Athlon64 = the only CPU with built-in memory controller ??

ShePearl

ShePearl

Limp Gawd
2FA
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
429
I'm wondering if Athlon64 is the only CPU with built-in (on-die) memory controller ?? I know Intel's Pentium4 doesn't have it on-die.

Outside of x86 based PC platform which is mosly Intel vs AMD, is there any CPU with built-in memory controller like Athlon64 ?? What about IBM's PowerPC processors ??
(Is Athlon64 the forst CPU with built-in memory controller ??)
 
It might not be the first one, i could be wrong, but i know it's the first truly consumer level processor like that.
 
ShePearl said:
What about IBM's PowerPC processors ??
Click to expand...

The 5th generation PowerPC processor does not, but it's also a little unique:

Advanced PowerPC G5 System Controller

Central to the overall performance of the Power Mac G5 is the system controller. This revolutionary Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) is one of the industry’s fastest. As an advanced engineering concept, it’s beautiful in its simplicity: A point-to-point architecture provides each primary subsystem with dedicated throughput to main memory, neatly avoiding time-consuming contention for bandwidth (unlike subsystems that share a bus and are compelled to constantly negotiate for access and bandwidth across a common data path).

Straight from http://www.apple.com/powermac/architecture.html
 
iddqd said:
Wow, never heard of that...
Click to expand...
The Efficion is the next generation Crusoe chip. There were a couple of laptops made on the Crusoe that whomped Intel and AMD offerings on battery life until Centrino (Read: Pentium 4 Mobile) came out.
 
Centrino isn't P4-M.. it's an industry standard which, involves having some Penitum-M chip, and some standard of a wireless card...
 
iddqd said:
Centrino isn't P4-M.. it's an industry standard which, involves having some Penitum-M chip, and some standard of a wireless card...
Click to expand...


You would think that if you are going to claim something, you would get your facts 100% right.

Centrino is not an industry standard, not by far. It is an Intel marketing gimic, nothing else. In order for a computer to be "based on Centrino technology", it must have three different things. First an Intel Pentium M CPU, the Intel 855 Chipset and finally the Intel wireless package. Centrino machines just mean more money for Intel as it would include the Intel wireless package since there is no third party chipset.


AAha the Crusoe chip, what a wonderful piece or technology. To bad it never really took off in the USA, but it was popular in Japan. :cool:
 
Centrino is more than a gimmick in that it pretty much guarantees a hassle-free wireless experience, and a nice processor that is well suited for mobile computing.

On the topic of Transmeta products, the Efficeon is really quite nice, and if you'll notice in my link, they too have progressed into 90 nm process technology and hopefully it will provide them some opportunities to flourish somehow. Just recently, there was actually a Mini-ITX board which featured a Transmeta Efficeon processor. Hopefully we will see more accessible offerings in the future.
 
ShePearl said:
Athlon64 = the only CPU with built-in memory controller ??
Click to expand...

it would be more accurate to have said the K8 architecture
(said the mod with the Opterons :p )
and they where released before the Athlon64's

I can definatively say the Xeons and Itaniums dont
and its the main reason AMD made it into Tier One Servers
it offers great advantages in scaling and NUMA

AMD Opteron Coverage - Part 1: Intro to Opteron/K8 Architecture
An Introduction to 64-bit Computing and x86-64
Opteron Memory Guide
NUMA FAQ (Non-Uniform Memory Access)
 
I believe most all the SUN Ultra Sparc Processors have ondie memory controllers. They also have 4 and 8 wide memory channeles as opposed to at most dual channel for AMD or Intel.
 
What most people think of as Centrino is acctually called the Pentuim-M which can best be described as a derivitive of the Pentium 3 NOT the craptactular Pentium 4. It is also rumored that the Pentium 5 (dual core?) will also be a derivitive of the fantastic Pentium 3. Then and only then will I jump back to Intel (unless AMD keeps beating them sensless like they have for the past year)
 
CentronMe said:
You would think that if you are going to claim something, you would get your facts 100% right.

Centrino is not an industry standard, not by far. It is an Intel marketing gimic, nothing else. In order for a computer to be "based on Centrino technology", it must have three different things. First an Intel Pentium M CPU, the Intel 855 Chipset and finally the Intel wireless package. Centrino machines just mean more money for Intel as it would include the Intel wireless package since there is no third party chipset.


AAha the Crusoe chip, what a wonderful piece or technology. To bad it never really took off in the USA, but it was popular in Japan. :cool:
Click to expand...
I didn't actually claim any facts.. lol. What I've been trying to say is it's a P-M, as opposed to a P4-M. Then again, I'm no good with words, so it came out like GWBush's propaganda.... "I know what you read on your internets!"
 
Power4 used an integrated memory controller.
But it was clocked at either 1/2 or 1/3 (can't recall) the core speed.
 
While not many remember this, Cyrix (before VIA acquired them) manufactured the MediaGX processor, which was in the Pentium/Socket 7 class range. The CPU was designed for embedded use and Value PC's. As such, it not only had an embedded memory controller, but also an embedded PCI controller, audio, and video --all on a single processor. The processor's video wasn't very fast, and its performance didn't compare to Intel or AMD processors of the day, but it also generated very little heat, which still makes it a neat setup (if you can find a board with it, most CPU's were permanently surface-mounted to their system boards) if you want do do a cool mod with one, or an embedded setup of some sort. You still might be able to build an extreme budget HTPC setup with one if you added something like Sigma Designs X-Card MPEG2/4/DivX decoder card or a Hauppauge WinTV PVR.

For a neat little blurb on it:
http://www.pctechguide.com/22non-inte_Cyrix_MediaGX.htm
 
actually Intel did make a CPU with an on-die memory controller, but scrapped they idea, saying it wouldn't be marketable.. Think that was right before the P4..
 
I think it was somewhat after. Was it codename Timna? That was an early form of the Pentium M that was also scrapped.
 
xonik said:
I think it was somewhat after. Was it codename Timna? That was an early form of the Pentium M that was also scrapped.
Click to expand...


Yea, that sounds bout right..

Intel - Timna - Pentium III - 32-bit

This chip was discontinued by Intel on September 29, 2000. The information here is for archival purposes only.

Intel will take advantage of the smaller size of the .18 micron process to integrate a graphics controller and a memory controller onto a Pentium III Celeron chip, code-named Timna. Originally, Timna was scheduled to be released in the second half of 2000, but due to its built in RDRAM interface and problems with the MTH (Memory Translator Hub), it has been delayed until Q1 2001. The resolution will either be a new MTH-like part or a reworking of the Timna to support SDRAM directly.

It's interesting that Intel is integrating graphics functionality onto their chipsets (810) and their processors at the same time.



Chip MHz Bus
Speed L1
Cache L2
Cache Mics Die
Size Trans Form
Factor US
Price Volts Watts SpecInt
SpecFP Avail
Timna 600+ 100 32KB
-16K I
-16K D 128K on chip .18 ? 22 mil Socket 370S - ? ? ? Q1 2001



 
LoneWolf said:
While not many remember this, Cyrix (before VIA acquired them) manufactured the MediaGX processor, which was in the Pentium/Socket 7 class range. The CPU was designed for embedded use and Value PC's. As such, it not only had an embedded memory controller, but also an embedded PCI controller, audio, and video --all on a single processor. The processor's video wasn't very fast, and its performance didn't compare to Intel or AMD processors of the day, but it also generated very little heat, which still makes it a neat setup (if you can find a board with it, most CPU's were permanently surface-mounted to their system boards) if you want do do a cool mod with one, or an embedded setup of some sort. You still might be able to build an extreme budget HTPC setup with one if you added something like Sigma Designs X-Card MPEG2/4/DivX decoder card or a Hauppauge WinTV PVR.

For a neat little blurb on it:
http://www.pctechguide.com/22non-inte_Cyrix_MediaGX.htm
Click to expand...


O yea, because the 200MHz Cyrix CPUs were kick ass.
:p :D
 
CentronMe said:
O yea, because the 200MHz Cyrix CPUs were kick ass.
:p :D
Click to expand...

They made them up to 266 or 300MHz I believe. As I said, they in no way measured up to AMD or Intel CPUs of the day, but even non-cutting edge parts have their place, especially if they run cool enough that you don't need a fan on them. Having so much embedded on one CPU also meant you could build a really small mainboard with one, that would fit into almost anything.

I'd bet you could build a pretty cool Linux box on one, and make a nice mod out of it.
 
LoneWolf said:
They made them up to 266 or 300MHz I believe. As I said, they in no way measured up to AMD or Intel CPUs of the day, but even non-cutting edge parts have their place, especially if they run cool enough that you don't need a fan on them. Having so much embedded on one CPU also meant you could build a really small mainboard with one, that would fit into almost anything.

I'd bet you could build a pretty cool Linux box on one, and make a nice mod out of it.
Click to expand...


Have one right here, OC'd to 300. Works great as an all-round mini-pc. No heatsink on the chip. Doesn't need it unless loaded. Cute little bugger!
 
robberbaron said:
That has an IPC of up to 8. Doesn't that basically demolish every other processor?
Click to expand...

It is fairly impressive, but because Transmeta CPU's are VLIW (antiRISC like Itanium) and do X86 in software it means that they don't get the performance out of them you would expect, even with that high of a IPC.

==>Lazn
 
Unlike the Itanium's emulation layer, Transmeta's "code-morphing" instruction translater works quite efficiently, to the point of competing favorably with the Dothan Pentium M, clock-for-clock.
 
xonik said:
Unlike the Itanium's emulation layer, Transmeta's "code-morphing" instruction translater works quite efficiently, to the point of competing favorably with the Dothan Pentium M, clock-for-clock.
Click to expand...

True, the Pentium M also has an IPC of 8. Only the Athlon 64 with a IPC of 11 is better in the x86 world.

But code-morphing still has a penalty in performance. (and many advantages elsewhere)

==>Lazn
 
xonik said:
Centrino is more than a gimmick in that it pretty much guarantees a hassle-free wireless experience, and a nice processor that is well suited for mobile computing.
Click to expand...
I dunno. I like the fact it is a standard prepackaged deal, however I have sold many Centrino's to customers... if you are on the road, the wireless is hardly hassle-free. Maybe with just Intel's wireless software, but not Toshiba's or IBM's, certainly not XP's built in... aagh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top