The Ice Lake Benchmark Preview: Inside Intel's 10nm
by Dr. Ian Cutress on August 1, 2019 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- GPUs
- 10nm
- Core
- Ice Lake
- Cannon Lake
- Sunny Cove
- 10th Gen Core
Cache and TLB Updates
One of the biggest changes in the new Sunny Cove core is the cache hierarchy. Throughout most of the last decade, Intel has kept the same cache configuration among its server cores with very few changes, aside from improving the micro-op cache through Sandy Bridge today, but with Sunny Cove, we get some key updates.
From our microarchitecture disclosure article, we know that Sunny Cove brings with it an increased L1 data cache, as well as a doubled L2 cache, from Skylake. With this comes more associativity as well.
Core Cache Comparison | ||||||
Sunny Cove |
AnandTech | Cannon Lake |
Skylake | Sandy Bridge |
AMD Zen 2 |
|
48 KB 12-way |
L1-D | 32 KB 8-way |
32 KB 8-way |
32 KB 8-way |
32 KB 8-way |
|
32 KB 8-way |
L1-I | 32 KB 8-way |
32 KB 8-way |
32 KB 8-way |
32 KB 8-way |
|
512 KB 8-way |
L2 | 256 KB 4-way |
256 KB 4-way |
256 KB 8-way |
512 KB 8-way |
|
2 MB 16-way |
L3/core | 2 MB 16-way |
2 MB 16-way |
2MB 16-way |
4 MB 16-way |
|
2304 | uOp Cache | 1536 | 1536 | 1536 | 4096 |
I’ve also included the size of the micro-op cache in this comparison, because we understand that the L1-I and the micro-op cache are typically located next to each other in the die design – increasing the size of one typically means limiting the size of the other, however given that both of them work to accelerate the same types of data, it is important to find the right balance: AMD for Zen 2 decided to halve the L1-I and double its associativity, and then double the micro-op cache from 2k to 4k entries. For Sunny Cove, Intel has increased the L1-D by 50%, but also increased the micro-op cache by 50%, taking advantage of the second generation 10nm process.
In the above latency graph comparison, we can notably see the new increased cache capacities. The L1’s increase from 32KB to 48KB is well visible, as well as the L2 increase from 256KB to 512KB.
On the part of the L2 it’s interesting to see that again the new core’s TLB structures don’t quite cover the whole capacity of the L2 and that’s why the latter half of the L2 has worse access latencies for L1D TLB miss patterns.
L3 latencies look similar, however we’ll dwell into that just in a bit. The DRAM latencies of course are apples and oranges in this case as Intel’s new LPPDR4X memory controller in the new ICL part doesn’t have a counter-part we can compare to, but as expected the memory latency is notably worse than a desktop part so no big surprises there.
What’s rather disappointing however is that we’re not really seeing any kind of change to the prefetchers and our access patterns between the two microarchitectures look identical. We had expected Intel to improve in this regard, but alas it seems, at least for our test cases, there’s been no improvements.
One of the major balancing acts with cache sizes is also cache latency. The bigger the cache, the longer it takes to retrieve data from it – increasing associativity can do this as well. Intel for the longest time has cited a 4-cycle latency to its L1 cache, and a 12-cycle latency to its L2 cache. This changes, in quite a substantial way.
Core Cache Latency (in cycles) | ||||||
Sunny Cove | AnandTech | Cannon Lake |
Skylake | Sandy Bridge |
AMD Zen 2 |
|
5 | L1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | |
13 | L2 | 12 | ~12 | 12 | 12 | |
30-36 | L3 | 26-37 | 34 |
Due to the increase in the L1 cache, that 4-cycle latency is now a 5-cycle latency. Intel is hoping that its double L1 store bandwidth will help hide that latency, however adding 20% latency onto every data fetch is a heavy hit to take. This is why a lot of the rest of the core is also beefed up, so work can still continue to cover for this extra cycle. It is worth noting that Intel’s Atom cores in the past had an L1 latency of 3 cycles, however they have also since moved to 4-cycle.
The L2 also changes, from 12 cycles to 13 cycles. You can’t double a cache for free, and it is interesting to note here that now AMD and Intel share the same L2 cache size and the same associativity, however AMD has a cycle advantage on Intel. This has a knock on effect for L3 cache latency too, which has increased from ~26-37 cycles to ~30-36 cycles on Intel, from Skylake. The latency here isn’t uniform because the cache isn’t uniform, and accessing non-local L3 slices comes with a latency penalty, as say opposed to AMD’s uniform latency L3.
One of the biggest additions Intel was keen to make in our Sunny Cove microarchitecture disclosure is the increase in the L1 bandwidth. Based on our testing, Skylake’s L1 data cache was capable of 2x32-byte read and 1x32-byte write per clock. For Sunny Cove this has increased, but it gets a bit more complicated. In one clock Sunny cove can perform 2x64-byte reads and either 1x64-byte write, or 1x32-byte write, or 2x16-byte writes. So both reads and writes, at peak, have doubled with bit width, with the write configurations being a bit more complex.
We can see the direct effects of the bandwidth change in our bandwidth tests. The L1 store bandwidth is extremely evident as it measures in at 222GB/s on the ICL part, while only reaching 139GB/s on the 28% higher clocked 9900K. If we normalise for frequency, we indeed see a doubling of the store bandwidth of the new core.
The L2 cache bandwidth looks unchanged from Skylake – the part here lags behind with an equal amount to the frequency difference. Surprisingly, the L3 bandwidth fares quite well here and is almost at parity to the desktop 9900K even though the frequency difference. The DRAM bandwidth is inferior on the ICL mobile chip, but again that’s to be expected due to the apples and oranges DRAM architecture comparison.
Moving on to the TLB configurations, and it turns out that Intel has moved where this data is stored. This data is typically stored in CPUID.02h, however it is now found in CPUID.18h, and the info between different page sizes and capabilities is now given as subdivisions. The TLBs look as follows, and broken down into configurations:
Sunny Cove TLB | |||
AnandTech | Type | Entries | Associativity |
L1-D | 4K | 64 | 4-way |
L1-D | 2M | 32 | 4-way |
L1-D | 1G | 8 | full |
L1-I | 4K+2M | 8 | full |
L1-I | 4K+2M+1G | 16 | full |
L2 | 4K+2M | 1024 | 8-way |
L2 | 4K+1G | 1024 | 8-way |
This means that for 4K and 2M L1-I entries, there are a total 8+16 = 24 possible, but only 16 1G possible. For 4K L2 entries, there are 1024 + 1024 = 2048 entries possible, however only 1024 each of 2M/1G are possible. The peak numbers align with what Intel has told us in our microarchitecture disclosure, however it is good to dive into what is possible.
261 Comments
View All Comments
tamalero - Monday, August 5, 2019 - link
the 3d mark VRS test graph is very confusing.MASSAMKULABOX - Tuesday, August 6, 2019 - link
These chips are priced quite high esp the i3's the Dualcore is outrageous (20$ discount for half the cores and threads?).They will only sell in limited qtys at such high prices . Bring on the 14nm equiv at sane prices.what discrete gfx does the IGPU equate to? gt1030 vs 2200g vs 3400ge??
Zhentar - Tuesday, August 6, 2019 - link
The bit per cycle throughput of REP STOS is really only half of the picture - the startup latency matters a lot too! On my Skylake, I've measured a minimum latency of 29 cycles* (any REP STOS from 1 byte to 128 bytes takes 29 cycle, then it starts going up from there). Some compilers make heavy use of it even for small stores/copies (VC6, first and foremost, but also the .NET JIT for stack zeroing), so it can be pretty important to performance in some scenarios.*I am no Agner Fog... nor anywhere close to him, this measurement should be taken with a grain of salt ;-)
ballsystemlord - Wednesday, August 7, 2019 - link
@Ian
Sunny Cove SIMD chart and others have many asterisks, why?
"POPCNT Microcode 50% faster than SW (under L1-D size)"
What does this mean? The CPU uses microcode and HW, not SW, AFAIK, much less use it to implement the POPCNT instruction.
ballsystemlord - Thursday, August 8, 2019 - link
Spelling and grammar errors:Insert: I've been commenting corrections for at least 1 year now, if you guys want me to change the format, or have any request regarding phrasing, etc., just ask. Thanks for your work!
"L3 latencies look similar, however we'll dwell into that just in a bit."
I think you ment delve:
"L3 latencies look similar, however we'll delve into that just in a bit."
"IPC increases against the mobile Skylake are 33 and 38% in the integer and fp suites, though we also have to keep in d mind these figures go beyond just the Sunny Cove architecture and also include improvements through the new LPDDR4X memory controllers."
Missing percent sign and stray "d".
"IPC increases against the mobile Skylake are 33% and 38% in the integer and fp suites, though we also have to keep in mind these figures go beyond just the Sunny Cove architecture and also include improvements through the new LPDDR4X memory controllers."
"...which did not go down to well."
You mean "too" not "to":
"...which did not go down too well."
"...we actually see a number of key microarchitectural improvements bubble up through in our SPEC testing."
Excess "in":
"...we actually see a number of key microarchitectural improvements bubble up through our SPEC testing."
alysdexia - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link
I think you mean Baalsystemlord or Bàqhàlsýstemlord.Grammar is a barbarism of ghrammatics, another word for composition or handwriting, font, format, spacing, the looks, whereas you meant diction/lecsis or register, vocabulary, declension, placement, spelling, the meaning.
you guys -> ye
nils_ - Monday, August 19, 2019 - link
I noticed on Intel Ark that Ice Lake CPUs do not have TSX instructions enabled / available. THis is interesting, since I believe TSX has also been used for some of the spectre attacks.ikjadoon - Thursday, September 12, 2019 - link
On 'Gaming Results (15W and 25W)', the graph is colored incorrectly. "On" and "Off" have the same color...and the legend colors are somehow not related to the graphic?