IDF, AMD, and Intel in Perspective -- 2nd Look

After a lot of discussion and consideration since the last article I've decided that FSB licensing does not mean that CSI has been scrapped. I had been under the assumption that CSI was essentially ready to go so the FSB licensing didn't make a lot of sense. I've now decided that I was overestimating Intel and that FSB licensing and Geneseo both make a lot of sense. I believe that my assumption that CSI was ready to go was incorrect and that, in fact, CSI will be two years late. CSI was supposed to be released in 2007 but now I doubt it will be released on any Xeon chip until 2009. In light of this, the FSB licensing would be a necessary stopgap. However, I do disagree with some assessments of Geneseo. Geneseo looks to me very much like CSI without cache coherency. If it were released today it would be somewhat competitive with HTX with the HT 3.0 standard. Geneseo/CSI would be competitive in terms of speed and latency however HT 3.0 includes a distance mode that can reach one meter, a power saving mode that is good for notebooks or reducing total power draw when full speed isn't being used, an unganged mode that splits a single 16 bit channel into two 8 bit channels, and HT 3.0 is hot pluggable. Secondly, by the time Geneseo is actually available we will probably be looking at HT 4.0 and Geneseo will be further behind. Nevertheless, it is a reasonable upgrade path for CSI to eventually catch up to HT. With a big upgrade to the Geneseo/CSI standard in 2009, CSI might be able to close the gap by 2010 or 2011.

The second issue is attitude. Intel and AMD have been complete opposites. Intel talked about photonics and the TeraFlop chip. Yet, Geneseo won't be ready for 2 - 2 1/2 years, TeraFlop is 5 years at the earliest, and photonics are indefinite. This is the height of vaporware. TeraFlop is unlikely to ever be released because it will most likely be outdated in five years. Similarly, it is not clear that photonics will ever be used for on-die signaling. The most likely use for fiberoptics would be something like a more robust HyperTransport link for connecting multiple cpu boards. This could even be used to connect a memory board to the processor board. The use of fiber would remove the need to run serpentine data traces all the way across the motherboard to the DIMMs. Memory could be on its own board and just plug in with fiber. I/O could also be on its own board. This would make boards easier to design because the signal path would be much smaller and easier to control. It would be easier to design just a cpu board or just a memory board or just an I/O board. I could see this application in servers. Interestingly, this would move servers back toward the way they used to be as minicomputers when the cpu occupied half a dozen to a dozen separate boards.

If Intel has been talking about technology in the distant (or nonexistent) future; AMD has been amazingly silent. AMD has not been merely quiet; it has been so secretive that even though both socket AM2 and F have been released there are still no pinout diagrams available. Typically, these pinout diagrams would be available a little before official release because chipset designers and motherboard makers would already have them. Yet, a search of the sea of information on the internet gets no hits for pinouts for either socket. And, if AM2 and F are a secret then 4X4 would make the CIA and the US military envious. I've seen demonstrations of future weapons and spy devices that won't be released for two or three years. 4X4 is due within 3 months but the technical detail available when written down would still leave space free on the back of a postage stamp. There are rumors that it will be socket F or socket AM2. There are rumors that it will support a cache coherent HTX slot or it won't. There are rumors that it will be used for workstations and support registered memory for increased reliability or that will only use unregistered DIMMs for higher speed. It still is not clear what will differentiate 4X4 and the new FX from the 2xxx series of Opterons. 4X4 could include 2 cache coherent HT links or maybe not.

One could take Intel's ramblings about future technology as a bluff because it doesn't want to admit the glaring gap in its server lineup for the next two and a half years. However, one could equally take AMD's deafening silence as an indication that it has nothing to compete with Conroe on the desktop for the indefinite future. However, I doubt everything is quite as bad as that. Intel does have a huge problem with Woodcrest. The current performance problem is small and will get fixed just as soon as Intel releases a registered DDR2 chipset because it is really FBDIMM that is making Woodcrest look bad. Dropping FBDIMM will improve latency with full DIMM sockets and reduce power draw. This should allow Woodcrest to pull noticeably ahead of Opteron. However, when it comes to 4-way, Woodcrest just isn't quite tall enough to reach the bar. This is a problem. However, IBM has the robust XA-64e (Hurricane) chipset for servers and this is probably enough to make a big tin server out of the currently wimpy Woodcrest. The only thing Woodcrest really needs are robust 4-way and 8-way connections. The need for this is even more desperate with Clovertown and its two dies crammed into one package. It should have this with XA-64e and I'm certain that IBM will be releasing heavy duty servers based on Woodcrest (Clovertown or Yorkfield), perhaps later in 2007. There is some possibility that this could even be intentional on Intel's part as Intel might wish to give Itanium some breathing room before X86 steals the markets above 4-way. Intel's statements suggest that it is all too aware that Itanium will get pushed higher and higher up the n-way ladder until it is no longer viable. The clock is ticking.

If IBM and DDR will be the saving grace for Woodcrest then K8L (Barcelona) would be the same for K8. By the time Intel gets a DDR chipset out the door for Woodcrest AMD will be releasing K8L. This processor should give K8 a huge push in FP/SSE performance and a smaller boost in Integer performance. If the rumors are true then AMD will be moving up the release of K8L Opteron to Q2 07 and the release of the desktop version to Q3 07. AMD knows that it will lose marketshare if it can't deliver something more competitive. While Woodcrest with DDR will leap ahead of Opteron it won't leap ahead of the dual core version of K8L Opteron, and Clovertown should find itself looking at tailights from quad core K8L. Opteron on HPC is where Intel wishes it were with Itanium or perhaps Woodcrest. AMD has three announced supercomputing wins (Sun, Cray, and IBM) for machines that will all be in the top 5 and has just upgraded the Oak Ridge machine. In contrast, there have been no new announcements for either Itanium or Woodcrest in the HPC arena. To add insult to injury, the purely Opteron Cray PetaFlop machine will probably rank 1st until it is displaced by the hybrid Cell/Opteron IBM machine. This would put Opterons in the number 1 and 2 systems with Sun's Opteron machine still in the top 5 (possibly even ranking 3rd). This isn't quite so bad for IBM because it has had the lead with Blue Gene L and will be putting its Cell machine into the number 1 spot and it's current Blue Gene machines will still be in the top 5. The only machine competitive with these is the proposed 3 PetaFlop Fujitsu machine which won't be ready until 2010 or 2011. It could potentially make it to 2nd on the list but there may be others by then.

IBM's XA-64e should keep the Woodcrest/Clovertown lineage from falling off the map on quad core/quad socket but it will be nearly impossible for it to match Opteron through 2008. The extra instuctions like PopCnt in 2007 will steal some of Itanium's thunder. In addition to the robust HT 3.0 added to K8L Opteron in 2007, AMD will bounce the technology even harder when it releases Direct Connect Architecture 2.0 in 2008 (Intel will still be waiting for Geneseo/CSI). This will give Opteron even greater connectivity with 4 HT links. This will be good for Sun and Dell (as well as HP and IBM if they pursue it) and will put pressure on the Intel based SGI, HP, and IBM offerings. However, IBM should sell enough Xeon systems to make a nice return on its XA-64e development. Likewise, the massive available memory on SGI's boxes should maintain a specialized market for their products. It would be nice to see how these products compare with proper load testing but I haven't seen this yet from any of the major review sites. It has yet to be done for even the dual core processors.

I think Intel's vaporware show and tell is a symptom of being ahead and trying very hard to make everyone believe that they have a solid strategy to stay ahead. The reality suggests that Intel has almost no hope of getting ahead in servers and is in serious danger of losing its advantage in notebooks. AMD now appears to be very serious about producing a proper low power chipset for notebooks with ATI. This could be a problem for Intel in 2008 when AMD moves to an integrated CPU/GPU for notebooks. Intel will need to work hard to keep from falling behind in power consumption which has been the trademark of the Centrino line. However, pressure will come much sooner than 2008 as AMD qualifies multiple chipsets and wireless adapters for OEM's. This is a sharp contrast to Intel's all or nothing Centrino position.

I think AMD's silence is related to the fact that while everything seems to be improving in terms of servers, notebooks, and corporate customers the desktop is still a problem. Intel gained massively by both increasing IPC and increasing clock. It would be impossible for AMD to increase the clock quickly enough with K8 to offset the IPC gains that Intel has. AMD needs K8L to increase IPC and needs 65nm to continue increasing clock. This gives AMD a fighting chance on the desktop in 2007 but doesn't help today. Today, AMD is clearly behind on the desktop and is very much aware of this. I believe that AMD has been quiet and extremely secretive because they realize that they have to make a strong showing when they announce something new. People who were expecting a jump in performance with Revision F were disappointed; AMD doesn't want another disappointment. AMD only has three things it can show. It can show that the power draw is less with 65nm. This will be helpful for notebooks and with large scale servers to be sure, but won't do much on the desktop.

AMD has 4X4 which should regain the FX position by essentially selling two chips for the price of one. However, for this to have any effect, AMD will need demos or benchmarks that can take advantage of four cores. Most games and benchmarks do not. AMD is going to have to carefully plan a presentation for 4X4. I suppose it is possible that they are talking to one or more software companies for some kind of endorsement. We can only wonder. However, whatever 4X4 does, it will be compared to Kentsfield and it is unlikely that the major review sites will do anything but superficial testing. I wouldn't be surprised with claims that Kentsfield is faster in everything than 4X4 when common sense would indicate that Kentsfield will bog down on any memory intensive task. This simply indicates the very sad and unreliable state of big review sites today as I've already talked about in my articles on Tom's Hardware Guide and Anandtech. The final thing that AMD has to show is the demo of K8L. This should give some indication of where AMD will be in Q2 07. However, K8L is unlikely to have the same IPC increase as Conrore which means that AMD will need a higher clock to match Conroe's performance. Considering that AMD is currently trailing in clock this will be a challenge even with 65nm. So, Intel's banter is a company pretending that being ahead on the desktop means that it is ahead everywhere and that it will stay ahead. AMD's silence is a company that knows it is behind on the desktop and needs maximum effect to get any notice. Intel has a fighting chance to stay ahead on the desktop in 2007 but should be facing increasing competition in notebooks, corporate accounts, and servers. AMD seems to be improving in notebooks, servers, and corporate accounts, but is going to have to work hard to catch up on the destkop in 2007.