Slashdot Mirror


Larrabee Based On a Bundle of Old Pentium Chips

arcticstoat writes "Intel's Pat Gelsinger recently revealed that Larrabee's 32 IA cores will in fact be based on Intel's ancient P54C architecture, which was last seen in the original Pentium chips, such as the Pentium 75, in the early 1990s. The chip will feature 32 of these cores, which will each feature a 512-bit wide SIMD (single input, multiple data) vector processing unit."

33 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Pentium 75? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ah the dreams of the past, a beowulf cluster of old computers come to life :)

    1. Re:Pentium 75? by Divebus · · Score: 5, Funny

      Making math errors at blazing speeds...

      --

      Most of the stuff on /. won't survive first contact with facts.
    2. Re:Pentium 75? by BUL2294 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh, don't worry about that. Games will just be more interesting. For example, that 3D monster you're trying to hack to death with a chainsaw will now suddenly shift to a different part of the screen... Or maybe you'll get a cool color-cycling effect from some incorrectly calculated values...

      "Intel Graphics Inside--it's all in good fun!"

      --
      Windows 3.1x calc: 3.11 - 3.10 = 0.00
    3. Re:Pentium 75? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't care if you're a C64 fanboi, Pentiums made mistakes. Apple had nothing do to with it. Read here.

      And this also from the same source... "In June 1994, Intel engineers discovered a flaw in the floating-point math subsection of the Pentium microprocessor. Under certain data dependent conditions, low order bits of the result of floating-point division operations would be incorrect, an error that can quickly compound in floating-point operations to much larger errors in subsequent calculations. Intel corrected the error in a future chip revision, but nonetheless declined to disclose it."

    4. Re:Pentium 75? by Lemmeoutada+Collecti · · Score: 5, Funny

      You mean my FPS will behave like World of Warcraft now? Wonderful!

      --

      You can have it fast, accurate, or pretty. Pick any 2.
    5. Re:Pentium 75? by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh it performed them reliably.. just reliably wrong.

    6. Re:Pentium 75? by SETIGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      they're nothing hypocritical about saying that the original Pentium 1 was a pretty bad chip, and the Core 2 Duo is a pretty great one.

      Have you compared the total length of Pentium errata with the length of the Core 2 Duo errata?

    7. Re:Pentium 75? by toddestan · · Score: 5, Informative

      It wasn't every time you divided. It only affected floating point operations, and Intel claims that only 1 in every 8.77 billion random divisions will show the error, and those familiar with the bug agree that Intel's analysis is more or less correct. That would explain how it got through the initial testing by Intel and that the bug wasn't noticed for a while by the general computing public. The whole thing was more of a PR disaster on Intel's part than anything else.

  2. What the hell is Larrabee? by vondo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A little context might help. This isn't the Inquirer for god's sake.

    1. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Larrabee is the codename for a discrete graphics processing unit (GPU) chip that Intel is developing as a revolutionary successor to its current line of graphics accelerators. The video card containing Larrabee is expected to compete with the GeForce and Radeon lines of video cards from NVIDIA and AMD/ATI respectively. More than just a graphics chip, Intel is also positioning Larrabee for the GPGPU and high-performance computing markets, where NVIDIA and AMD are currently releasing products (NVIDIA Tesla, AMD FireStream) which threaten to displace Intel's CPUs for some tasks. Intel plans to have engineering samples of Larrabee ready by the end of 2008, with public release in late 2009 or 2010.[1]

      According to Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larrabee_(GPU)

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by KlomDark · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's one of the larger cities in Wyoming. Get with it. ;)

    3. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's one of the larger cities in Wyoming. Get with it. ;)

      Only if you have a head cold.

    4. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by TransEurope · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Interesting is also that intel expects a maximum power consumption of at least 300 Watts. I personally expect nothing from that thing. The ancient technology of the cores and the perspective of building a system serving and cooling a hotspot of 300 Watts doesn't make these cards my favourite choice yet. I#m very sceptic about Intes try of making a high end graphic board. I really can't imagine that old cores of first gen Pentiums will be able to compete with modern stream processing units. I'm wondering that Intel wasn't able to choose some RISC-design at least, maybe i960.

    5. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by poetmatt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not only is the power retarded, but ATI already can do 100% native ray tracing which crushed intel bigtime.

      I welcome intel trying to push for marketshare but it's going to be many generations before intel can play catchup on graphics cards...specifically when we get around to 32+GB of ram and you can afford a couple gigs for graphics (at which point we'll need 4+ gigs for graphics probably), the performance of an integrated solution will still be lacking. Graphics bandwidth and needs increases far exponentially beyond that of processing needs for anything graphics intensive by definition (currently).

    6. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not quite...

      Larrabee is a general purpose number cruncher with high degree of parallelism.

      NVIDIA/ATI are moving towards making their graphics cards capable of running general purpose code. Intel is coming from the other side, moving a general purpose parallel-compute engine towards doing graphics.

      Yes it's a subtle difference and yes they'll meet in the middle, it's just a question of angles.

      Intel wants the parallel compute market more than it wants the graphics card market so that's who it's pitching this at.

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by ciroknight · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, 32 x 600MHz x 1MIP/MHz @ 0.5W == 19.2 GIPS@16W.

      Meanwhile...

      32 x ???MHz (Unknown, but likely to be 900+ to be competitive with current designs) x 3+MIPS/MHZ + 32 x 512-bit SIMD units = OMGWTFHAX @ 300W.

      Seriously. The "Pentium" base of this design is damned near irrelevant. At this point, all it's doing there is scheduling execution on the SIMD units. If you've seen any modern GPU designs, they're basically hugely parallel cores attached to a few "director" cores which puts everything where it needs to go. The original Pentium is probably the most powerful CPU with the least complicated design on the process, with the least amount of legacy MMX cruft.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    8. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Funny

      The three largest "Cities" are: Cheyenne -- 56k,

      That's insane. I could get 56K people to yell at me to Turn That Shit Down by simply turning up my stereo and opening a window at 3am...

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    9. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by Joe+Snipe · · Score: 5, Funny

      I#m very sceptic about Intes

      Cool, proof of Dvorak keyboard use in the wild

      --
      Sometimes, life itself is sarcasm...
    10. Re:What the hell is Larrabee? by Joe+Snipe · · Score: 4, Funny

      :(

      The hunt continues...

      --
      Sometimes, life itself is sarcasm...
  3. SIMD = Single Instruction, Multiple Data by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Informative

    Get your acronyms right....

    --
    No sig today...
  4. I'm no expert but by Gat0r30y · · Score: 4, Funny

    The card features one 150W power connector, as well as a 75W connector. Heise deduces that this results in a total power consumption of 300W,

    Um, that just doesn't seem to quite add up to me.

    --
    Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
    1. Re:I'm no expert but by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Informative

      The card features one 150W power connector, as well as a 75W connector. Heise deduces that this results in a total power consumption of 300W,

      Um, that just doesn't seem to quite add up to me.

      Power can come from multiple sources. In this case, you have a 150W power connector (probably a 6pin PCIe one), and another 75W one (yet another 6pin PCIe). The remaining 75W comes from the PCIe connector itself.

      Nothing terribly unusual - a number of cards are coming out in configurations like this, and 300W for a video card is starting to become the norm, depressing as it is.

    2. Re:I'm no expert but by h4rm0ny · · Score: 4, Funny

      Um, that just doesn't seem to quite add up to me.

      It does if you work it out on a Pentium I :D

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    3. Re:I'm no expert but by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or from the loss of mental acuity due to serious RF interference melting your brain.

      "Look at da pretty colors..."

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  5. Re:Pentiums? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Intel... where quality is job 0.9995675!

  6. good. by apodyopsis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    good. sounds like a sensible engineering decision.

    on the basis that..
    the design is well known, understood and has had rigorous testing in the field
    they will no doubt fix any understood errors firstlimits the RnD to the multicore section

    as long as the chip performs well for the silicon overhead then they should feel free to cram as many in as they want.

    seems perfectly sensible to me.

  7. I doubt it by Bender_ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I doubt it. Maybe they mentioned the Pentium as an example to explain an in-order superscalar architecture as opposed to more modern CPUS.

    -There is a lot of overheard in the P54C to execute complex CISC operations that are completely useless for graphic acceleration.

    -The P54C was manufactured in a 0.6micron BiCMOS process. Shrinking this to 0.045micron CMOS (more than 100x smaller!) would require a serious redesign up to the RTL level. Circuit design had evolve with process technology.

    -a lot more...

    1. Re:I doubt it by Chip+Eater · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A process shrink, even a deep one like .6 um to 45 nm shouldn't require too many RTL changes if the design was done right. But I don't think they are using "soft" or RTL cores. Most likely this P54C was a custom design. Shrinking a custom design is a lot more tedious. Which might help explain why they chose such a old, small core.

    2. Re:I doubt it by ratboy666 · · Score: 5, Informative

      The original Pentium (which went to 166Mhz, at the end, not just 75Mhz), used U and V execution pipes. No translation to micro-ops, and no "out of order". Indeed, there shouldn't be a need for that in Larrabee, anyway, given the number of cores. It would almost be better to get rid of the V pipe, and add SIMD, instead.

      Your comments on CISC are bit off-base; the idea is to execute shaders in x86 machine code. They can be simple (limited flow control), or complex (general CPU/GPU).

      "out-of-order" (ei. Pentium Pro and better) is not so good with that many cores doing that kind of work. It would get the hardware into a lot of trouble. Better to keep it simple, and add more cores.

      A better start point would probably have been ARM, but that would lose the compatibility edge. If Larrabee works, it will take the GP-GPU market by storm. It needs:

      1 - to publish itself as an NUMA access CPU (add a bit to tell the OS what it is for)
      2 - compiler optimizations for the particular CPU architecture, preferably broken into two pieces:
      2a - "straight line" shader code
      2b - branching code
      3 - a guide to the new NUMA characteristics.

      With that in place, a standard (BSD/LINUX) OS will be able to use it for regular jobs. Or, for those special "I need the SIMD unit" jobs. The biggest hassle is trying to split control of those new CPU units between OpenGL and the regular scheduler (this is a kernel hack that Intel will have to make). It would be easier to jam this into OpenSolaris, but that isn't anywhere near popular enough.

      Don't you want your video card to assist compiling large source when not gaming/modeling? Why not?

      And, a few "extra" points

      - Intel already has an optimizing compiler for the P54C architecture, and we have gcc.
      - The architecture, including U/V pipelines only used 3.1 million transistors.
      - A GeForce 7800 GTX has 302 million transistors -- 100x the number of the original Pentium processor.

      So, I would think that using 32 "Pentium Classic" cores reduced would be quite feasible -- you need some (lots) of logic to ensure that they can all access their respective memories. The general SIMD implementation will take quite a bit of real estate as well. There is probably a budget of 600M transistors (wild ass guess) to Larrabee, estimate derived from power consumption estimates.

      The gate size shrink should result in higher speeds. There may be a danger in the complex instruction interpretation routines, but these can be corrected. The single cycle instructions are already a (more than less) synchronous design, and should scale trivially.

      Anything I am missing?

      I, for one, am looking forward to buying a desktop super-computer with Larrabee.

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
  8. Manycore GPU by DrYak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Larrabee is going to be Intel's next creation in the GPU world. A many core GPU which has the following peculiarities :

    - fully compatible with x86 instruction set. (whereas other GPU use different architecture, and often instruction sets that aren't as much adapted to run general computing).
    Thus, the Larrabee could *also* be used as a many core main processor (if popped into a quick path socket) and used to execute a good multicore OS. Something that's not achievable with any current GPU (both ATI's and nVidia's completely lack some control structures - both are unable to use subroutines and everything must be in-lined at compile time)

    - unlike most current Intel x86 CPUs, features a shallow pipeline, executing instruction in-order. Hence, the Larrabee (and the Silverthorne which also have such characteristics) are regularly compared with old Pentiums (which also share those characteristics) since the initial announcement and including in TFA.

    - feature more cores with narrower SIMD : 32 cores able each to handle 16 32bit float simultaneously. Whereas, for exemple nVidia's CUDA-compatible GPU have up to 16 cores only, but each able to execute 32 threads over 4 cycles and keep up to 768 threads in flight.
    This enable Larrabee to cope with slightly more divergent code than traditional GPUs and make it a good candidate to run stuf like GPU accelerated RayTracing.

    Hence all the recent technical demos running Quake 4 in raytracing mentionned on /.

    That's for what Intel tells you.

    Now the old and experienced geek will also notice that Intel has only kept making press releases and technical demo running on plain regular multi-chip multi-core Intel Cores (just promising that the real chip will be even better than the demoed stuff).

    Meanwhile, ATI and nVidia are churning new "half"-generations each 6 months.

    And the whole Larrabee is starting to sound like a big vaporware.
     

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  9. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  10. Bill Waterson process by DragonHawk · · Score: 4, Funny

    One does not "shrink" a chip by taking photomasks and shrinkenating.

    'course not. You use a transmogrifier. In the industry, it is known as the "Bill Watterson" process.

    It can also be used to turn photomasks into elephants, which, while less profitable, is immensely entertaining if the operator didn't see you change the setting.

    --

    dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
    I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
  11. Internet telephone game run amok, Slashdot helping by jharel · · Score: 5, Informative
    Hmm... Let's see where they got this from. They claim they got it from a Babelfish translation of Heise, a German site (Yeah, start wincing now...)

    http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fct%2F08%2F15%2F022%2F&lp=de_en&btnTrUrl=Translate

    Actually, they got the "Gelsinger said so" remark from Expreview, itself a Chinese site:

    http://en.expreview.com/2008/07/07/larrabee-unleashes-2-tflops-capacity (note they curteously attached the Larrabee board diagram leaked from a while back):

    "Gelsinger said the Larrabee will be a 45nm product featuring SIMD technique, 64-bit address. Besides, 32 of cores runing at 2.00 GHz will unleash 2 TFLOPS capacity, twice as much as the RV770XT."

    But did Gelsinger really SAID those things?

    Here is the Google translation of the same Heise article: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fct%2F08%2F15%2F022%2F&hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=de&tl=en

    It seems that no matter which crappily translated version of the German article one looks at, it appears that Gelsinger said no such thing... The part about Larrabee containing P54C cores was clearly in a separate paragraph, written after a speculative question.

    So I guess Expreview THOUGHT Pat said something after it took a too-short of a look at the Heise article, after which CustomPC sensationalized the whole thing, not really bothering to actually read even the translated link it posted. Now, some random Slashdotter is doing the same curtesy.

    There you go, folks- Internet reporting.