Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Peter W.'s avatar

Thanks George! One thing I haven't heard or read any statement from Intel about is the memory controller and improvements in latency accessing main memory. Intel's CPUs have an unfortunate tendency to have significantly worse (longer) latencies accessing DRAM than, for example, AMD's Zen CPUs.

Expand full comment
c3dtops's avatar

Question 1::

4 P-Cores and 8 E-Cores which share a 18MB L3 cache with an extra 4 LP E-Cores, all of which can access the 8MB memory-side cache on board the Compute tile.

So both the 4-P-Cores, 8-E cores and 4-LPE can access the 8MB Memory Side cache ("MSC"), darkmont LPE 4 cores (which forms 1 cluster) is already expected to use 4MB of the Memory side cache (upper bound scenario) that would theoretically mean the other 4MB is left for either some of the P-Core and E-core to fight over?

Question 2::

SRAM related question, in Meteor Lake (using 155H core ultra as a discussion point) that has 24MB of L3 cache

NAME ONE-SIZE ALL-SIZE WAYS TYPE LEVEL SETS PHY-LINE COHERENCY-SIZE

L1d 49152 557056 12 Data 1 64 1 64

L1i 65536 917504 16 Instruction 1 64 1 64

L2 2097152 18874368 16 Unified 2 2048 1 64

L3 25165824 25165824 12 Unified 3 32768 1 64

155H 24MB L3 vs Panther Lake (4+8+4 SKU) which has 18MB L3 + 8 MB memory side cache.

26MB / 24MB that impiles SRAM (which is harder to scale at the foundry/process node level) increased by ~8.3% ish from Intel 4 to Intel 18A.

What is the traditional SRAM density improvements for TSMC process node jump, historically?

Is that how you would read it? (question for Geroge but Chester feel free to answer)

Question 3::

What would be your estimates for L1D$, L1I$ and L2$ size for the LPE only (Per-Core)?

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts