Wednesday 27th August 2008

Intel Core i7 and X58 revealed

Posted at: Wednesday 27th August 2008 by Clive Webster

Everything you need to know about Intel's next-generation Nehalem CPUs and X58 chipset, including hints about how it will overclock

Note: This is a preview article, now that Core i7 has launched, please click here for the Core i7 launch coverage.

After Intel revealed more details about Nehalem to CPC at IDF Fall 2008, we’re finally in a position to tell you almost everything there is to know about the new Core i7 processor, which was, until recently, better known by its codename, Nehalem. After days of lengthy briefings we’ve discovered its new design, new features, new technology and even some of its benchmarking and overclocking characteristics.

We’ll cover the basics in this section – what Nehalem is and why it’s such a sweeping change for Intel. Scroll to the bottom of the page to skip to read more in-depth discussions of specific aspects of the new CPUs that will form the basis of Intel's high-performance product line over the next few years.

NEHALEM - NATIVE AND INCLUSIVE

Nehalem is a radically new design for Intel: for the first time, the company is producing a 'native' quad-core CPU, where all four cores sit on the same piece of silicon. With its Core 2 CPUs, Intel used two dual-Core dies to create a quad-core chip.

Nehalem features Level 3 cache, something first seen on earlier Xeon server chips, but Intel has indicated its Core i7s will feature up to a massive 8MB (shared between all four cores) rather than the 2MB of the Phenom X4. Each of Nehalem's four cores has 256KB of lower-latency Level 2 cache rather than the 512KB of the Phenom X4.

The Level 3 cache of Nehalem is described as being ‘inclusive’, meaning that it holds the data of all the Level 2 caches. This means that if a core needs to fetch data, and it doesn’t find it in the Level 3 cache, it can be confident that the most up-to-date version of that data is held in system memory and fetch straight from there. If the Level 3 cache wasn’t inclusive, the core would first have to look at the cache of the other three cores to ensure that none of them had a more recent version of the data it needs. An inclusive cache is therefore said by Intel to be more efficient than an ‘exclusive’ cache design, even if it does mean that 1MB of Nehalem’s 8MB Level 3 cache is taken up by storing a copy of the 256KB Level 2 cache inside each processing core.

INTEGRATED MEMORY CONTROLLER

Intel has also followed AMD in bringing the memory controller onto the Nehalem CPU die rather than having it be part of the Northbridge on the motherboard. It's achieved this by modularising the design of the CPU. The seperate processing cores and caches are linked to the onboard memory controller via a new bus standard called QuickPath (sometimes called QPI, short for QuickPath Interconnect).

As QuickPath replaces the Frontside Bus (FSB) and Northbridge combo, it also takes over the role of allowing the CPU to connect to other system components, busses and controllers such as the PCI Express controller and DDR3 memory. This will, among other things, allow a Nehalem processor to have an integrated graphics processor, much like AMD’s forthcoming Fusion product. We doubt that Nehalem processors with integrated graphics will show up for at least six months, and Intel has given no roadmap for this.

1 | 2

Submit to:

Slashdot | Digg | Stumbleupon | Del.icio.us
Reddit | Technorati

Print-friendly version

Hands On Guides for this article

Comments

Intel Follow?AMD Follow? WTF

Isn't that the way its always been. Its like a game of leap frog. Either way Intel rocks and always have always will

Comment by Overfiend at 5:15pm 22nd November 2008

Report comment

Intel Follow?AMD Follow? WTF

Isn't that the way its always been. Its like a game of leap frog. Either way Intel rocks and always have always will

Comment by Overfiend at 5:14pm 22nd November 2008

Report comment

Availability?

But where can I get one? I've only found one place in the UK where you can even pre-order. How come it's virtually impossible to get the latest equipment even close to the launch date in the UK?

Comment by scardx at 9:43am 4th November 2008

Report comment

by waiting to integrate their IMC solution intel will blow away AMD's. early tests indicate that i7 has an incredibly efficient IMC compared to phenom's, offering up a huge cut in the latency, and a big increase in cache size which is impressive enough. AMD chose to integrate an IMC far earlier, but i dont see how it can be called innovative design because they had been around before AMD decided to implement one. im very sure intel knew all about the advantages gained by having an IMC long ago, but never chose to include one until they were sure the package could be small and quick enough to make sense on the chip as they had commented about the space they take up. as for overclocking potential, they probably wont OC as well as core 2 because they are naturally larger on the same 45nm process. but it looks a step forward. they seem plenty faster per clock which is good, and it will only push the price of the core 2 parts down and force AMD to follow. i mean cmon, quad cores for under 100 quid, and better multithreaded software incoming? good stuff for consumers

Comment by vulcanproject at 3:40pm 29th August 2008

Report comment

i7 the end of cheap performance

By what I have read about the i7 the days of buying a lesser chip and overclocking it to to equal or better of a higher more expensive chip are looking very slim.

Comment by mad4maxin at 2:20pm 29th August 2008

Report comment

got an e8400 intel processor help

hi i need help to get a motherboard for this processor any ideas please PM me on my email adress

Comment by chillios at 7:01am 29th August 2008

Report comment

The difference between AMD and Intel is quite clear. AMD are technologically ahead, where as Intel have the capability to actually make things work. Nobody can seriously claim that AMD did not innovate with the IMC. But equally nobody can seriously claim that in doing so they gained any advantage over Intel. Intel made their chips better than AMD to the point that the technological lead didnt actually matter.

Comment by NotFred at 1:09am 29th August 2008

Report comment

intel dont follow

they lead at the moment.....people may try and claim intel copy AMD, but i think clearly intel have proven they can beat AMD without an IMC. just because intel wait until now to include one, doesnt mean AMD innovated the idea, because they didnt, nor does it mean intel are behind because in performance they obviously havent been the past two years! the anticipation for this part is high as expectation was raised by core 2 enormously. i suspect that intel will indeed deliver. causing AMD more headaches unfortunately for them, but great for the consumer!

Comment by vulcanproject at 11:33pm 28th August 2008

Report comment

32 bit or 64 bit

It seems you could stick with a 32 bit operating system but would a 64 bit be an advantage?

Comment by conradfwebster at 10:20pm 28th August 2008

Report comment

AMD brainstorming then producing

AMD followed intel with the quad core business... they seem to think that the faster the idea comes out......the faster the pocessor!! (obvoiusly not!)