Russian Electronics: Semiconductor and Processors

kvs wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Performance wise of Elbrus 8SM was around a xeon of the more recent series. So I don't know why all the hate KVS.

Also, this is a prototype. Wait till newer prototypes are out.

Spare the hyperbole.   Hate is an obvious mischaracterization of my post.   Nobody is supposed to worship everything that MCST does.

Here is a fact for you: the Elbrus chips are supposed to be used in Russian HPC systems.   So my comments are right on target.
Hiding behind "military applications" is pure BS.   That would make Russia a military-kolonka that does not care about it civilian economy.
If Russia want to support domestic science and engineering it needs to stop artificially limiting its prime domestic CPU and get people
who have a clue on the job.   Right now it looks like the chip is being treated like it is intended for $50 appliances.   Ironic given its
touted "military" credentials.

Where is the improved FPU prototype?   I guess it's not a priority.

Don't be aggressive when you don't need to be.

I'll put it simple: they have a chip equivalent to a Intel 4960x in terms of performance. While, yes a change to the Elbrus architecture can yield better results, it's still an amazing leap from nearly nothing to this. We already seen Elbrus 4S and 8SM in action.

I got myself a 10500 ES chip here. It is quite different than overall 10400f processor. But hey, whatever.

The most powerful Russian processor will be 32-core and made according to the 7 nm technology


Representatives of MCST JSC reported that this year the company will start developing the most

fast processor Elbrus next generation. It will be used for high performance computing and storage systems. It is planned that Elbrus-32C will be created using 7 nm technology, and the first working samples of the Russian 32-core processor will appear in 2025.

The first plans for the Elbrus-32S told the general director of "MCST" Alexander Kim in an interview with the magazine "Expert".

According to Kim, MCST has already shown that it is able to create technologies and products within the country that can provide adequate information security and correspond in performance to foreign counterparts. Now the company has a new goal - to design and manufacture Elbrus-32C.

According to the CNEWS portal, the representative of MCST, Alexander Kim, explained that the new microprocessor will be made according to the 7 nm technology, although earlier versions of 6 nm were called.

Other characteristics and parameters of Elbrus-32S MCST have not disclosed at the moment.

Although it is planned that Elbrus-32C will be designed domestically and based on Russian technologies, it will be manufactured at the Taiwanese TSMC factory. Russian manufacturers do not have the equipment to manufacture such systems.

Technical characteristics of Elbrus processors of the past (4C), current (8C), new (8CB) and future (16C) generations in comparison with similar Intel x86 processors.

Earlier in early October 2020, the Elbrus architecture developer announced the receipt of the first engineering sample of the Elbrus-16S microprocessor. The launch of serial production of Elbrus-16S is scheduled for the end of 2021. Currently, the company's specialists are conducting research on the resulting engineering sample. They have already been able to load the Elbrus Linux operating system on it.

Also in October 2020, MCST released a new version of the Elbrus Linux distribution - a general-purpose operating system of the GNU / Linux family for computers based on the Elbrus, SPARC and x86 architecture. The sixth version of "Elbrus Linux" is based on a modified Linux 5.4 kernel and includes technical solutions for Debian GNU / Linux and the LFS project. The distribution kit "Elbrus Linux" 6.0 (64-bit) for PCs with x86 processor architecture is available for download to all users free of charge. List of packages "Elbrus Linux" 6.0.

https://vpk.name/news/459093_samyi_moshnyi_rossiiskii_processor_budet_32-yadernym_i_sdelannym_po_tehnorme_7_nm.html

Big_Gazza wrote:Thats a fail in my book.  What is stopping the US from being a pack of c*nts and leaning on TSMC to withdraw their servces like they did for Huawei and its advanced chipsets???

Import substitution still has a long way to go.

Agree, but such technology is ultra-expensive and difficult to implement. China and Russia are in the same boat in terms of substituting Taiwanese and Korean technology tied to Western pressure, they should team up for this.

MCST is relying on lithography shrinking to get more out of the design. This is only part of the proper approach. The other one
is optimizing the transistor layout. I am assuming something like this is being done, but originally the TSMC production line was
using off the shelf transistor block layouts. Having a CPU design is not the same as having an optimized rendering in silicon.

We have seen 32 core CPUs from AMD that are using 12 nm "FinFet":

https://www.globalfoundries.com/sites/default/files/product-briefs/pb-12lp-11-web.pdf

The Elbrus had a substantially smaller number of transistors compared to Intel x86 designs when it was first mass produced. That
is why it had ultra low power output. A huge part of the transistor count goes to L1, L2 and even L3 caches in modern
CPUs, but the Elbrus still has a some sort of advantage in terms of lower number of transistors. It most likely has something
to do with its VLIW design and the use of the compiler to do what x86 does in hardware. The Intel Itanium tried this but
was a failed effort to "rip off" the Elbrus since it made no sense of Intel to dabble with such a non sequitur branch to its
hardware focus since the 1970s. Russians are really good at coding and software technology is not trivial and secondary
to hardware.

To wit, the Elbrus 32 core can be rendered on 14 nm. So they are kicking the can down the road in terms of properly laying
out this processor. And 14 nm is actually achievable for Russian IC manufacturers.

https://www.zelenograd.ru/hitech/v-zelenograde-namereny-postroit-fabriku-chipov-28-nanometrov/

We have 28 nm production capacity being deployed. This easily allows 8 core Elbrus processors to be manufactured in
Russia. Relying on TSMC is a bad idea.

Russia may switch to Chinese nodes since China is working closer to 7nm upcoming.

But while I agree it should be done in Russia, I dunno what overall plans are.

They may wait till they move more to 3d chip design.

miketheterrible wrote:Russia may switch to Chinese nodes since China is working closer to 7nm upcoming.

But while I agree it should be done in Russia, I dunno what overall plans are.

They may wait till they move more to 3d chip design.

China is safer than Taiwan as an offshore production point, but it is the same problem of having your jewelry in someone else's
pocket.

Even if Russia goes down the photonics pathway, there is a clear need for conventional silicon IC production inside Russia.
Aiming for short term transition to 14 nm would be ideal. The 7 nm target is more hype than substance. In fact, 7 nm
is too close to the 3 nm molecular cluster transition limit where continuum mechanics does not apply. So there is no
"material" to have predictable properties and which can be molded into functional components. There is talk of going to
5 nm but I think that will be entering the excessive error rate regime. It is already an achievement to be using 7 nm but
the end of the line is fast approaching.

Hence there is a need for photonics. Photonics will allow 3D in 2D hardware. Different frequencies of photon can be
use in the same "wires" but only one type of electrical current. So a chromatically selective photonic transistor (likely
some sort of complex not as simple as any of the current conventional IC transistors) would enable multiple IC layers
to coexist on a single plane. The different photon frequencies can be routed into different domains of a generic transistor
grid (sort of like FPGAs) to deploy the 3D aspect.

magnumcromagnon wrote:"Baikal electronics" orders hundreds of thousands of chips from TSMC for billion-dollar projects

Isn't this going to encounter possible "complications" since TSMC is based in Taiwan? we know Taiwan is a US lackey.. It would be best if Russia develops its own semiconductor industry so they wouldn't have to rely on foreign fab foundries to manufacture chips for them.

The original news with many details both technical and industrial here:

https://www.cnews.ru/news/top/2020-11-30_bajkal_elektroniks_vypustit

https://www.stalkerzone.org/domestic-16-core-processor-elbrus-16s-has-russia-really-caught-up/

Hole wrote:https://www.stalkerzone.org/domestic-16-core-processor-elbrus-16s-has-russia-really-caught-up/

Still no real push to manufacture it in Russia as opposed to Taiwan.

The author also does not understand CPU clock frequencies are not some intrinsic measure of speed. They merely reflect the
number of pipeline stages. So the Pentium 4 with its high clock rate back around the year 2000 achieved this since it had
long pipelines with small stages. It was also crap that was prone to pipeline bubbles and was replaced by the "Core" model
that had much less pipeline stages. Of course lithography resolution increases maintained the clock around 3 GHz. But
if you not there has not really been much increase in Intel CPU clock rates over the last 15 years compared to the 15 years
previous to 2005.

The VLIW principles behind the Elbrus automatically make it a short pipeline design with complex and large pipeline stages.
This "wide" format allows it to execute more instructions per stage so it has a lower clock but a higher productivity per
clock cycle compared to something like the Pentium 4. The 300 MHz E2000 was not "absurd". It was effectively a
1 to 1.5 GHz "Intel" analogue. But it also was not transistor optimized. Intel spends a lot of time and effort and money
to hand tune its transistor layouts. If MCST was able to do this then the E2000 would have been close to 3 GHz equivalent.

Regarding manufacture in Russia, the 28 nm process is good enough to produce the 16 core version on Russian soil. The
hype 7nm and 14nm fabrication processes are nothing of the sort (see my post in the general physics thread). The 28 nm
process without FinFet likely involves actual transistor sizes below 50 nm. The magic 7 nm transistor sizes are in reality
over 20 nm in size. So the silicon foundry gap is closing.

I have been a regular visitor to another forum (sinodefence) and from the discussions there concerning Chinese developments in the semiconductor industry it seems domestic Chinese companies like SMIC are having difficulties manufacturing chips with 7nm and 5nm process to compete with competitors like TSMC. It seems China still relies on the US and other suppliers for machinery and essential tools for production. How sophisticated is this field of science? and since China is heavily investing in this area, perhaps it is something that can be considered an essential strategic industry (just like aircraft engine production) that Russia needs to focus on.

KRETs update regarding electronics. http://www.promweekly.ru/archive/kret/2021/KRET_1-2021.pdf

"high-frequency (microwave) tubes and analog waveguide components with solid-state microwave equivalents: low-noise emitters
low-power amplifiers, phase shifters,
complete PPMs made by technology
Monolithic microwave semiconductor integrated circuits (MMIC - Monolithic
Microwave Integrated Circuit).
As technology improves
in the last decade and a half, constantly
improved characteristics of PPM based on monolithic integrated circuits of the microwave range and
their cost decreased. When used in
gallium arsenide, then gallium nitride MMIC technology, the power output per module increased exponentially in normal ranges
Radar. The continuous exponential growth of the performance of individual circuits is expected to continue as they improve.
materials technology.
MULTIFUNCTIONAL
SYSTEMS
Another important trend in the development of modern radar technology is the creation of multifunctional systems operating on the same platform, possibly through one
and the same physical aperture. On ships or
airplanes, it can be a combination of radars for various purposes (observation, detection,
tracking, target illumination), communication lines in various frequency ranges and broadband
electronic warfare systems.
This allows you to reduce the size of stationary equipment on the carrier, increase
the ability to control and monitor the electromagnetic fields of antennas and reduce the cost
radar equipment. However
certain difficulties with this approach
may be related to EMC problems.
RADAR
SYSTEMS WITH SYNTHESIZED
APERTURE
Synthetic aperture radars, widely used to create
high-resolution 3D images, appeared four decades ago as
a productive solution to the problem of restrictions,
related to the aperture interface.
Diffraction analysis shows that for
obtaining permission from a radar station operating in
L-band (wavelength 30 cm) at a distance
several kilometers, the physical dimensions of the antenna should be approximately equal to the range,
that is, several kilometers.
The solution is to use the linear nature of Maxwell's equations for
creation of a synthetic aperture of the phased array by using a series of time samples,
received on a small consistent
movable antenna in those spatial
points at which one would need to have real
PAR elements in a physical antenna. Data
samples are collected and jointly processed to obtain the desired three-dimensional
high resolution images.
The growth of digital computational processing capabilities expands the areas of practical application of the synthetic aperture radar concept.
DIGITAL
RADAR SYSTEMS
According to American experts,
future generations of radars will not be based
only on solid-state phased array, but almost entirely on digital technology. As
used analog devices will remain
terminal input stages for coupling the antenna to the external environment for receiving analog
Microwave signals.
The received signals will be digitized and transmitted
on broadband fiber optic
communication lines for appropriate funds
processing remotely located outside
apertures for digital formation of the beam pattern,
in-phase and quadrature generation, compression
impulses, suppression of interfering echoes, target allocation, multivariate tracking.
Likewise, in transmit mode, digitally generated waveforms will be
generated outside the aperture and distributed over fiber optic lines at
separate elements of the antenna, where it will be emit digital-to-analog conversion
and power amplification on the MMIC. During transmission
all signals in digital form phase
the shift required for reception and transmission can be digitally performed by delaying signals to varying degrees
towards or away from the individual antenna elements.
This approach removes the need for
use of analog phase shifters in
PPM and allows you to get without much effort
the possibility of digital control of the position of the DNA with an accurate time delay.
The main advantages of digital radar
associated with the possibility of a significant reduction in the size of the required analog
receiving equipment and with architectural
flexibility due to the possibility of remote placement of some components
Radar in places remote from the antenna on board
plane or ship. Their disadvantages include the high cost of the ones used in them.
high-speed analog-to-digital or digital-to-analog converters with large
dynamic range. Also required
large computing power of the order
teraflop (1012 op / s).
PHOTONICS
In recent years, the concept of use in radars has become widespread.
photonics. The term "photonics" is somewhat inaccurate. It is used to refer to
optical means, i.e. lasers, optical
communication lines, mirrors, lenses, various hybrid
components that combine optical, electro-optical and electronic elements into monolithic structures known as optoelectronic integrated circuits (OEIC - Optoelectronic
Integrated Circuit).
With regard to radar, photonics refers to
usually to broadband analogue optical propagation of microwave signals and
real-time delay control. Placement of microwave signals on optical media
completely changes the physics of propagation
signals, therefore inconvenient, often large and expensive waveguide structures, traditionally used for distribution
Microwave signals from the PAR elements and back are replaced by miniature, lightweight and cheap
fiber-optic communication lines.
There are still many unresolved problems in this matter. R&D for the improvement and development of photonic technology
components continue.
Photonic radars will compete in the future with digital
Radars, the concept of which also uses
photonics in a more perfect form in the form
fiber-optic digital communication lines.
As with coherent optical processing
signals in synthetic aperture radar
the rate of development of digital technology is currently exceeding the rate of development of photonics. Given the state of the art of these two
technologies, digital methods are getting more
wide use. Despite synchronization problems, digital stations are more flexible and flexible. Although photon radar may find applications
in the field of highly specific tasks, it is unlikely
will it provide a solution to the general tasks inherent in
digital methods.
COMPLEX
PURPOSE CHARACTERISTICS
Collecting with additional sensors
information about the goal, according to experts,
is one of the important trends in the improvement of electronic weapons,
solving problems of target recognition. Such a possibility can be realized by observing the target using either one
of the same sensor in different spectral
ranges, or several sensors located in different places. In technology
Both methods are practiced by radars. In a number of heads
homing, currently being developed, the first method is used - observation in several widely spaced
spectral bands to obtain complementary target information. Method two
used in automated systems
air defense control of the operational compound of the Navy
(CEC - Cooperative Engagement Capability), in which many ship and aircraft radars
united by modern communication systems
into a single information network. By distributing
data from all radars located in a certain area, and synthesizing results to eliminate duplication or resolve explicit
contradictions, it is possible to create a single radar display of the space of combat
action.
BISTATIC
AND MULTISTATIC
SYSTEMS
The provision of the US Armed Forces with new types of active radars is limited by capabilities
use of noise-immune sources
radio frequency radiation. Many active
tactical radars, in addition to their basic functions,
can jointly or autonomously execute
function of target illumination in bistatic or
multistatic modes. For military purposes, several bistatic radars have been developed,
but in general they are found to be less effective,
than conventional monostatic. However, the stations
in which the receiver and transmitter are located
in one place are good targets
for complete destruction by anti-radar missiles. Multistatic radar systems that use existing geographically dispersed emitters for such attacks
invulnerable.
It is possible that the subsequent development of this
field of technology can provide the Navy
new types of radars that do not require super-powerful transmitters and function
almost completely hidden. This requires a significant amount of additional
research.
PASSIVE FORMATION
IMAGES
Passive imaging is based on the use of the intrinsic radio emission of various objects and
from the external natural environment of background illuminating radiation, as it happens in
eyes or television cameras. The same principle can be adopted for imaging with radar and means of working
in the range of millimeter waves. According to American specialists, this will make it possible to make a technological breakthrough in the field of creating tools that provide an opportunity
observing objects hidden by a smoke screen,
foliage and camouflage. The surfaces of natural objects emit electromagnetic energy in the radio frequency range, spectral
whose density depends on temperature and
emissivity. Highly reflective metal surfaces
(hence low emissivity) reflect signals well from all other
natural sources of radiation, of which
the most significant is the sky, and therefore
look in comparison with the background of the earth's surface as a very cold spot. The presence of such
irregularities with a sufficient antenna aperture, providing a narrow beam pattern and high
permission, allows for passive
formation of radar images.
ELECTRO-OPTICAL SYSTEMS
The value of optical
area of ​​the electromagnetic spectrum, the use of which in difficult weather conditions
assessed as limited. However, its capabilities are extremely useful for creating
2D and 3D images with high
spatial resolution at small
observation apertures in conditions
good visibility. As high-precision weapon systems with low side
damage optical systems become necessary for automatic recognition
and target selection, identification of guidance points,
high-precision target designation and guidance at the end of the trajectory, as well as for routine observation.
Passive imaging. The efficiency of modern optics sharply increases with the development of providing
electronic computers and semiconductor microelectronic technology.
New materials are being developed for semiconductor detectors in the optical spectral range. This allows you to quickly
develop technologies and create flat focal imaging matrices
and use semiconductor integrated
circuits with a large number of elements of photodetectors and electronic readout circuits from
them signals.
The rate of increase in the number of picture elements on an integrated circuit chip
is exponential. Wherein
the most promising are visible
and near infrared spectral ranges
due to the fact that highly efficient photodetectors can be manufactured for them.
silicon based. Using readout electronics based on it, it is possible to manufacture
monolithic flat matrix of photodetectors
as a technological basis for obtaining high-definition images, widely used in the television industry, for
production of portable digital video cameras that record image and sound.
MULTI AND HYPERSPECTRAL
SIGNATURES
Another trend inherent in radar technology and optics is
increased interest in the collection of complex characteristics or the so-called multidimensional
object signatures for a more reliable understanding of images. Dual-mode heads
homing missiles that use
two different infrared (IR) ranges,
selected in accordance with the conditions of their operation, have demonstrated high efficiency in the conditions of the use of infrared devices
counteraction and significant reduction
number of false alarms caused by
phenomena such as glare from the sun.
This article is based on
analysis of publications in foreign scientific, technical and periodicals, materials of exhibitions, international conferences and
symposia as well as official communications
government bodies and firms
United States regarding information about the used and
promising technologies in the field of shipborne electronic weapons systems.
In particular, research materials from the US National Academy of Sciences, research organizations and laboratories were used.
United States Navy, Industry and University"

Uncle Sham tried to sabotage T-Platform supercomputers (for strategic reasons), and the Russkies responded with Elbrus-90S:

https://www.russiadefence.net/t5946p50-a-135-moscow-abm-system#310191

PhSt wrote:I have been a regular visitor to another forum (sinodefence) and from the discussions there concerning Chinese developments in the semiconductor industry it seems domestic Chinese companies like SMIC are having difficulties manufacturing chips with 7nm and 5nm process to compete with competitors like TSMC. It seems China still relies on the US and other suppliers for machinery and essential tools for production. How sophisticated is this field of science? and since China is heavily investing in this area, perhaps it is something that can be considered an essential strategic industry (just like aircraft engine production) that Russia needs to focus on.

The so-called 7 nm finFet from TSMC is actually a 10 nm process. This was demonstrated by a video where an AMD Ryzen CPU had
a piece of it extracted with a highly precise instrument (see the physics thread). Anything under 10 nm right now is marketing BS.
So I am not sure how much of a real problem is actually involved in China. Dependence on US companies is a real weakness just
as it is for Russia.

But my impression is that China can actually manufacture 10+ nm class ICs.

Tests of various games running on the Elbrus 801-PC workstation.

ABOUT THE RUSSIAN ELBRUS PROCESSOR
February 21, 2021

I have to say that specific advertising policy of the former head of MCST Babayan in the form of periodic high-profile claims that the new processor Elbrus E2K is about to “break” Intel, permanently ending zilch, being zero from the beginning, has raised in me distrust of this company since the beginning of the 2000s. Moreover, when Babayan with a team of leading employees left for Intel in 2004, I thought that this was definitely all.

And yes, the company went quiet, and all the following years just quietly profited from something for the defence industry, almost without communicating with the outside world. It withdrew into itself. With long interruptions, it dryly posted new versions of processors on its website:

2005 – Elbrus-2000, which turned out to be a very simplified version of the E2K. Processor technology 130 nm, frequency 300 MHz, 1 core.
2010 and 2011 – Elbrus-S and Elbrus-2C+. Processor technology is 90 nm, the frequency is 500 MHz, 1 and 2 cores, respectively.
2014 – Elbrus-4C. 65 nm processor technology, frequency 800 MHz, 4 cores.

All of this was produced and financed for the defence industry, and so everything would have been sluggish and continued further, if not for the events of 2014. The fall in the ruble exchange rate and the sanctions of the western world have led to the need to have their own computing equipment not only in the military, but also in the civilian segment. But, I must say, the Medvedev government was particularly slow to do so.

The movement around the Elbrus processors intensified in an avalanche in 2020, exactly with the arrival of the Mishustin government. Probably just a coincidence… In general, it became clear that the government is planning something big, which was confirmed by the unprecedented government resolutions of the end of last year 2020. Why in the media it even slipped out, somehow sluggishly – it is not clear. Media leaders don’t understand the scale of what is happening?

I will start with the fact that from January 1st 2022, in order to obtain the status of Russian equipment and supply products to state structures, it is required to use a Russian central processor or controller in its composition (paragraph 2458 of 31.12.2020). Previously, this requirement was only applicable to data storage systems (paragraph 719 of 17.07.2015).

Nevertheless, the first and successful attempt to introduce Elbrus into civilian state structures nevertheless began in 2016, and since May 2017 the first data processing centre was introduced at the passport and visa service based on Elbrus-4C processors (back then about 130 servers, now already about 200 servers) instead of the IBM mainframes, which have been there since 2006, the cost of technical and service maintenance of which has suddenly increased. Thus, the cost of 1 year of maintenance of IBM mainframes has actually become comparable to the purchase of a data centre based on Elbrus.

From January 1st 2022, the requirement for a domestic processor or controller applies to almost any electronics, including ATMs, cash registers (processor or ad valorem part), I/O devices, monitors, peripherals (for example, printers) and “semiconductor storage devices” (controller in solid-state drives). There is also a requirement for quotas (paragraph 2013) for the purchase of radio-electronic equipment, and several other standards and proposals that are likely to become standards in the coming months.

Since the transition to a different architecture of the central processor in the equipment produced in Russia is often quite a complex process, measures of state support for companies developing products based on Russian processors (paragraph 109 and paragraph 529) have also been worked out. For example, the Ministry of Industry and Trade gives grants and subsidies for the creation of equipment with a Russian processor. The Ministry of Finance may also give similar grants, and there is a discussion about this. In the same way, the development of automatic design systems (CAD) and the development of electronic components and chips are supported. There is a program to subsidise consumers. And add to this the tax benefits for IT companies!

The scale of the measures taken indicates the seriousness of the state’s intentions to implement a massive transition of industry and state structures to domestic equipment. This can be treated in different ways (there will always be opponents), but at the moment it becomes obvious that a clear practical course has finally been taken on import substitution in radio electronics, and it is happening!

From the above, it follows that radio electronics engineers and programmers of system and application software have a new potentially very promising direction, which already needs to be actively studied, especially since several large successful projects have already been implemented on the basis of Elbrus processors:

In addition, a very high-load system for the Ministry of Internal Affairs (Center for the Automated Recording of Administrative Offences) is currently being deployed in Elbrus, where video analytics will be conducted in real time and there will be large databases. The system is expected to be completed by the end of 2021.

I think that now more and more new projects of this kind will actively appear.

Now companies that used to develop motherboards and build servers and other computing equipment based on x86 processors are actively expanding their solutions with lines based on the Elbrus processor. There are already about a dozen of them, and in the future there will be hundreds of them.

In connection with such activity of everything and everything, I think that Elbrus processors will soon catch up with Intel and AMD in performance, and maybe even approach them in cost due to the volume in the batch and taking into account the unprecedented measures of state support.

I think that our own factory is not far off. After all, in one of the drafts of the “strategy for the development of the electronic industry of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2030” for 2022-2025 there is the development of microelectronic products at the technological level of 28 nm and below, and development at the level of 14 nm and below, although the final document does not contain such specifics. There, with more general terms until 2030, the development and industrial development of silicon technologies for the production of electronic components with topological standards of 65-45 nm, 28 nm, 14-12 nm, 7-5 nm and subsequent production of products based on them, as well as the development of products based on silicon technology with a topological norm of 5 nm, followed by the production of products based on them at foreign factories and the transfer of production to the Russian Federation, are recorded. It is planned to create silicon factories operating in a “foundry” mode for the production of digital integrated circuits with topological standards of 28 nm, 14-12 nm, 7-5 nm.

I wonder if the norms of 5 nm will be relevant in 10 years? Perhaps, since science has almost reached the physical limit of microminiaturisation, and further reduction in size will affect the durability of such products. Perhaps productivity growth will take a different path.

Elektromozg

https://www.stalkerzone.org/about-the-russian-elbrus-processor/

How can somebody write an article about the Elbrus today and totally omit any reference to the 8 core version? Then
why bother listing any of the previous models?

http://mcst.ru/elbrus-8c
http://www.ineum.ru/elbrus_801-pc

The rest of the article reads like an internet forum post with basically no real information about either Russian IC fabrication
or development plans for the Elbrus (e.g. native 64 bit floating point).

I heard Elbrus 16C which is next and apparently already seen, is more than simple core increase. Apparently more of an IPC improvement too.

miketheterrible wrote:I heard Elbrus 16C which is next and apparently already seen, is more than simple core increase. Apparently more of an IPC improvement too.

I hope they make more effort with cost-free 64 bit floating point. They should also add more FPUs for vectorization.

In the article we have the author harping about how the Elbrus needs to catch up to Intel and x86. The Elbrus should
never be subjected to this "race". It is rigged from the start. Recall back in the 1990s we had Cyrix CPUs "failing to deliver"
with Quake supposedly because they had inferior FPUs. It turns out that Quake used the FPU for integer manipulation
and not as an actual floating point unit. Cyrix did not fail when code did not use Pentium specific optimization hacks.
Using write combining would achieve similar performance but without the Pentium specific trickery.

The Elbrus should be used to create a Russian software ecosystem instead of trying to import western rubbish (yes
rubbish). Russia should ban Micr$haft software from any institutional use. Ridiculous bloat with built in back doors
for NSA infiltration. No thanks. In terms of real productivity, the test is in HPC environments. Here is where the
improvement effort should be (i.e. expanded floating point power).

kvs wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:I heard Elbrus 16C which is next and apparently already seen, is more than simple core increase. Apparently more of an IPC improvement too.

I hope they make more effort with cost-free 64 bit floating point.   They should also add more FPUs for vectorization.

In the article we have the author harping about how the Elbrus needs to catch up to Intel and x86.   The Elbrus should
never be subjected to this "race".   It is rigged from the start.   Recall back in the 1990s we had Cyrix CPUs "failing to deliver"
with Quake supposedly because they had inferior FPUs.  It turns out that Quake used the FPU for integer manipulation
and not as an actual floating point unit.   Cyrix did not fail when code did not use Pentium specific optimization hacks.
Using write combining would achieve similar performance but without the Pentium specific trickery.

The Elbrus should be used to create a Russian software ecosystem instead of trying to import western rubbish (yes
rubbish).   Russia should ban Micr$haft software from any institutional use.   Ridiculous bloat with built in back doors
for NSA infiltration.   No thanks.   In terms of real productivity, the test is in HPC environments.   Here is where the
improvement effort should be (i.e. expanded floating point power).

Well, that is the purpose of Elbrus OS.

The loss in performance in the 64bit floating point has more to do with emulation in Windows environment than anything as they advertise the whole emulating Windows with this processor.

We should see what happens but it is rather becoming a solid CPU especially in workstation and server environment. Data storage and what not.

I am also intrigued to see if they will do a RISC-V architecture too. They already do SPARC.

Actually the current Elbrus implementations all take a big hit from 64 bit floating point compared to 32 bit. This
has nothing to do with emulation. The Elbrus simply does not have 64 bit wide FPUs.

The 8 core variant has the following official numbers:

Пиковая производительность:

25 операций в такт в каждом ядре (8 цел., 12 веществ.)
250 GFLOPS одинарной точности, 125 GFLOPS двойной точности

There is a factor of two hit from using 64 bit (double precision) floating point.

And this is not an academic problem. I know from personal experience that single precision is crap for physical process
codes. If Russia wants an HPC processor, it needs to have 64 bit x 4-8 units for floating point. If the need is for some
military specific format, then have a separate model for it. Trying to satisfy contradictory constraints is a losing proposition.