Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Announces Xeon D SoC Line Based On Broadwell Core Architecture

Posted by samzenpus on from the check-it-out dept.

MojoKid writes Intel is targeting big core performance and intelligence in a microserver form factor with its new Xeon D family of processors, the company's first ever Xeon-based System-on-Chip (SoC) design. The Xeon D line Intel is announcing today is built on their 14nm process technology and combines the performance and features of its traditional Xeon chips with the size and power savings of an SoC. According to Intel, Xeon D delivers up to 3.4x faster performance node and up to 1.7x better performance per watt compared to the company's Atom C2750. The Xeon D is the third generation of the family and it's actually based on Intel's Broadwell architecture. Intel unveiled two new Xeon D processors today, the D-1540 (8 cores, 16 threads, 2GHz, 45W TDP) and D-1520 (4 cores, 8 threads, 2.2GHz, 45W TDP). These chips have memory controllers capable of addressing up to 128GB. They also feature an integrated platform controller hub (PCH), integrated I/Os, and two integrated 10 Gigabit Ethernet ports. Again, all of this is based on Intel's Broadwell core CPU architecture, so performance per watt should be strong.

76 comments

  1. Xeon D? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Xeon D" sounds too much like "systemd" for my tastes. I don't think I will buy one of these CPUs for that reason alone.

    1. Re:Xeon D? by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 2

      I was wondering if it'll help me do massively parallel computing AND decongest me.

      Thanks, Xeon D.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  2. Want NOW. by ITRambo · · Score: 1

    Usually I wait for a chip to prove itself, prices to drop ,etc. For the first time in a very long time I want this new Xeon chip NOW. NOW I SAID!

  3. Support AMD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Stop supporting a company with a well-known history of suppressing competition with dirty tactics and who price gouges the industry. This site's members should all be supporting AMD. Allowing Intel become a full-on monopolist would be disastrous.

    1. Re:Support AMD!! by nomel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Then write to your politician to not be so corrupt and uphold all of the existing laws. A consumer buying the lesser product just to prevent a monopoly is totally absurd.

    2. Re:Support AMD!! by sexconker · · Score: 2

      I buy AMD because of the huge cost/core advantage, flexible upgrade paths, and unlocked parts.
      I don't need an anti-monopoly cause to stay away from Intel.

    3. Re:Support AMD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I stick with Intel for Instructions Per Cycle reasons, but I would be interested to see how their current arch will do on 20nm.

    4. Re:Support AMD!! by aztracker1 · · Score: 2

      Didn't AMD management shift off it's manufacturing side, and shake down on its' engineering teams in order to maximize short-term profits? I mean, I will often choose AMD where it's pragmatic, but they're too far behind Intel for server performance/watt considerations.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    5. Re:Support AMD!! by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Support AMD : get a Xeon-D motherboard and add an AMD graphics card to it!

    6. Re:Support AMD!! by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      No it wasn't to maximize short term profits. It was to prevent them going bankrupt. They basically wasted all their cash reserves, which were saved in order to build their next generation fab at NY, on buying ATI above the stock market price, at the height of the stock market bubble, just before the Great Recession.

      As a result they ran out of cash and had to sell their fabs to ATIC from Abu Dhabi. AMD also sold their mobile GPU division to Qualcomm and now they work on Adreno.

      I blame Hector Ruiz for that.

    7. Re:Support AMD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would buy an 8 core/16 thread 45W processor from AMD any day.
      any day they make one.

    8. Re:Support AMD!! by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Don't buy the bullshit, even Intel admits they rigged the benchmarks so those numbers you are relying on? About as accurate as the results from Quack.exe back in the day. if you run ACTUAL PROGRAMS like games instead of rigged benchmarks? You'll find AMD chips at less than half the price trading blows with Intels and many times BEATING them, again at less than half the price! You can buy an FX8300 for around $120 right now, what are you gonna get from intel at that price? A Pentium Dual...yeah you are really gonna be "superior performance" with two cores versus eight lol!

      BTW if anybody wonders why both links are from Tek Syndicate? Because surprise surprise they are one of the few places that takes ZERO DOLLARS from Intel or AMD and wadda ya know? They run actual programs and not rigged benches! Meanwhile you have Tom's (Who DOES take Intel ads) trying to push a Pentium Dual over the FX6300...really? When most of the triple A titles require quad core minimums they push a dual core as a best in class GAMING chip? If you need evidence Intel writes some big checks there ya go.

      So don't buy the lies, I've seen the results with my very own eyes and without rigging? You are looking at maybe 5-10% difference...except on price, where you are talking as much as 200% difference! Everyone should just ask themselves one simple question....If Intel's numbers are REALLY that good...why are they rigging? Why are they getting investigated in the EU and having lawsuits brought in a bunch of countries if their numbers stand on their own merit? The answer should frankly be obvious, their numbers are NOT worthy of the price they are charging and they know fair benches would show that and cut down on their crazy high profits, that's why!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    9. Re:Support AMD!! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      And check out Phoronix's benchmarks on Linux which use the non-rigged GCC compiler.

      AMD and Intel do indeed trade blows on the top end and it's much closer than one would expect.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    10. Re:Support AMD!! by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      What minimum PassMark score would you demand for that chip?

    11. Re:Support AMD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A consumer buying the lesser product just to prevent a monopoly is totally absurd.

      May I then ask all the crazy libertarians out there what other choice a consumer has? Buy nothing?

    12. Re:Support AMD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard rants like this before whenever I mention I have an Intel system. While I also encourage people to benchmark their own stuff, especially if they can borrow a computer from a friend to test things before buying, some people just assume the benchmarks will support whatever ideological goal they are trying to push and not actually care about the results. The difference between AMD and Intel can be quite small, and depends a lot on what you are doing. My computer speeds a lot of time doing cpu heavy stuff that is not games, and in my case Intel still came out ahead without that much difference in price (heck, people have different ideas of what is a good price even, the extra $50 might be small for me but big for someone else). In the meantime, there are too many people yelling, "You can't trust reviews/benchmarks, so just buy X anyway," or "You can't trust Y but you can trust Z who happens to agree with me."

      When most of the triple A titles require quad core minimums they push a dual core as a best in class GAMING chip? If you need evidence Intel writes some big checks there ya go.

      Which class? I still play new games on a laptop with dual core cpu. It depends on what you needs and priorities are. For some people, you can't call it gaming unless everything is set to max graphical settings, while for many other people can play such games fine on older or cheaper machines and be just as happy.

    13. Re:Support AMD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eleven.

    14. Re:Support AMD!! by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      And then compare the prices, $300+ for the i5 versus...$120 for an AMD FX8300...yeah not even close, the bang for the buck is still on the AMD side by a LARGE margin!

      And the amount of service life you get with them is just nuts, my Phenom II X6 is going on 6 years old, still plays the latest games AND can do video transcoding at the same time, while my nearly 8 year old Phenom II X4 has passed through 3 boards and is STILL going, the wife games on it every.single.day. and it just keeps on coming back for more.

      BTW you want a quad CRAZY cheap? Go grab an Athlon X3 450 or 455, you can find them for around $25-$40 and we've been seeing better than 80% unlocks on those, a 3.3Ghz quad for $25, whats not to like?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  4. I'm pretty excited about this. by nomel · · Score: 2

    It's been interesting watching the beast slowly awaken from ARM poking at it so much. I hope we get some great mobile chips out of this.

    Maybe 2015 will be the year of the well hidden don't-hold-it-that-way type heat sinks, along with thicker phones for bigger batteries, so we can actually use these things. Function has to creep back into fashion at some point.

    1. Re:I'm pretty excited about this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Already here. Technically, intel's SoCs have been superior to most ARM offerings since the baytrail atoms hit the scene last year. Superior performance-per-watt full-on tablet SoCs.

      Most of the first gen baytrail based systems are already going on sale. I picked up a Dell Venue 8 pro for 150 bucks. How's that for a 2GB ram, 32 gig storage tablet.. That runs full windows 8.1. Yeah. Not a tablet OS. It's literally a PC in tablet formfactor. USB charging, long battery life, everything. (Microsoft's really lame "Metro" environment/start screen thing has been mostly awful but it really does pretty good in a touchscreen environment - Perhaps part of the reason the surface pro has been popular. IMO the best tablet browsing experience I've had is actually on windows 8.1. Chrome in "windows 8 mode" has a full on real browser with all the addons I could want (Adblock on android requires rooting) and works pretty good on a touch screen. "Metro" IE, while it's still IE, is actually the most touch-friendly browser I've ever used.)

      What Intel lacks is the flexibility of ARM. With ARM device makers can custom order an SoC easily and cheaply and get exactly what they need. Cheap or expensive. With intel, you get what Intel ships and that's it. If Intel can fix their business model and culture a bit, ARM will be history.

  5. RAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This would fill that gaping hole for a decent RAID box. The ZFS guys keep bangin the "SHALL HAVE ECC" drum, and this chip with its 2x 10gb ethernet should fill this need nicely.

    1. Re:RAID by CODiNE · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No kidding! It's been a real pain trying to find something reasonably priced with ECC and 8 SATA connectors. The whole industry should have moved to ECC by now.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    2. Re:RAID by nomel · · Score: 1

      From the summary:
      > and two integrated 10 Gigabit Ethernet ports

      The article doesn't say that they're integrated, just the summary. Maybe the mac is internal, but the phy (the power hungry part of ethernet) will be a separate chip. There's no way they stuck it in the cpu, 10G phy silicon is huge and heatsinky.

      Who knows if they they included the phy power in the 45 Watts.

    3. Re:RAID by dj245 · · Score: 1

      No kidding! It's been a real pain trying to find something reasonably priced with ECC and 8 SATA connectors. The whole industry should have moved to ECC by now.

      If you dont need a lot of CPU power, you can get a MSI AM1I motherboard with the Athlon 5350 cpu and crucial ecc memory part CT51272BD160B (B, not the 'BJ' model). It isn't written on the box that this motherboard and CPU support ECC memory but there are forum threads full of people who built file servers using this combination. Only 6 SATA ports but that is plenty for most people.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    4. Re:RAID by edmudama · · Score: 1

      Note that you can query ark.intel.com to find every chip that supports ECC:

      http://ark.intel.com/search/advanced?ECCMemory=true&MarketSegment=DT

      --
      More data, damnit!
    5. Re:RAID by slaker · · Score: 1

      Anything that has a modern LSI chip can probably be flashed to Target Initiator mode. I've gotten PERC and IBM M-series SAS controllers for $80 off ebay. You can add in an SAS expander if you need more than 8 drives.
      With that kind of setup, you don't have to depend on motherboard ports and can buy whatever makes the most sense.

      --
      -- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
    6. Re:RAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to be naive and thought we should just make all the memory out of SDRAM. Why not just have a 16GB L3 cache? Heck, why not just have 16GB of L1 cache? It's always a cost constraint, or a power constraint. In reality a chip with that much L1 would consume stupid power, stupid die area and would just be completely stupid and be totally useless for anything.

      For most of the market ECC memory is overkill. Unless you have a process running over a day there isn't really much chance of a bit error, and most users are the emailing or gaming type who reboot daily anyway.

    7. Re:RAID by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      But very interesting is they announce support for 2.5 Gbps ethernet. That's like a little suprise, a workaround to the semi-failure of 10G gaining traction.
      It can do 100 meters over CAT5e, from this old pdf http://www.ieee802.org/3/minut...

      So, if it comes to fruition maybe 2.5 Gb does the trick and it could end up as a desktop/laptop standard (besides cooling, putting a controller on PCIe 1x 2.0 would be a no-brainer)

    8. Re:RAID by goarilla · · Score: 1

      The article doesn't say that they're integrated, just the summary. Maybe the mac is internal, but the phy (the power hungry part of ethernet) will be a separate chip. There's no way they stuck it in the cpu, 10G phy silicon is huge and heatsinky [google.com].

      Well according to this Intel powerpoint presentation http://download.intel.com/news... by Killeen Kristine it is integrated.
      There is some details on the benchmark methods in the fine print but it isn't throughput that they are testing it is concurrent sessions.
      Too bad there are no details on "Intel's reference board" so we can see if the heavy silicon is on the motherboard or not.

    9. Re:RAID by nomel · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, nobody has a 10G phy at 14nm at this time. Intels current 10G ethernet PHYs come from Aquantia: http://www.lestina.com/media/p...

      Their current offering is still at 28nm. None of the *very very few* 10G ethernet phy competitors have anything close.

      It would have to be a mystery company they were getting this IP from, especially considering the 2.5G Ethernet rate support. Only Aquantia and Broadcom support this right now.

    10. Re:RAID by nomel · · Score: 1

      Which makes me think it's an Aquantia PHY, since Aquantia and Broadcom are the only ones with known silicon that supports 2.5g, 5g, and 10g. But from Aquantia's current products, they're still at a 28nm process, which makes me think it's not integrated. Mystery company, Intel built a PHY out of nowhere, or Aquantia supports a 14nm process and haven't announced it yet (usually, announcements like that are simultaneous).

    11. Re:RAID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want something with 0 SATA adapters. That's what HBA cards are for. I want something not much larger than some PCI-E and RAM slots.

    12. Re:RAID by goarilla · · Score: 1

      According to this: http://www.servethehome.com/as... we can conclude that the 10GE silicon is on the motherboard.

    13. Re:RAID by Agripa · · Score: 1

      AMD has their socket AM1 processors which support ECC memory and encryption but lack the built in ethernet which may not be a big loss since the processors and motherboards for them are so inexpensive.

    14. Re:RAID by nomel · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm surprised they don't have 5G in that speed list. Both broadcom and aquantia support 1/2.5/5/10g. And, cat5e can do 5g and 10g in shorter runs, and not many people need 100m. I don't see the point of having 2.5G be the standard for wired when 802.11c can do over that (which is why we need something wired beyond 1G). For a desktop standard, I would rather have a full multi speed 10g chip that gives me the fastest possible with my cable, that gives a speed and reliability benefit over wireless.

  6. 128 GB ought to be enough by bazmail · · Score: 2

    What advantages would this CPU have over say... a train, which I can also afford?

    1. Re:128 GB ought to be enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pair the eight core version together with an accelerator (CUDA, OpenCL, OpenML, OpenACC) on a dense platform, 64 GB of fast and inexpensive memory, and a media, scientific, financial or an engineering application capable of being accelerated in a heterogeneous cluster, or a virtual shared memory system. Multiply, package, rack and install. Cable, and enjoy with a reasonable power consumption.
      I wouldn't mind having one of such as my home "serious business" workstation.

    2. Re:128 GB ought to be enough by hsa · · Score: 3, Funny

      There is nothing stopping you from using your train with these new Xeons:
      http://www.lian-li.com/en/dt_portfolio/pc-ck101/

    3. Re:128 GB ought to be enough by ghettoimp · · Score: 1

      Wow! Well played, sir!

    4. Re:128 GB ought to be enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What advantages would this CPU have over say... a train, which I can also afford?

      None I can think of. With two 10Gb enet ports, bandwidth is about the same. But how do you plug in ethernet when the chip is smaller than an RJ45?

    5. Re:128 GB ought to be enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is nothing stopping you from using your train with these new Xeons:
      http://www.lian-li.com/en/dt_portfolio/pc-ck101/

      That was excellent! I agree ghettoimp, that was very well played!

  7. When can I buy a laptop with one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds like it would make a perfect development laptop.

    1. Re:When can I buy a laptop with one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never. Unless you want a laptop the size of a desktop to have enough cool.

    2. Re:When can I buy a laptop with one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they are hitting 45TDP thats not out of line for a laptop.

      Laptops 4-5 years old are in that range.

    3. Re:When can I buy a laptop with one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you say that? 45W is not out of line for the current fast CPUs from Intel that are used in laptops.

      The last round of laptops my company bought have Intel i7 4610M CPUs which have a TDP of 37W. They're extremely crappy and low quality laptops. The model is Dell Latitude E6440. The trackpads had a 180% failure rate (we replaced them nearly twice on average) and screens are too dim to read in the average office. We paid about $2.2k for them, and they're simply horrible except for CPU speed. They're nearly half as fast as my new 15" MacBook Pro.

    4. Re:When can I buy a laptop with one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dell Latitudes have used CPUs with a large TDW for over a decade. Why would you think 45W would be too high? Dell has been burning our laps for over a decade with even larger power sucking CPUs.

    5. Re:When can I buy a laptop with one? by slaker · · Score: 1

      If the CPUs are very similar and the machines are "nearly half as fast", I strongly suspect you're comparing a system with an SSD to one without. There's nothing special or magical about Apple's OS or hardware that would otherwise account for that difference.

      --
      -- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
    6. Re:When can I buy a laptop with one? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      It would be possible but very unlikely. A laptop with dual NIC and a serial port would be fun to some people I'm sure, but you won't find it even though it's trivial to make one. So the chance of seeing a laptop with that server CPU and mandatory external GPU are zero.

    7. Re:When can I buy a laptop with one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This sounds like it would make a perfect development laptop.

      The new Clevo P750ZM laptop is being shipped with a socket for the CPU and a Z97 controller... won't do ECC RAM, but it will talk to a Xeon. So, if you want a Xeon in a 15" laptop, it's possible!

    8. Re:When can I buy a laptop with one? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      the chance of seeing a laptop with that server CPU and mandatory external GPU are zero.

      I could see a workstation-class "laptop" with a 17" or larger display and a Quadro GPU coming with this processor. But I could also see the second network interface only being expressed through a docking station that costs at least half as much as the machine itself.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  8. I prefer my Freescale T4240 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Less juice, more compute, 10G Ethernet

    1. Re:I prefer my Freescale T4240 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ronald is that you?

    2. Re:I prefer my Freescale T4240 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, that's me, Ronald McDonald.

  9. SOC = More backdoors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that KVM/GPU/WIFI is all inside the same chip, every server can be hacked wirelessly through mobile phones nearby, even what is being displayed on your screen can be transmitted in real time.

    Fuck US tech.

    1. Re:SOC = More backdoors by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      It's a "SoC" because the southbridge is integrated - with the northbridge also integrated but regular CPUs have had the northbridge for a while.
      USB, SATA and wired ethernet are in there but if you check the article and pictures there's no GPU or wifi!

    2. Re:SOC = More backdoors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not yet, but it'll be on most models eventually, see "Intel vPro", "Intel Wireless Display" and "Intel Anti Theft Technology".

      Again, fuck US tech.

    3. Re:SOC = More backdoors by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      USB, SATA and wired ethernet are in there but if you check the article and pictures there's no GPU or wifi!

      If I could get something that would be about the size of a half-length card and have a single PCIEx16 slot on a tree, it would be my ideal motherboard. My PC is too big. I just need room for a couple of SSDs internally, and the power supply.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:SOC = More backdoors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buy a foreign chip them you fucking commie. Oh wait! There aren't any.

    5. Re:SOC = More backdoors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean to tell me that Russia doesn't still make 8080 clones?

    6. Re:SOC = More backdoors by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      I would get a low-profile micro-ATX, so I can still have cards in it : at least the sound card and then whatever current or future need.
      no hardware dongles / external hardware, roomy for at least one 3.5 HDD and two 2.5HDD.

  10. Availability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to hothardware.com the Xeon D's are available now. Does anyone know of an internet retailer who lists them with a price? ebay? amazon?

  11. How about a NUC based on this? by swb · · Score: 1

    Especially with the dual NICs.

    1. Re:How about a NUC based on this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This thread has some great ones, dual lan NUC for $100

    2. Re:How about a NUC based on this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking the same thing!!!

      (A NUC with 128gigs of RAM.... Mmmmmm)

  12. Price by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    D-1520: $199
    D-1540: $581

    I know it's twice as many cores, but I wasn't expecting quite that big a jump in price.

    1. Re:Price by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Intel acts weird with the "tray price", on CPUs that only OEMs can get e.g. core i7 4950HQ is officially at $623 but it is speculated the OEM doesn't pay as much.

    2. Re:Price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, "officially" madonna's a fuckin rock star. Some speculate she's the same skank from brooklyn that stole my shoes.

  13. SoC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would like to see about 8 of those in a a MacPro, or 4 per blade in a 16 blade blade server.

  14. No beowulf cluster? by Sri+Ramkrishna · · Score: 2

    How things have changed.. not one comment on beowulf clusters.. shame on you slashdot!

  15. Not in competition with ARM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    D-1520: $199
    D-1540: $581

    At that price, Intel is not in competition with ARM whatsoever. ARM's royalty on licensees' product is very small, such that even top-end ARM SoCs like the octal-core Allwinner A80 have high-volume prices around $5.

    Intel is having difficulty shrugging off the taste it acquired for astronomic CPU pricing in its de-facto monopoly years, and until it does so, ARM will be laughing all the way to the bank.

    I suspect that Intel is fervently hoping that ARMv8-based servers are delayed in their entry to the server market, during which time the Xeon-D SoC with its exorbitant pricing (exorbitant for a SoC, not for a Xeon) may still sell in reasonable numbers.

    That happy window won't last long though. Intel's problem is not that "ARM is coming" to the server market, but that "low-cost ARM is coming."

  16. Cant wait by luckytroll · · Score: 1

    This is exactly the kind of thing I was hoping to see emerge for use in my home lab and NAS - dual 10G means I can finally stop mucking about with all those 1G lines when what I really wanted was an affordable converged net for my lab. Power requirements will keep my hydro bill under control too.

  17. Apps will need a recompile? by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 1

    I wonder if it is too late for Intel to enter the market, many mobile apps have C++ code that is compiled to ARM instructions and unless intel makes some kind of virtualization layer microops for those instructions any intel mobile device will not run many things built for Android/iOS without a recompile.

    If you code everything in Java for Android it will probably run on intel chips, I am not familiar with iOS but I believe that all apps there would need a recompile.

    Either intel mobile chips will be stuck in the wintel cycle or the app devs will need to support both architectures causing major annoyances and user frustration ("why can't I run this on my phone?")

    1. Re:Apps will need a recompile? by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 1

      Oh wait this seems to be for notebooks and netbooks, not tablets like I originally thhought...

    2. Re:Apps will need a recompile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is for servers.

  18. TSX errata corrected by IYagami · · Score: 1

    According to http://techreport.com/review/2... Intel TSX errata has been corrected

    This can improve database performance (see http://www.anandtech.com/show/... )