Yes for sure. Sick and tired of NPUs and this AI garbage hype.
These NPUs are mostly just for marketing purposes I think. I assuming most of the AI apps can use the GPU instead. A bit inefficient maybe, but who cares.
The 3:1 ratio for P vs E still applies. More embarassment for P core team.
P core team is a lost cause. Hope they come up with something good sooner.
LNL is simply on a different level in real world low power applications compared to the AMD solutions.
LNL looks real awesome. I don't understand why these idiots have to stop with just one iteration.
But despite this, you can see that LionCove is a completely new project from scratch.
Are you sure it's a new design? I'm under the impression, LNC is basically a port of RWC from in-house design tools to industry standard design tools while being modular & agnostic (portable). Meaning, it's basically RWC with some decent core upgrades but on a solid foundation that'll help them immensely going forward. Am I correct? If yes, I'm expecting some decent uplift starting cougar cove itself.
Oh that's Very Bad for an N3 core.
Since it a N3B core, it's kinda easier to compare with M3 which is also N3B. Can someone figure out whats the size of a M3 P core with L2. That'll be true apples-to-apples comparison. Something we've all been waiting for.
Can x86 cores at least catch up to M3 what is this
A M3 P core vs LNL P core direct comparison should shed more light on area-efficiency, overall-efficiency, performance (per transistor or area or whatever the unit is), etc. It's gonna be very interesting. Will show how behind Intel P core team is.
They go nowhere, this review is just dubbious.
Naturally. It's gotta be dubious.
Zen 6 40% and Nova Lake 40% Cope ?
Nove Lake only 40% ST? ;-)
Oh the fanboy wants to compare multicore performance now? Tell me, a 4+4 8c8t compare to 4+8 12c24t, and you proud of it?
Iirc, one of the mod wasn't happy when the term fanboy was used. I guess it's on this forums blacklist or something. It's never too late to make an edit.
This is IPC, i.e. comparison at the same clock speed.
The x86 design cores from Intel and AMD provide high clock speeds, which on the one hand simplifies the design, but also makes the core logic less dense than it could be. High clock speeds mean many compromises in the core microarchitecture.
Apple designs cores for much lower clock speeds, so it can have a pipeline with fewer stages, lower cache latencies, and greater capacity. Apple cores are the power of huge amounts of resources: L1-I 192KB, L1-D 128KB, 10-Wide decoding, ROB 900+ 8xALU and very low latency.
That's it in a nutshell and simplified way.
But I think it also makes the Apple P cores a bit fat.
And Intel/AMD needs to follow that direction, because I suspect large L1 caches are also contributing to efficiency in their designs because it keeps lot of data from going out into slower, higher power cache levels and memory.
The basis of Apple's design is also having stellar design team, because being able to have 4GHz clocks at such low power at just 9 pipeline stages and humongous L1 cache with 3 cycle latency is amazing. The E core team can still do quite a bit better, which is catch up with Apple's. It is even more impressive when you consider Mx chips have been stagnating for a while with smart engineers all into "AIeeee" hype and moving to startups.
I remember reading most of the top talent in the Apple silicon team have left leaving the rest to just iterate. Probably one of the reasons M series silicon hasn't had any major performance/efficiency jumps lately.
If you can't control yourself than I have to suggest you have a bit of problem yourself. You can feel uncomfortable about something but still be more civil.
As they say, if you want to stay, you gotta "play the game".
True.
Excuse me? Am I in a AMD thread ?
Self restraint is crucial. The mods aren't too kind. If @awbx continuously tries to flamebait, the best option is to report those posts. He knows the rules & plays by them, so should the rest of us.
Core architecture is the key that matters most (IPC). Intel claims that future generations will no longer focus on high clock speeds, but on IPC. It will be interesting to see where this goes.
Panther Cove?