Intel Rolls Out 10nm Pentium/Celeron CPUs, Previews Rocket Lake

[baryluk]

It is funny on one of their slides they say: "Resizable BAR - Partnered with Nvidia and ecosystem ...". Are they afraid to name AMD by name or what? What about Mesa? How about naming them too?

[coder]

Even the lowest end X570 mobos support ECC to my knowledge. For example the Gigabyte X570 UD. The only exception is MSI.

That's not what I found, last I checked.

Just looking at the X570 motherboard specifications, on ASUS' website:

• 2 boards specifically say non-ECC memory
• 3 boards don't mention ECC, in the memory specifications
• 7 boards specifically mention that ECC support varies by CPU model
• 2 specifically list ECC memory support (presumably, these boards don't support APUs)

Anyway, the best advice is always to check the docs (specifically user manual and memory QVL), on the manufacturer's website, before purchasing a motherboard with the expectation of using ECC RAM in it.

[chithanh]

You mean they all offer motherboards that support it? Definitely not all big-name X570 boards support it, though. It's still a minority of models, mostly those aimed at workstation or server use.

Even the lowest end X570 mobos support ECC to my knowledge. For example the Gigabyte X570 UD. The only exception is MSI.

[numacross]

The most interesting part is they are making the cpu's backwards compatible with previous chipsets.

Not with all chipsets, only Z490/Q470/H470. Lower end motherboards based on B460 and H410 will not support Rocket Lake.

[torsionbar28]

I will readily give my data to the Chinese if it means that the Americans can't get their hands on it.

Mmmkay. You do you boo.

[torsionbar28]

This wasn't that hard to find. I am not sure why you weren't able to lookup the information yourselves.

It's not a function of able, it's a function of willing. Not willing to perform independent research to validate the nonsensical assertions of others.

Clearly, I do not approve of linking "Teachers and students" to "3DMark Fire Strike graphics score".

Case in point, I'm glad I didn't take any time out of my day, to uncover that Intel believes 3DMark Fire Strike = STEM. Not sure if this is clueless marketeers, or if it's intel being dishonest. Prob a mix of both.

[ermo]

I'm glad the Tremont-based CPUs are finally getting launched. These aren't your grandaddy's Atoms.
(...)
The only real complaint I have is about the lack of AVX/AVX2. Don't care about AVX-512, but it'd be nice of these little cores would finally reach ISA parity with Haswell.

I have a beef with intel relating to their segmentation strategy.

However, having read the thread, I accept that there might be a power envelope / die space argument to be made here. With that in mind, how much extra die space would AVX2 add (or even just a 2x128bit AVX2 implementation like the one found on Zen and Zen+)? Because this seems like very deliberate segmentation to avoid laptop-makers going for the Atom line of CPUs in their ultralight models?

I'd wager that to many people, a ~3GHz 10W TDP quad core with AVX2 (for faster or more power-efficient media operations such as image/video manipulation stuff for presentations) would be all the CPU they'd ever need on a daily basis?

[ezekrb5]

Still no sign of a desktop Tremont / Jasper Lake desktop CPU... They released the J5005 in Q4'17, and still no successor.

What about the J6413 ? It's a J Series celeron with better specs, higher IPC, much better graphics, it was announced a little while ago, launching this Q1 2021.

Those Pentium and Celeron models are part of their Atom line right?

Not really, they are similar technology but the product itself is a bit differente. Atoms are geared towards IoT, embedded, Industrial, and learning devices. Celeron and Pentium is like that but aimed towards consumers in general, notebook, minipc, tablets, and so on. The line does get blurry on some lineups though, but sometimes atoms (despite lower performance in some cases) get special features, which is why they can't be super cheap compared to some celeron.

[coder]

Industrial espionage has been a sanctioned function of the CIA for a long time.

Source?

I don't believe the strucures for this sort of thing even exist. I also doubt it could remain under wraps, if it were really happening.

[coder]

No hardware backdoors were ever discovered to be on ZTE or Huawei hardware. Even the UK with is strong "China-bad "stance had to admit that there were none after it audited Huawei's source code.

Even if this is true, today, it doesn't mean backdoors can't be added via a future software or firmware update. It's also difficult to say with 100% certainty that no backdoors exist.

ZTE and Huawei are America's punching bags only because ZTE is state-owned and Huawei's founder is a retired PLA officer, and both companies combined consume the lion's share of global telecommunication infrastructure due to their lower costs.

A big problem with that theory is that the US no longer has competitors in some of those markets. Meanwhile, Chinese national security law compels those companies to comply with orders in the interest of the Chinese state.

When even the Department of Homeland Security says that there was no evidence that Supermicro server boards had been compromised in the supply chain, the whole story loses its credibility instantly.

Source? I'm curious exactly what they said about this, which you're paraphrasing.

And if China's semiconductor industry was advanced enough to create such undetectable backdoors in hardware, why would they even need to import semiconductors for use in assembling finished products, and then go through the trouble poke holes in and exploit it? Why not just create its own domestic semiconductor replacements with the backdoor integrated within, as opposed to grafting it on imported chips?

Because one delivers results in months, while the other could take the better part of a decade.

Why is the CCP pouring billions into research on semiconductor design and fabrication now after its champion, SMIC, was placed on the US trade entity list, if its semicon industry was as super advanced as what people are saying? Another one of those 'the enemy is both weak and strong at the same time' nonsense?

Strawman argument. It's not their strength that landed them on that list.

"Oh, the Chinese semiconductor industry is advanced enough to create chips with undetectable backdoors, but third-rate enough that they can't even make decent domestic chips." Please ponder on that and decide how absurd it is.

False dichotomy. It's comparatively easy to pull off an exploit like what Bloomberg documented, by comparison with the difficulty of catching up to world-class semiconductor fabrication. One need look no further than Global Foundries and Intel to see just how hard it is to stay in that game, much less catch up from essentially zero.

I was willing to cut you some slack, as an obvious non-US citizen, but your energetic embrace of disingenuous arguments have my spidey senses tingling. Whatever you're peddling, I ain't buying it.