Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 10th Feb 2010 16:09 UTC, submitted by SReilly
Hardware, Embedded Systems "In years past, an ISSCC presentation on a new processor would consist of detailed discussion of the chip's microarchitecture (pipeline, instruction fetch and decode, execution units, etc.), along with at least one shot of a floorplan that marked out the location of major functional blocks (the decoder, the floating-point unit, the load-store unit, etc.). This year's ISSCC is well into the many-core era, though, and with single-chip core counts ranging from six to 16, the only elements you're likely to see in a floorplan like the two below are cores, interfaces, and switches. Most of the discussion focuses on power-related arcana, but most folks are interested in the chips themselves. In this short article, I'll walk you through the floorplan of two chips with similar transistor counts - the Sun's Niagara 3 and IBM's POWER7."
Permalink for comment 409216
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Intel Nehalem-EX
by foobar on Sat 13th Feb 2010 20:43 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Intel Nehalem-EX"
foobar
Member since:
2006-02-07

Jesus, I am not FUDing and making things up nor lie. I wrote:
"Just google "nehalem-ex vs power7" and read articles."
didnt I? The point was to show that there exists articles about Nehalem-EX vs POWER7 performance. I post some of articles here, to prove that I am not FUDing about performance of both CPUs.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13512_3-10321740-23.html
"I expect the raw number-crunching performance of the Nehalem-EX cores to be roughly on the same level as Power7's cores."

http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=219400...
"I am sure Power7 will be the fastest processor around, probably faster than Intel's Nehalem in some benchmarks," said Nathan Brookwood, principal of market watcher Insight64 (Saratoga, Calif.).

The last one is funny, POWER7 will be faster than Nehalem-EX in SOME benches, but the Nehalem-EX will be faster in all other benches?


Until "all" is defined, you are just handwaving.


What I am trying to say, is that yes the POWER7 is fastest - AS OF NOW. But wait for benches of the next-gen CPUs: Nehalem-EX, AMD 12-core bulldozer, SPARC64 Venus, Sun Niagara T3, etc. Then we will see if POWER7 is still the fastest in it's generation.


Only Nehalem-EX, and AMD 12-core bulldozer have any merit in your list.

Neither Fujitsu nor Oracle have Venus on their road maps for commercial use. It's only on Fujitsu's road maps for a single HPC project.

Niagara T3 is a year away.

By your definition, we can only compare power 7 to tukwila because they were announced on the same day. Get over it, schedules never line up.

And I am also trying to say that I believe Nehalem-EX server will be very much cheaper than one POWER7 server. I believe I can get three or four x86 servers for the price of one POWER7. If the Nehalem-EX reaches 90% of the POWER7 performance, then the choice is obvious to me.

You need six IBM p570 servers to match one Sun T5440 on Siebel v8 benches. One p570 is $413.000. One T5440 is $76.000. IBM servers are not cheap. I DO believe you get several x86 servers for the same price.


You need to update your numbers. Jesper did this for you over at the register. How quickly you forget:

And price.. why don't you mention that a T5440 costs 116KUSD 128GB RAM 4 CHIPS@1.6GHz, and a POWER 750 costs 102KUSD with 128 GB RAM 4 CHIPS@3.0GHz.


He did a good job with the rest of your arguments too:

http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2010/02/08/ibm_power7_chip_...

No one is claiming that IBM is the best, but some of your arguments are just too exaggerated.

Reply Parent Score: 1