5 GHz turbo speeds with this power consumption... unless IPC has drastically increased over Rocket Lake, which I highly doubt. Even in that case, I'd much rather see more modest clock speeds with more realistic power targets (and no PL2 - nobody plays games or does any work in 56-second intervals). So far, I'm not impressed.
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2017
Messages
184 (0.07/day)
System Name Linotosh
Processor Dual 800mhz G4
Cooling Air
Memory 1.5 GB
I'm reserving judgement on these until they actually release. In theory, it sounds like a good idea, at least when it comes to mobile processors, but it really depends on how the operating system uses the cores.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2019
Messages
9,725 (5.12/day)
Location
Midlands, UK
System Name Nebulon-B Mk. 4
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Motherboard MSi PRO B650M-A WiFi
Cooling be quiet! Dark Rock 4
Memory 2x 24 GB Corsair Vengeance EXPO DDR5-6000
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 7800 XT
Storage 2 TB Corsair MP600 GS, 2 TB Corsair MP600 R2, 4 + 8 TB Seagate Barracuda 3.5"
Display(s) Dell S3422DWG, 7" Waveshare touchscreen
Case Kolink Citadel Mesh black
Power Supply Seasonic Prime GX-750
Mouse Logitech MX Master 2S
Keyboard Logitech G413 SE
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Cinebench R23 single-core: 1,800, multi-core: 18,000. Superposition 1080p Extreme: 9,900.
Unless Windows (and Linux) chooses to only delegate background services to the slow cores, there is bound to be a lot of cases of sub-optimal performance. And while synthetic workloads are likely to look impressive, there could be a lot of edge cases causing both lag and sustained poor performance.
Having 2-4 small cores dedicated for background tasks might make sense, but this thing has 8 of them. They must be of some use to the end user too, otherwise they're just a waste of die area (which I think they are anyway, but we'll see).
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2014
Messages
8,115 (2.29/day)
Location
SE Michigan
System Name Dumbass
Processor AMD Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard ASUS TUF gaming B650
Cooling Artic Liquid Freezer 2 - 420mm
Memory G.Skill Sniper 32gb DDR5 6000
Video Card(s) GreenTeam 4070 ti super 16gb
Storage Samsung EVO 500gb & 1Tb, 2tb HDD, 500gb WD Black
Display(s) 1x Nixeus NX_EDG27, 2x Dell S2440L (16:9)
Case Phanteks Enthoo Primo w/8 140mm SP Fans
Audio Device(s) onboard (realtek?) - SPKRS:Logitech Z623 200w 2.1
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Steeseries Esports Wireless
Keyboard Corsair K100
Software windows 10 H
Benchmark Scores https://i.imgur.com/aoz3vWY.jpg?2
Unless Windows (and Linux) chooses to only delegate background services to the slow cores, there is bound to be a lot of cases of sub-optimal performance. And while synthetic workloads are likely to look impressive, there could be a lot of edge cases causing both lag and sustained poor performance.
I highly doubt windows will be up to the task at first. I fear m$/windows will come out with profiles to separate Intel and AMD chips/sets and that the adjustments/allocations meant this glued-together chip only will bleed over into AMD side of things and end up tanking its performance. There is no cure incompetence, it took the windows team how long? to address the performance of threadrippers chip management.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2012
Messages
963 (0.23/day)
System Name Poor Man's PC
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 7500F
Motherboard MSI B650M Mortar WiFi
Cooling ID Cooling SE 206 XT
Memory 32GB GSkill Flare X5 DDR5 6000Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse RX 6800 XT
Storage XPG Gammix S70 Blade 2TB + 8 TB WD Ultrastar DC HC320
Display(s) Mi Gaming Curved 3440x1440 144Hz
Case Cougar MG120-G
Audio Device(s) MPow Air Wireless + Mi Soundbar
Power Supply Enermax Revolution DF 650W Gold
Mouse Logitech MX Anywhere 3
Keyboard Logitech Pro X + Kailh box heavy pale blue switch + Durock stabilizers
VR HMD Meta Quest 2
Benchmark Scores Who need bench when everything already fast?
So basically this is a 9900K with addition of eight N6005 cores.
Barely know anything but latency could be atrocious, unless Intel push Microsoft in their bidding to be aware of smaller cores. On top of that, read ahead on this version of Windows is abysmal at worst, so they might overhaul Windows entirely of just launch a new version of it.

-= edited=-
That 10 nm SuperFin really less appealing when compared to regular 12c24t or 16c32t at 14nm.

 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
3,475 (0.85/day)
System Name Skunkworks
Processor 5800x3d
Motherboard x570 unify
Cooling Noctua NH-U12A
Memory 32GB 3600 mhz
Video Card(s) asrock 6800xt challenger D
Storage Sabarent rocket 4.0 2TB, MX 500 2TB
Display(s) Asus 1440p144 27"
Case Old arse cooler master 932
Power Supply Corsair 1200w platinum
Mouse *squeak*
Keyboard Some old office thing
Software openSUSE tumbleweed/Mint 21.2
Having small cores for non demanding tasks like video consumption or web browsing is a great idea for devices sensitive to power draw, likes phones and tablets.

But with windows machines, you're talking a fraction of the power it uses. Even with the atom cores these alder lake chips are going to suck down power on the desktop, and in mobile AMD's arch is still better, and zen 4 is going to pull further ahead.

This is a solution to a problem nobody wanted. If they could produce atom cores with skylake performance, they could have just made atom processors that performed as well as regular coffee lake CPUs without the huge power draw. The fact they didnt makes me very ssuspect of how capable these cores really are.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
6,728 (1.68/day)
It's obvious that Alder Lake is designed for notebooks first and foremost, and desktops chips come as an afterthought. I expect desktop CPUs to come with fewer small cores, or none.


A core can resort to software emulation when it encounters an unknown instruction. So a thread that runs on a small core and uses AVX doesn't need to crash; but the scheduler needs to detect such a situation quickly and move the thread to a large core.


Browsers are multithreaded too. Of course, someone (developers? compiler? scheduler?) needs to know which tasks may be offloaded to slower cores.


I'm wondering to what extent this is true. Intel, AMD and Arm engineers certainly have a lot of input in the development process. As Intel is a major contributor to the Linux project, I'm sure they are busy tweaking its scheduler all the time, too.


Absolutely, but it also needs to be aware of the peculiarities of each architecture. It also needs to be very fast, which limits its flexibility and the ability to gather runtime statistics, do complex calculations and adapt. We had a similar discussion about Zen 5 recently, here.
You're just speculating, it was designed for "more" efficiency but that's about it.

I'm thinking the opposite 16c/24t is an actual selling point vs 5900x or 5950x for Intel ~ the chance of this SKU (125W TDP) making it to notebooks is close to zero!

Why does a thread running on small core even need to run AVX, if it doesn't support it?
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
2,889 (0.81/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900X ||| Intel Core i7-3930K
Motherboard ASUS ProArt B550-CREATOR ||| Asus P9X79 WS
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S ||| Be Quiet Pure Rock
Memory Crucial 2 x 16 GB 3200 MHz ||| Corsair 8 x 8 GB 1333 MHz
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1060 3GB ||| MSI GTX 680 4GB
Storage Samsung 970 PRO 512 GB + 1 TB ||| Intel 545s 512 GB + 256 GB
Display(s) Asus ROG Swift PG278QR 27" ||| Eizo EV2416W 24"
Case Fractal Design Define 7 XL x 2
Audio Device(s) Cambridge Audio DacMagic Plus
Power Supply Seasonic Focus PX-850 x 2
Mouse Razer Abyssus
Keyboard CM Storm QuickFire XT
Software Ubuntu
It's obvious that Alder Lake is designed for notebooks first and foremost, and desktops chips come as an afterthought. I expect desktop CPUs to come with fewer small cores, or none.
Yes. I would probably suggest most desktop users to buy the ones with 6 or 8 fast cores only, unless they want to be beta testers of course.
I might have to get one of the hybrid ones though, but only because I might have to verify some software.

A core can resort to software emulation when it encounters an unknown instruction. So a thread that runs on a small core and uses AVX doesn't need to crash; but the scheduler needs to detect such a situation quickly and move the thread to a large core.
By software(?) emulation I presume you mean that the CPU frontend will translate it into different instructions (hardware emulation), which is what modern x86 microarchitectures does already; all FPU, MMX, SSE instructions are converted to AVX. This is also how legacy instructions are implemented.

But there will be challenges when there isn't a binary compatible translation, e.g. FMA operations. Doing these separately will result in rounding errors. There are also various other shuffling etc. operations in AVX which will require a lot of instructions to achieve. In such cases I do wonder if the CPU will just freeze the thread and ask the scheduler to move it, because this detection has to happen on the hardware side.

One additional aspect to consider, is that Linux distributions are moving to shipping versions where the entire software repositories are compiled with e.g. AVX2 optimizations, so virtually nothing can use the weak cores, so clearly Intel made a really foolish move here.

Browsers are multithreaded too. Of course, someone (developers? compiler? scheduler?) needs to know which tasks may be offloaded to slower cores.
Developers have fairly little control over this in normal Windows or Linux environments. They can control how many threads are spawned, set attributes like affinity and priority, and of course detect CPU features such as core count, SMT, etc. at runtime. But the actual management of this is done by the OS scheduler.

Browsers like Chrome already spawn an incredible amount of threads. Normally, very few of these have any major load, but the browser may still need to synchronize them, so this can be an issue if important low-load threads end up cores which are slow to respond. I know Chrome gets slow due to high thread count long before CPU load with high tab count.

I'm wondering to what extent this is true. Intel, AMD and Arm engineers certainly have a lot of input in the development process. As Intel is a major contributor to the Linux project, I'm sure they are busy tweaking its scheduler all the time, too.

Absolutely, but it also needs to be aware of the peculiarities of each architecture. It also needs to be very fast, which limits its flexibility and the ability to gather runtime statistics, do complex calculations and adapt. We had a similar discussion about Zen 5 recently, here.
Windows and the default Linux kernel have very little x86 specific code, and even less specific to particular microarchitectures. While you certainly can compile your own Linux kernel with a different scheduler, compile time arguments and CPU optimizations, this is something you have to do yourself and keep repeating every time you want kernel patches.

So with a few exceptions, the OS schedulers are running mostly generic code.
They do however as the dragon tamer said in your link, do a lot of heuristics and adjustments in runtime, including moving threads around for distributing heat. Whether these algorithms are "optimal" or not depends on the workload. We'll see if this changes when Intel and AMD releases hybrid designs, you better prepare for a bumpy ride.
 
Top