Anand says that SSE will execute in a single cycle but I think Intel really meant that SSE will have single cycle throughput, not latency. Notice that in the slide Intel simply writes "single cycle SSE". SSE instructions (except some of the really easy ones) are currently broken down from 128bits -> 2x64bit instructions to actually execute. This has long been the biggest weak point of SSE.
I expect latency to be 5cycles for SSE FP multiply (it's currently 6). I expect throughput to be 1 cycle for SSE FP multiply (it's currently 2). So instruction throughput will theoretically double.
Do all SSE instructions execute in the same number of cycles?
This crazy projections are always more exciting when they come from Intel because they do have a track record of NOT producing vaporware.
On the other hand their performance figures are always way optimistic.
If you look at the middle ground Conroe will probably be a bit faster than X2 per clock cycle. We'll see if they can ramp up the clockspeeds for release...
So, Conroe won't be that cool running then. Not exactly shocking, though. A 40% reduction on power consumption versus the P-D 950 makes Controe land at like 70-75W, correct? I guess it's quite impressive if the performance claims hold true.
Looks like the Conroe should be quite more powerful (according to Intel) than their current top of the line. I wonder what this will do to the AMD v. Intel debate... I suppose just up the ante
Also, the single cycle execusion of the SSE extensions should really increase the benefits gained from SSE applications. This will do wonders for video encoding.
- Creathir
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
15 Comments
Back to Article
nicolasb - Wednesday, March 8, 2006 - link
What do I need to do so that anandtech.com will let me see the pictures when I'm reading its articles? :-(stephenbrooks - Sunday, March 12, 2006 - link
I've found that the pictures load as 1x1 blank GIFs in Opera but appear fine in IE. That really sucks.zephyrprime - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
Anand says that SSE will execute in a single cycle but I think Intel really meant that SSE will have single cycle throughput, not latency. Notice that in the slide Intel simply writes "single cycle SSE". SSE instructions (except some of the really easy ones) are currently broken down from 128bits -> 2x64bit instructions to actually execute. This has long been the biggest weak point of SSE.I expect latency to be 5cycles for SSE FP multiply (it's currently 6). I expect throughput to be 1 cycle for SSE FP multiply (it's currently 2). So instruction throughput will theoretically double.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
You are quite correct, Intel just clarified this point to us and I've updated the article. Thanks for the pointer :)Take care,
Anand
Hulk - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
Do all SSE instructions execute in the same number of cycles?This crazy projections are always more exciting when they come from Intel because they do have a track record of NOT producing vaporware.
On the other hand their performance figures are always way optimistic.
If you look at the middle ground Conroe will probably be a bit faster than X2 per clock cycle. We'll see if they can ramp up the clockspeeds for release...
Doormat - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
"While we'll get a better idea of performance of Conroe, Merom and Woodcrest later today, Rattner did whet our appetites"Is that a typo or a reference (inside joke?) about performance numbers....
Rock Hydra - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
That's the proper use for the word.I suppose what he's trying to say is they're satisfied with the info disclosed at the time.
xtremejack - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
Whet means sharpen, right. Means becoming eager for more information, I supposeadamfilipo - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
same here. images arent loadinghope conroe kicks ass, my next powermac will have it
DigitalFreak - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
show me the benchies!Brunnis - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
So, Conroe won't be that cool running then. Not exactly shocking, though. A 40% reduction on power consumption versus the P-D 950 makes Controe land at like 70-75W, correct? I guess it's quite impressive if the performance claims hold true.JackPack - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
Brackets:65/80/95W - desktop, server, XE.
BigLan - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
FYI - Most of the images are showing up as red x's here. Not sure if the server is getting hammered or if they're just broken though.creathir - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
Looks like the Conroe should be quite more powerful (according to Intel) than their current top of the line. I wonder what this will do to the AMD v. Intel debate... I suppose just up the ante- Creathir
creathir - Tuesday, March 7, 2006 - link
Also, the single cycle execusion of the SSE extensions should really increase the benefits gained from SSE applications. This will do wonders for video encoding.- Creathir