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."
Thread beginning with comment 409216
To view parent comment, click here.
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

RE[6]: Intel Nehalem-EX
by Kebabbert on Mon 15th Feb 2010 11:26 in reply to "RE[5]: Intel Nehalem-EX"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

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

I got accused of FUDing when I wrote that Nehalem-EX will be as fast as POWER7.

Am I FUDing or did I post links to articles where experts clearly state that Nehalem-EX will be as fast as, or faster than POWER7? Did I lie? No. So I dont see how your post about "handwaving" was relevant to my claim that I am not FUDing about Nehalem-EX vs POWER7.

Ergo, I do not FUD. There are experts in the industry believing what I wrote. My claim has credibility.



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.

No, we can not compare POWER7 to Tukwila because they were announced the same day, I write that we must compare POWER7 to the other chips "in it's generation".

Everyone agrees that Playstation3 and Xbox360 are in the same generation and should be compared. Even though PS3 arrived one year later. You think that PS3 and Xbox360 can not be compared because they where not announced the same day? They are not the same generation? Must products be announced the same day, and the same second? I doubt Tukwila and POWER7 where announced the same second, why are you willing to compare them, then?



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_...
"
I tried to show by example that IBM has very high prices to make my claim probable: that POWER7 will be much more expensive than Intel Nehalem-EX gear.

I dont really understand what Sun vs IBM price, has to do anything with Nehalem-EX most probably being cheaper than POWER7 gear? Have you disproved my claim that Nehalem-EX will be much cheaper by linking to Sun gear, now?

Man, you confuse me. Your claims are a bit weird. I suggest you reread my post again, but slowly. First you talk about "handwaving" when I prove that I do not FUD - "handwaving" did not disprove my point, it was not relevant. Then you talk about "same day" when I clearly talk about next-gen CPUs. Now you talk about Sun and IBM pricing when I try to argue that IBM will be much more expensive than Nehalem-EX.



Regarding that Jesper, he is funny. I dont know how much I tried to explain to him, but no, he just refuse to comprehend. For instance, I wrote "you need four 5GHz POWER6 to match two Nehalem 2.93GHz in official TPC-C benchmarks" - and he STILL insists that POWER6 is the faster CPU (he talks about pricing on single cores, etc). I never got it his weird IBM marketing talk. If you need four POWER6 to match two Nehalem, how can POWER6 be the faster CPU? He explained and explained, but I never understood his weird explanations. From a logical viewpoint they where wrong.

It just like when IBM claims that IBM STILL has the TPC-C world record right now. Because IBM used fewer cores, and Sun used more cores. But if you look at the TPC-C list, who is at the top? Who has the record? It is Sun. Not IBM. So I dont get it when IBM explains that they still has the world record (because they used fewer cores).

Jesper shows the same weird reasoning as IBM does. I dont understand anything of what he says. Neither do you understand what I write. Your posts have nothing to do with what I write.



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

So which of my arguments are just too exaggerated? I agree that POWER7 is fastest right now. I have no problem with admitting that. Jesper guy has problems admitting that Nehalem is faster than POWER6, even though you need four POWER6. He showed other problems too, when we discussed about other things.

Reply Parent Score: 2