Motherboards Memory Storage Cases/Cooling/PSUs IT Computing Displays Mobile Mac CPUs & Chipsets Video Digital Cameras Linux Gadgets Systems Trade Shows Guides Home Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Change Page Size
Fall IDF 2006 - Day 1: Laser FSBs, more Alan Wake, Flash in Vista & DDR3
Fall IDF 2006 - Day 1: Laser FSBs, more Alan Wake, Flash in Vista & DDR3
Date: September 27th, 2006
Topic: Trade Show
Manufacturer: Intel
Author: Anand Shimpi & Cara Hamm
Buy the Intel BX80571E7500 Duo E7500 2.93GHz
Blank
 Directron $129.99
 Newegg $119.99
 CircuitCity $119.99
 
 

Intel Robson Technology

Intel offered some brief information on its upcoming Santa Rosa platform and its associated Robson technology:

Along with 802.11n support and a new chipset (965GM), Intel's next-generation Centrino (codenamed Santa Rosa) will for the first time incorporate Intel NAND flash as a supported part of the platform. With software support from Windows Vista, Intel's Robson technology will allow notebook makers to utilize a small amount of NAND flash memory as a disk cache and/or extra virtual memory to improve performance.

Windows Vista supports two technologies that are taken advantage of by Intel's Robson (NAND flash in a notebook) technology: Windows ReadyDrive and Windows ReadyBoost.

Windows ReadyDrive is the marketing name for Vista's support for disk caching to NAND flash devices. The idea here is that ReadyDrive can cache frequently used OS and application data to a NAND flash device in order to speed up OS boot time and application load time.

Windows ReadyBoost on the other hand is designed to increase performance of systems that don't have much system memory but do have access to external flash based storage devices (e.g. USB drives). ReadyBoost will use these drives as additional virtual memory and swap to them when it runs out of main memory, which will obviously improve performance vs. simply going to disk.

ReadyBoost is really only targeted to systems with 512MB of memory that won't be upgraded (e.g. corporate desktops that you can't just stick more memory in without approval from IT), since you'd get better performance out of simply installing more memory in the system rather than relying on external flash devices as swap drives. These external flash drives have to be Vista certified in order to work with ReadyBoost (they mainly have to support a minimum read/write speed), but the performance improvement here would really only be seen on systems without sufficient main memory.

Windows ReadyDrive however can result in a significant performance increase as it acts as a cache, closing the gap between main memory and hard disk performance. Intel has been touting very tangible reductions in resume from hibernate time as well as application launch time thanks to ReadyDrive.

Intel's Robson technology is simply Intel's solution for both ReadyDrive and ReadyBoost; using a single Intel card (either in a Express Card slot or on the motherboard itself), Intel can support both ReadyDrive and ReadyBoost (although the latter isn't as important if you have enough main memory).

While you can take advantage of ReadyDrive with a hybrid hard drive, Intel obviously views the motherboard level integration of Robson technology as the best option.

Currently Intel expects the mainstream target for Robson NAND flash to be 1GB, although higher performance alternatives would definitely be larger. In order to take advantage of both ReadyDrive and ReadyBoost, you'd have to have a Robson card equipped with two flash devices, otherwise you can only support one. Assuming it's upgradable, Intel's Robson approach makes a lot of sense since it would be a lot cheaper to simply replace a flash card in your system rather than upgrading your hard drive everytime you wanted more flash for ReadyDrive.

Although it's not a required part of the Santa Rosa platform, Intel is expecting many OEMs to take advantage of Robson technology and we will see it introduced next year alongside Vista and the new Centrino notebooks.

Intel Demonstrates DDR3 on Desktops   Next Page

 
  Index

Tools Share
Find lowest prices Find the lowest prices
Digg   del.icio.us   E-mail  
Print This Article Print this article  

16 Comments - Last by cmdrdredd, 1149 days ago
Username:
Password:
ooo lasers by NullSubroutine, 1151 days ago
so like i was excited about the laser things. i cant wait till i can put those chips inside my mutated seabass (with attached laser also on their head) cybornetic brain. i will have frikin lasers galore!

Reply
RE: ooo lasers by Hypernova, 1150 days ago
Optical interconnects are perhapes the most important invention right behind IC itself. The next 10 years will be very exciting no doubt.

Reply
Gamers might not exactly line up for quad-core.... by Sunrise089, 1151 days ago
While actually having a highly multi-threaded game will be nice, until much more specific performance info is available I see little reason why "gamers [will] start thinking about the move to dual/quad core if they haven't already."

Several problems stand in the way of quad core being ideal for gaming:

1) Anandtech itself reported how difficult it was for a game developer to make their games trully multithreaded, so it remains to be seen how many games actually have the degree of threading present it Alan Wake.

2) The publisher only quoted actual performance use of the physics thread (80% of a standard clocked C2Duo), so it's VERY possible if the other threads use substantially less processing power the four cores may not be trully needed.

3) Even in this game, the publisher itsself admits that simply overclocking the dual-core machine allows for equal performance compared to the stock quad-core, so raw power seems to be trully important, not a specific number of cores.

4) The most important performance increase will always be from one core to two, since the overhead of the OS, antivirus program, etc can be removed from the primary game thread. After that, each additional core will suffer from deminished returns

5) Most importantly, going from dual to quad core costs money, and if the past is any indication, that mnoey should be better spent on a GPU upgrade. In fact, with the near theoritical doubling of performance with dual core over single, the GPU upgrade is probably reletively a better idea than it's ever been.

Until these issues are resolved I think while the game may be impressive, the idea that gamers will want to jump to quad-core is mostly marketing derived.

Reply
RE: Gamers might not exactly line up for quad-core.... by NullSubroutine, 1150 days ago
what say you when AMD's inverted hyper-threading is available? the one that runs 1 thread on multiple cores. the reason why game developers have to start programming multithread games is because in the not to distant future all threads (including video) will be run via multi-cored cpu.

Reply
RE: Gamers might not exactly line up for quad-core.... by ShapeGSX, 1150 days ago
"Reverse hyperthreading" is just not practical, nor would it give much of a boost in performance. It would take some major communication between cores during instruction fetch, instruction issue, and instruction retire.

Why wouldn't it give much of a boost? As it is, with 4 issue processors like the Core 2 Duo, it is very hard to find a window of instructions in a program that the processor can issue in parallel. Even now, some execution units are empty during most clock cycles. So what would be the point of trying to do even more in parallel? You would just end up with more empty execution units, but now on 2 or more cores instead of just one.

This is why multithreading on processors was invented in the first place. It was to fill up empty execution units with work from other threads, which is inherently parallel and doesn't have dependencies.

Reply
RE: Gamers might not exactly line up for quad-core.... by johnsonx, 1150 days ago
it's been stated numerous times that 'inverse' or 'reverse' hyper-threading is nothing more than a myth. No one even knows how it got started, but it may have been a misunderstanding of AMD's Dual Core Optimization utility.


Reply
RE: Gamers might not exactly line up for quad-core.... by DigitalFreak, 1150 days ago
Until at least 2008, I bet the VAST majority of multi-threaded games on the PC will be "ports" of Xbox 360 games.

Reply
RE: Gamers might not exactly line up for quad-core.... by Anemone, 1150 days ago
I find it disturbing that there isn't much comparison of that same Alan Wake game on a Core 2 duo. I do realize that there is a push to highlight the benefits of a quad processor, but are they now making the window for a dual core being the sweet spot to say, just 2007?

See, inadvertently, they are likely smashing the sales of core 2 duo's. A lot of folks are wondering if a core 2 duo is going to be "enough" and then for how long will it be enough? Intel has built a lot of "transition" chips over the years and they often have had relatively short useful lives. Is that the reason the Core 2 duo came out so reasonably priced? Is it going to be a small one year chip that is outdated, and potentially badly so, by the end of 2007? If so, why buy one?

Some assurance would have helped a lot if we'd seen a comparison of how Alan Wake, and the benchmark quad processing programs ran on Core 2 duo's. As it is, a lot of folks are getting nervous that they have bought, or might be buying into a dead technology of "just" a dual core.

I sure hope Intel addresses this market concern before they conclude. If not, the holidays could be a very rough season for sales of Core 2 duo's.



Reply
RE: Gamers might not exactly line up for quad-core.... by JarredWalton, 1150 days ago
It's IDF and Intel is pimping new technology. I would say it's pretty reasonable to assume that quad cores are not at all required. Stating that HyperThreading can run the game with lower detail is also sort of funny, as HT only gives about 10% more performance. Let's see... Athlon 64 single core 4000+ is about 20-30% faster than the best HyperThreading Pentium 4 chips, but HT is enough while a fast single core is not? I don't really buy it, although "enough" seems to be a stretch at best. I will wager that Remedy will work hard to make sure the game at least runs on single core setups, as that is still a very large market segment.

Another thought: audio often uses maybe 10-20% of the CPU time in a game. So physics + audio is one core. The streaming and terrain tessellation sounds like maybe half a core at best, and the rendering would probably use the rest of the available power and then some. Remember that Xenon only has 3 cores available, all without OoO execution (Out of Order), so it's reasonable to assume 3 OoO cores will be more than enough, and in fact 2 cores is probably going to be fine.

Reply
RE: Gamers might not exactly line up for quad-core.... by cmdrdredd, 1149 days ago
"It's IDF and Intel is pimping new technology. I would say it's pretty reasonable to assume that quad cores are not at all required. Stating that HyperThreading can run the game with lower detail is also sort of funny, as HT only gives about 10% more performance. Let's see... Athlon 64 single core 4000+ is about 20-30% faster than the best HyperThreading Pentium 4 chips, but HT is enough while a fast single core is not? I don't really buy it, although "enough" seems to be a stretch at best. I will wager that Remedy will work hard to make sure the game at least runs on single core setups, as that is still a very large market segment."

This is what I think too, they would dig their own grave if they released a game that performed pitifully on a 2.6Ghz single core system. Alot of people still use those HP, and Dell systems their parent's bought them to game on (sometimes with upgraded GPU).

There's no way they can convince me that all 4 cores are needed for any game. I can see 2 because that's becomming mainstream, but to commit suicide by relegating users to abysimal performance is bad news.

Reply
Comments Page 1 of 2

SAP Risk and Compliance Resources
Register to Access SAP's Risk Management Resource Center today.
DOWNLOAD vWire Today - FREE TRIAL
Take Control of Your Virtual Infrastructure. Manage VI Data & Prevent Problems.
Unlicensed Software at Your Last Company
Anonymously Report Unlicensed Software with Our Form Now. Get Up to $1 Million.
Download Microsoft Visual Studio ® Team System
Streamline Dev processes, Reduce time to market. Try Microsoft Visual Studio Team System, FREE!
Supermicro Barebone Servers
We Carry Everything Supermicro. Low Price, Top Service, FREE Shipping, and more.




Latest news by
DailyTech

 November 20, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 November 19, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank




pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2009 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information