Intel Silvermont Architecture: Does This Atom Change It All?

The Silvermont Architecture

So again, we know that Silvermont is based on an out-of-order execution engine, which has huge ramifications for performance compared to Saltwell (remember, that design is already competitive with other SoCs available today). Intel continues to lean on macro-op execution for more efficient handling of certain x86 instruction combinations, though.

The Saltwell Execution PipelineThe Saltwell Execution Pipeline

The 32 nm Saltwell execution pipeline is 16 stages long, and because it’s in-order, macro ops have to go through the whole thing, even if they don’t need the cache access stages. As a result, branch mispredicts waste 13 cycles. In Silvermont, the op can bypass the access stages and execute if cache isn’t needed. Mispredicts consequently only burn 10 cycles.

The Silvermont Execution PipelineThe Silvermont Execution Pipeline

Each Silvermont core receives a number of tweaks and improvements, from larger branch predictors to the reworked execution units and bigger caches. A lot of effort went into identifying instructions that were on the slower side in Intel’s Bonnell design. Silvermont improves much of that, reducing latency and increasing throughput. Floating-point add operations are down several cycles each, packed SIMD double results are achieved in four clocks (instead of nine), and signed multiplies are sped-up significantly. All told, Intel claims that its per-core IPC is about 50% higher across a wide swath of workloads. Consider the jump from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge, where we saw single-digital IPC gains comparing two CPUs running at the same frequency. A 50% boost is outright massive.

Silvermont Block DiagramSilvermont Block Diagram

But of course, Atom typically shows up in multi-core configurations. When the processor family first launched, it was a single-core chip. Not long after, Intel introduced a dual-core model, also manufactured at 45 nm. When it came time to adopt 32 nm, only dual-core versions surfaced. And as the company advances it process technology, more parallelized configurations become viable. In fact, Silvermont can scale as high as eight physical cores.

Now, the L2 cache is tightly coupled to the cores, yielding low latency and high bandwidth. Intel’s architects didn’t want to share that cache across more than two cores, though. So they went with a module-based approach. Each little building block includes a pair of cores and 1 MB of L2 cache shared between them (previous Atom processors had 512 KB of L2 per core). Individual cores, the L2 cache, and the interface between the cores and cache can all be power-gated. The cores in a module can even run at different frequencies, though they’ll operate symmetrically by default.

Silvermont Module ArchitectureSilvermont Module Architecture

Modules communicate over a point-to-point in-die interface with independent read and write channels, replacing the front-side bus topology altogether. Incidentally, Intel identifies its IDI as one of the keys to the modularity of the Nehalem/Westmere generation, and it’d seem that a lot of work from the “big” core space is affecting Atom here today.

Intel took a look at its core architecture, optimized for single-threaded performance, along with its modular approach to scalability, and chose to drop Hyper-Threading. Including the technology would have increased power use in single-threaded workloads. So the company bypassed SMT altogether, favoring more cores to boost performance in parallelized tasks.

At the same time, Intel’s engineers incremented its instruction set architecture to the 2010 Westmere class—up four years from the original Atom design’s Merom-compatible ISA. SSE4.1, SSE4.2, and POPCNT (which operates on integer registers) are part of this ISA package update, augmenting the Atom’s performance picture. AES-NI acceleration and Secure Key (including the RDRAND instruction and Digital Random Number Generator) also make it in.

Virtualization acceleration evolves from VT-x support to the technology’s second generation, introduced with Nehalem, supporting Extended Page Tables. Virtual Processor IDs in the TLBs and Unrestricted Guest (allowing KVM guests to run real and unpaged mode code natively when EPT are turned on) are part of that same evolution.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
60 comments
    Your comment
  • hero1
    Nice article as always C.A. I would really like to see this chip on a smartphone. If the performance and power utilisation is as good as it looks then Qualcomm will really feel the heat. Intel has the money and R&D to pull off a big move and compete. Time will tell.
    3
  • SchizoFrog
    I wonder if there are any plans to release Windows Phone 8 smartphones with these SoCs over the next 12-24 months? That would really solidify the eco-system for both Intel and Microsoft in one fell swoop.
    4
  • hannibal
    Much needed upgrades in here. Hopefully they allso deliver what they promise in these slides. Any devices out in this year or do we have to wait untill 2014 we see something based on these. But very promising indeed! A windows pro tablet based on these at desent price would be first candidate to start good move to Windows based tablets. Then there would be three good alternatives in tablets.
    0
  • de5_Roy
    bulldozer!
    .. is the first thing came to my mind when i started reading about the cores. but it's not exactly like bd, it's different. still.. it made me chuckle. amd deserves the credit.

    i wonder if future intel cpus ($330+ core i7) will have the same core system instead of htt.... :whistle: :ange: :lol:

    edit2: rodney dangerfield FTW! \o/
    -3
  • tipoo
    de5_Roybulldozer!.. is the first thing came to my mind when i started reading about the cores. but it's not exactly like bd, it's different. still.. it made me chuckle. amd deserves the credit.


    Well, it's just the cache that's shared in this one, no actual execution resources.
    5
  • esrever
    Finally intel is getting serious. Ditching hyperthreading is the best thing they could have possibly done. Now with OoO and real cores these atoms are looks pretty powerful. They will probably beat Kabini no problem with higher clocks with slightly less IPC. The 22nm trigate will drop power consumption especially without the shitty hyperthreading in the way.
    2
  • de5_Roy
    Anonymous said:
    Finally intel is getting serious. Ditching hyperthreading is the best thing they could have possibly done. Now with OoO and real cores these atoms are looks pretty powerful. They will probably beat Kabini no problem with higher clocks with slightly less IPC. The 22nm trigate will drop power consumption especially without the shitty hyperthreading in the way.

    i noticed the lack of information on the integrated graphics part. having a powerful cpu isn't enough for atom. the gpu part has always been the weakest point for intel. kabini otoh, will have gcn-based, hsa enabled, low power igpu.
    4
  • 4745454b
    So they still have an off die memory controller. I would have thought they would have moved that on die by now.

    Any more info on this "system agent" and IDI? I'm also surprised the cores can't talk directly to each other. If you want to use many small cores to tackle a problem together that's fine. But give them the ability to do it quickly.

    It seems Intel is getting the ball rolling on their smaller chips. I just hope that when they finally do they ditch the Atom name. Bad chips, get a new name for those that aren't.
    0
  • esrever
    de5_Royi noticed the lack of information on the integrated graphics part. having a powerful cpu isn't enough for atom. the gpu part has always been the weakest point for intel. kabini otoh, will have gcn-based, hsa enabled, low power igpu.

    Too true. Not a single mention of it probably means it won't be anything to brag about. Intel isn't really the type of company that likes to hide breakthroughs anywhere. Im expecting them to finally be able to do 1080p tablets and thats about it.
    0
  • jerryblack
    No, it won't, regardless of what Intel's press release says. If I've learned anything in the past few years, is never take what Intel says in the PR at face value, because it never turns out true.

    Silvermont may arrive a few months before the 20nm process for ARM chips is ready, but will that be enough, considering Intel's chips cost 2-3x more than the ARM equivalent? Probably not.
    -2
  • 4745454b
    I think the article said something about its going to be the IGP from the IB chips. If so that should be much more then enough on a phone.
    0
  • internetlad
    Contrary to what most enthusiasts believe, the current Atom processors on the market are more than enough horsepower when paired with an HDD and a gig or two of ram for grandma to check her email and figure out how to facebook.

    They're not a bad processor, you just need to properly impliment them. Of course they won't work if you demand split-second responsiveness or are looking to play games, but for somebody looking to set up a basic windows or linux box they're more than acceptable.
    1
  • 4745454b
    That's a bit like saying AMDs CPUs are good enough. Yes, both are mostly true. But both also ignore other possible solutions that are options. Why buy an Atom that performs similar to other chips, but because of the higher power usage will drain a battery and only last 75% as long as other SoCs? If Atom really was "good enough", then Intel could just put it out and not worry about it anymore. But they didn't, because I'm sure even Intel knows that at this point they aren't there yet.
    0
  • Truckinupga
    I've never seem a problem with AMD processors when it comes to reliability, Yes maybe they can't quite compete with Intel in performance but I have noticed even at that AMD is beginning to close the gap some. If anybody has seen an AMD road map of their upcoming advancements then they know AMD is about to pull a big rabbit out of the hat. Not to mention they give Intel a run for the money with price to performance, And "NO" I am not an AMD fanboy. I use Intel In all three of my home PC's, But I am pulling for AMD. We need AMD to keep Intel In check and I have been Impressed lately by the Piledriver's Improvement's over Bulldozer and AMD's future potential.
    2
  • g-unit1111
    With a low power chip on 14nm the Atom could have tons of applications for things that aren't just PCs or consoles. I'd like to see this chip put to use on things like auto navigation systems, smart phones, tablets, things of that nature. Intel could own the market with the right applications.
    1
  • kyuuketsuki
    Silvermont is releasing a half-year later than Jaguar, and it will still be poorer GPU-wise and likely only marginally better CPU-wise. Meanwhile, both AMD and ARM licensees will already be on their next platform.

    Assuming we see Jaguar-based SoCs in some decent tablets after June, I'm definitely going to be picking one of those up.

    Knock off the personal attacks now, or bans will be issued. - G
    2
  • tipoo
    This makes me wonder if companies that make in-house SoCs (I guess Apple in specific, since Samsung also sells them to others while Apple just does it for themselves) will ever switch mobile devices to Intel if they just can't match the performance per watt of this and future Atom cores.
    0
  • tomfreak
    if I only wish this shared power thing between CPU and GPU is available on Haswell. Haswell have high performance GPU, but I dont need GPU. Would be nice if Haswell automatic turbo CPU when GPU is OFF.
    1
  • DavidC1
    4745454bSo they still have an off die memory controller. I would have thought they would have moved that on die by now. Any more info on this "system agent" and IDI? I'm also surprised the cores can't talk directly to each other. If you want to use many small cores to tackle a problem together that's fine. But give them the ability to do it quickly. It seems Intel is getting the ball rolling on their smaller chips. I just hope that when they finally do they ditch the Atom name. Bad chips, get a new name for those that aren't.


    Don't be ignorant.

    "Incidentally, Intel identifies its IDI as one of the keys to the modularity of the Nehalem/Westmere generation, and it’d seem that a lot of work from the “big” core space is affecting Atom here today."

    You could consider previous Atoms as off-die, but it won't be in Silvermont.
    -2
  • DavidC1
    kyuuketsukiPeople, stop feeding the troll (maddoctor).Silvermont is releasing a half-year later than Jaguar, and it will still be poorer GPU-wise and likely only marginally better CPU-wise. Meanwhile, both AMD and ARM licensees will already be on their next platform.Assuming we see Jaguar-based SoCs in some decent tablets after June, I'm definitely going to be picking one of those up.


    Really?

    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Fujitsu-Stylistic-Q572-Tablet.91078.0.html

    Atom outperforms the Hondo chip by 30%
    Battery life of Atom is 2x at same battery capacity
    Needs active cooling

    AMD is expecting 15% IPC gain with Temash(Jaguar's Tablet version) but still clocked at 1GHz. I'd expect even Clover Trail to have an advantage over Temash.
    -4