Intel Itanium 2 Benchmarks

Pablo writes "Over at VR-Zone we saw some interesting benchmarks of the upcoming Intel Itanium 2 processor codenamed McKinley that is on schedule to be launched during second half of this year. With a faster 3MB on-die L3 cache, 6 instructions/cycle and 6.4GB/s of bandwidth, it is poised to perform at 1.5-2x of the current Itanium processor. There is an overview of how the Intel Itanium 2 at 1Ghz clock frequency will perform against the current Itanium 800Mhz and Sun's Ultra Sparc III RISC processor."

Comments

Re:AMD

[robburt]

At least the Itanium is large enough for me to put my coffee cup on to keep it warm. =)

No benchmarks

[KingKire64]

This is just a Marketing Piece put out by intel. All the "Benchmarks" are proposed Estimates. And why would a dinky website get a hold of something this "Big"? Dont know just questions.


Mod Me down Please

Re:No benchmarks

[Merlin42]

Personally I like how each page in the ppt presentations used a slightly different USIII ranging from 800 to 1050Mhz. Hmm smells like marketing picked out the best from a bunch of (simulated?) benchmarks. Everything was labeled 'simulated' or 'estimated'.

Nothing to see here folks please move along.

Well other than the slow death of competing high end architectures.

Lets see here we have:
SPARC ... still competitive I think
Itanium ... taking over
Alpha ... going the way of the dodo (im really sad about this)
PA-RISC ... transitioning to Itanium
MIPS ... never really liked them for big compute stuff, lets hope SGI can turn things around.
Power4 ... still competitive in performance but AFAIK to get a high end system you need to give your first born to IBM. And, IMO not really designed for the HPC kind of stuff I'm interested in.
Cray ... ? I've heard of some really cool stuff being developed, i'll believe it when I see it.

What eles is out there? I haven't really been in the market for a high end system in a while, but it feels like the market is shrinking and soon Itanium will be "the choice," unless legacy support is a concern .

Re:No benchmarks

[T-Punkt]

Even the graph has been done by a marketing guy.
They sorted the benchmark results in ascending order and the connected the data points of completely different and independet benchmarks by a line!

What shall the line tell you? The faker the benchmark the better the results? Or
"This is a line graph that doesn't make sense at all. But look: It shows an increase, increase is good, so Itanion 2 is good!"

Re:No benchmarks

[pmz]

Absolutely. From one of the slides "All projections based on Intel estimates[emphasis mine]...using...workload testing at Intel[emphasis mine]."

And, absolutely none of the benchmarks are substantiated with real data!!!

Only a fool would accept any of this presentation as fact. An even bigger fool would use this presentation in a decision whether to buy Sun or Intel.

run benchmarks in cache == FAST

[johnjones]

well I'm sorry but all the benchmarks seem to be cache hitters and so run pretty damn fast

real systems are about BANDWIDTH

memory bandwidth/latency is the reason AMD killed the P4 in benchmarks

lets see INTEL go up aganst a SUN on a large oracle DB then I will take notice

really this is where SUN make their money

regards

john jones

Itanium 2?

[sharkey]

The first Itanic sank ALREADY?