AMD Carrizo Pre-release thread

[Enigmoid]

Peaked at 59W, despite an official 4.5W TDP that it didnt even manage to hold on average since it did so at 8-9W..

Software was Intel Power gadget and value displayed was Package power, with power, frequencies og GPU and CPU and temperature on four little dynamic graphs.

Now you want perhaps to know my version of what is package power, and why the average value in the HVinfo does seem innaccurate while it is not..??.

Package power is the power comsumption of the whole device, that is, of the full laptop seen from the DC input, but not seen from the CPU wich can drain power simultaneously from the PSU as well as from the batteries.

What we can see with the screenshot i posted is that when the 4780HQ drain 100W in the test laptop about 40W are provided by the batteries, the values in the middle show low power comsumption of the CPU but high Package power because the laptop is charging the batteries that were previously somewhat sollicitated to supply said 40W...

Does it seems reasonable as explanation..?.

HW monitor max values should be taken with a grain of salt. Sometimes you get funny numbers, especially max numbers. I've had 10,000W package power before on my laptop.

And no, your explanation is wrong. Package power is the CPU die power (plus PCH if a U level chip) - CPU cores, Uncore, Igp, memory controller.

 

[Abwx]

HW monitor max values should be taken with a grain of salt. Sometimes you get funny numbers, especially max numbers. I've had 10,000W package power before on my laptop.

And no, your explanation is wrong. Package power is the CPU die power (plus PCH if a U level chip) - CPU cores, Uncore, Igp, memory controller.

Wrong.?. That s your notion of what is a demonstration, to say that one is wrong but to provide no numbers, and only a parody of explanations whose only relative utility is to extend an already confused discourse.??..


How do you explain the power package being at more than 40W while CPU/GPU/Uncore are together in the 15W range.?

And you think that the uncore doesnt include the MControler..?..

Do your homework, if you dont want to keep on analysing things unidimensionaly while flooding the thread with posts that are less accurate than if with there was no text at all...

Watching Abwx backpedal when the hwmonitor numbers come out for Carrizo is going be hilarious.

Hers a number, at least three times he claims it's biased against AMD :biggrin:

Actualy i went back to topic to stop the rhreadcrapping above of people explaining me that power package can vastly exceed the SoC power..

They are hell bent to deny that Intel chips are underspecced, going as far as to claim that :

Package power is the CPU package power. It's the power calculated from the output of the FIVR.

Yet if we look at the average value in this screenshot :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/fileadmin/Notebooks/MSI/GS30_Shadow/stresstest.jpg

We have for the minimum value :

Package power 42.77W

IA Cores 0.53W
GT (GPU) 3.93W
Uncore 10.30W


You understand better why i pointed that some people think unidimensionaly..?..

They have a trial and error approach and when faced with w numbers that dont match their last try they rely immediatly to myths, in this case the one that package power is the SoC power when the numbers i just posted show that it cant be the case..

Only explanation that cant be contradicted is here :

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37585457&postcount=1899

Funny how this chip consuming 100W brought a series of myths as counter arguments..

In short benches it is why Intel gains a huge advantage compared to long benches. No denying that fact.

AMD should just go about it the same way to win benches. I mean who cares about how useful such aggressive short term boost is. Winning benches is more important after all!

The same goes for Intel's SDP. AMD has already adopted that and they should do it with everything else Intel comes up with.

"If you can't win playing fair do drugs just like the competition."
-Every professional cyclist ever?

You did hit the nail in the head, and that s what worry some people here, they know that Intel will no more benefit from an undue advantage extracted by manipulating the TDPs numbers.

Now Carrizo has gained a momentum, HP who is the most agressive has his laptops already distributed worldwide, and they doesnt seems to fulfill all orders within normal delivery times.

Also those slides suggest that the A8-8600P will be used in 15W and dGPU less, and hence even lower cost solutions, there s no mention of more than 15W for this SKU in AMD s slides, at those settings it should be quite a delivering mainstream laptop...

 

[Phynaz]

Watching Abwx backpedal when the hwmonitor numbers come out for Chorizo is going be hilarious.

Here's a number, at least three times he claims it's biased against AMD :biggrin:

 

[maarten12100]

Watching Abwx backpedal when the hwmonitor numbers come out for Chorizo is going be hilarious.

Here's a number, at least three times he claims it's biased against AMD :biggrin:

Yeah about as hilarious as you calling Carrizo a river after a piece of food :biggrin:

 

[Abwx]

Watching Abwx backpedal when the hwmonitor numbers come out for Chorizo is going be hilarious.

Here's a number, at least three times he claims it's biased against AMD :biggrin:

I made you an answer in the previous post to not derail the thread, and since you managed to be somewhat on topic, i wonder by wich miracle btw, i m specificaly discussing this point in a relevant post..

That said i m afraid to have to greatly disapoint you, figures are likely from the same wood as Kaveri, set apart that the cores get a bigger chunk of the available power due to less power hungry FCH, uncore and something that doesnt appear clearly in the powers graph but is right there, lower leakage.

There s some Kaveri HVinfo screenshots at NBC and they are generaly accurate, only thing annoying actualy is NBC themselves as they do not often select all the relevant parameters and this for both AMD and Intel, perhaps that these are not probed in some boards..

 

[monstercameron]

I made you an answer in the previous post to not derail the thread, and since you managed to be somewhat on topic, i wonder by wich miracle btw, i m specificaly discussing this point in a relevant post..

That said i m afraid to have to greatly disapoint you, figures are likely from the same wood as Kaveri, set apart that the cores get a bigger chunk of the available power due to less power hungry FCH, uncore and something that doesnt appear clearly in the powers graph but is right there, lower leakage.

There s some Kaveri HVinfo screenshots at NBC and they are generaly accurate, only thing annoying actualy is NBC themselves as they do not often select all the relevant parameters and this for both AMD and Intel, perhaps that these are not probed in some boards..

abwx fhs stop feeding the trolls man.

 

[Enigmoid]

Yet if we look at the average value in this screenshot :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/fileadmin/Notebooks/MSI/GS30_Shadow/stresstest.jpg

We have for the minimum value :

Package power 42.77W

IA Cores 0.53W
GT (GPU) 3.93W
Uncore 10.30W


You understand better why i pointed that some people think unidimensionaly..?..

Because the minimums are not dependent?

CPU is running at TDP levels. Something like the Cores throttle for a second (or much more likely prime is closed and restarted as NBC do check Furmark, then Prime, then Furmark + Prime) giving very low min values. Meanwhile the igp is chewing a large amount of package TDP.

 

[Abwx]

abwx fhs stop feeding the trolls man.

you re right, one more time...

Since AMD slides seems to act as some red hering for the usual suspects here to calm down this noisy crowd and get back on topic on the same move :

Think about it, 500€ for this laptop :

https://geizhals.de/hp-pavilion-15-ab052ng-n3x34ea-a1299534.html


And 750€ in the same shop for this 768p with one of those "15W" 5200U :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-Fujitsu-Lifebook-A555-Notebook.146747.0.html

No wonder that notebooksbilliger.de prefered to send this power hog to review, this help clear the inventories from products that will be a tough sell on a very short term...

 

[maarten12100]

you re right, one more time...



Think about it, 500€ for this laptop :

https://geizhals.de/hp-pavilion-15-ab052ng-n3x34ea-a1299534.html


And 750€ in the same shop for this 768p with one of those "15W" 5200U :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-Fujitsu-Lifebook-A555-Notebook.146747.0.html

No wonder that notebooksbilliger.de prefered to send this power hog to review, this help clear the inventories from products that will be a tough sell on a very short term...

http://geizhals.de/acer-aspire-e5-571-55sw-nx-ml8eg-033-a1236595.html?hloc=at&hloc=de
No OS but it's cheaper nonetheless. Also do you really think people would buy an AMD based laptop even if it was better in every way?

Nope...

People don't buy because they have informed themselves they buy because that is what society loves to do. I'm a part of this buying a new gpu every year for no real reason...

 

[Abwx]

http://geizhals.de/acer-aspire-e5-571-55sw-nx-ml8eg-033-a1236595.html?hloc=at&hloc=de
No OS but it's cheaper nonetheless. .

It has a 500GB HD instead of the 1TB HD and 4GB instead of 8GB.

And also 1x USB3 + 2x USB2 instead of 2x USB3 + 1x USB2, and all this even before talking performances...

If you think that it s worth to spare the 32€ difference, what can i tell, go for this 5200U if you feel that it s the winning choice...

Nope...

People don't buy because they have informed themselves they buy because that is what society loves to do. I'm a part of this buying a new gpu every year for no real reason...

People buy in function of urban legends and myths, you understand better the need for some brands , Intel being agresive in this matter, to feed the public with such kind of kool aid..?.

 

[maarten12100]

It has a 500GB HD instead of the 1TB HD and 4GB instead of 8GB.

And also 1x USB3 + 2x USB2 instead of 2x USB3 + 1x USB2, and all this even before talking performances...

If you think that it s worth to spare the 32€ difference, what can i tell, go for this 5200U if you feel that it s the winning choice...




People buy in function of urban legends and myths, you understand better the need for some brands , Intel being agresive in this matter, to feed the public with such kind of kool aid..?.

Just saying for the average consumer worrying about picking up a penny notebook with half decent specs the choice would be obvious. Rather go Intel than something unknown

I don't think Carrizo will make any dent in Intel's material superiority in the market.

 

[Abwx]

Just saying for the average consumer worrying about picking up a penny notebook with half decent specs the choice would be obvious. Rather go Intel than something unknown

Those ones who count pennies to the tenths will pick Baytrails and enjoy the Intel experience, for sure that they will be Intel averse once thoses soon to be outdated items will show their ages..

I don't think Carrizo will make any dent in Intel's material superiority in the market.

It will, and already has, not sure that Kaveri was that early available and with decent laptop specs, and whoever will buy one will be pleasantly surprised even if he expected it to work very well, as said it s better than anything intel did release to this day.

 

[el etro]

abwx fhs stop feeding the trolls man.

Seconded.

 

[C.Cardinale]

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-A-...r-Specifications-and-Benchmarks.144218.0.html

                      15w   35w   ?
in %                100   233
3d mark 11 (P) 1764 2359 2181
in %                100    133  (123,6)
cpu  slightly above kaveri a10-7400p

200% would be double the power, i.e. Carrizo requires more than double the power (233%) to reach far less than the half the performance (33%) more. This is absolutely remarkable.
And makes it clear immediately why AMD claims Carrizo to be (relatively) more efficient at 15 watts. It means the currency of "electricity" is increasingly loosing value above of 15 watts. Such a thing is otherwise called runaway hyper-inflation.
It is not explicitly specified which thermal design power budget of the cpu was used to perform the test. Since these tests always want to determine the maximum performance it is plausible, if it is assumed that the tests were conducted under conditions, under which the CPU can deliver their maximum performance (regardless of the efficiency) namely at 35W TDP. A lower configured TDP should be explicitly declared. Otherwise, the whole test basically is worthless.
On the other hand there are three results to 3D Mark 11 at various TDP figures, two results with specified TDP details (see above) and a test result with unknown TDP (see below). If we assume a performance increase linear to the TDP and vice versa, we can calculate the unknown TDP simply as follows:
35 - 15 = 20
2359 - 1764 = 595
595 / 20 = 29.75 Points per tdp-watt
2181 - 1764 = 417
417 / 29.75 = 14.02
15 + 14.02 = 29.02 Watt
Therefore, the test was performed with a TDP configured at approximately 30 watts. Taking into account the ratio of the increases of TDP and performance, so the thing is as follows:
100 / 233 = 100 / 133
233 / 133 = 1.75
100 / 1764 * 2181 = 216.5%
15 Watt / 100% * 216.5% = 32.475 Watt
Therefore, the test was performed with a configured TDP of between 29 Watts and 32 watts.

octane v2    8324  core-m 5y10: +11%
cineb r15 single   69  core i3 4030u: +2%
cineb r15 multi    194  core-m 5y71: +0%
mozilla kraken    3488  core-m 5y10: -4%
geekbench3 32b multi   4775  core-m 5y70: -6%
geekbench3 32b single   2006  core-m 5y10: +0%
geekbench3 64b multi   5105  core-m 5y71: -9%
geekbench3 64b single   2170  core-m 5y71: +24%
3d firestrike physics 1920x1080  2685  core-m 5y70: -2%
3d cloud gate physics 1280x720  2007  core i3 4030u: -3%
3d ice storm unlimited 1280x720  22946  core i3 3217u: -6%
3d ice storm extreme 1920x1080  22721  core-m 5y71: +4%
3d ice storm standard 1280x720  22740  core-m 5y70: +0%
sunspider    164.3  core-m 5y10: -1%
truecrypt serpent mean   0.2  core i5 4210h: -4%
truecrypt twofish mean   0.3  core i5 5257u: -1%
truecrypt aes mean   1.5  core-m 5y71: +2%
x264 hd 4.0 pass 2   15.2  core i5 3437u: 0%
x264 hd 4.0 pass 1   74.4  core-m 5y31: -3%
winrar     1328  core i3 3110m: -1%
----------------------
3d 11 physics 1280x720   2181  core-m 5y10: -1%
----------------------
3d vantage cpu no physics  6585  core i3 4030u: +2%
3d 06 cpu    2843  core i5 3317u: +1%
r11.5 cpu single 64b   0.9  core i5 3339y: +1%
r11.5 cpu multi 64b   2.4  core i3 5010u: 0%
r10 rendering single cpu 64b  3264  core i3 3227u: 0%
r10 rendering multi cpu 64b  8949  core-m 5y70: 0%
r10 rendering single 32b  2343  core i3 3217u: 0%
r10 rendering multi cpu 32b  6443  core i3 4158U: -1%
super pi mod 1.5 xs 1m   19.9  core i3 4030u: 0%
super pi mod 1.5 xs 2m   44.4  core i3 4030u: 0%
super pi mod 1.5 xs 32m   965.5  core i3 4158u: -2%

All in all Carrizo (at about 30W) seems to reach a performance level of the (older) Broadwell Core M (6W or so).
How is that possible? Then Skylake Core M (+ 17% CPU, GPU + 41%) will likely burn off Carrizo?

One got an idea, how:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37585572&postcount=1902
"Intel chips are underspecced"

That's why lean too fast and stylish notebooks with Intel CPUs always explode, and why their battery runtimes tend to zero? And if they do not overheat and explode and its batteries last longer than you think, it is a large-scale conspiracy.
The OEMs receive the real TDP specification that is kept secret to the public, and so also opportunity to incorporate larger batteries, whose Spezifikation is also forged from the public.
Is this your theory as to why Intel can run longer and faster, much faster and with much more "bella figura" than AMD?

 

[Burpo]

Abwx has a new account?

 

[jime1]

ha huhahahahah

 

[Abwx]

Abwx has a new account! YAY!

I wouldnt produce so blatant mistakes and fud, but i can give you a hint that this account was created for fud purposes...

And i thought that it was clear that wherever sites i m registered i use the same name, sockpuppeting is for trolls, viral marketers, but certainly not for people who are technology discussions motivated.

All in all Carrizo (at about 30W) seems to reach a performance level of the (older) Broadwell Core M (6W or so).

So the point of you coming at AT is to spread fud and lies, and of course thread crap the thread, first post first trolling....

If we assume a performance increase linear to the TDP and vice versa, we can calculate the unknown TDP simply

HA HA HA HA, physics that say that earth is flat, rarely i did read an assumtion that was based on such a big lack of knowledge.

Performance and Power scale like, well like a power function, that is a square, so you should definitly return to school, at the basic classes apparently.

to incorporate larger batteries, whose Spezifikation is also forged from the public.

Guttentag......mikk..??.

 

[C.Cardinale]

Mikk, please sign up

 

[Abwx]

Mikk, please sign up

That he sign up or not will change nothing to the facts, read again your statement below :

If we assume a performance increase linear to the TDP and vice versa, we can calculate the unknown TDP simply

This kind of statement definitly point that you know absolutely nothing about electric laws, and that your post is hence blatant viral marketing, fud and lies.

Most forumers here that follow tech discussions could contradict you, even those whose usual work is to be cooker.

 

[C.Cardinale]

Performance and Power scale like, well like a power function, that is a square, so you should definitly return to school, at the basic classes apparently.

This shows the extent of his confusion. He clutters indiscriminately TDP and power consumption.

 

[mrmt]

I would love to really but I'm just a student for now. Despite me having no experience with laptop design going by the prices of materials and labour obviously it can be done better.

I gave the example of Apple using aluminium and being praised for it.

Price of material is just a small issue. Build and maintain a supply chain, that's the big deal. Those guys at the OEMs aren't as dumb as you think they are. They have a lot of data about what consumer actually buy or does not buy, and they have to build and support millions of units every quarter. It's not that they are underfunded too, they have plenty of money and some are backed by strong investors too, so if those guys don't follow Apple's lead they have their reasons to not to.

It's not one OEM not following Apple's lead, it's an entire ecosystem. So I think there are some points you are not privy into, or even aware of them.

 

[Abwx]

This shows the extent of his confusion. He clutters indiscriminately TDP and power consumption.

How is it at Intel currently you think..?..

I mean they must be quite annoyed with Carrizo, despite a hyped 14nm they are obliterated by a chip using a 28nm process, how will their marketing react you think..?.

Or you already know you said..?..

And while we re on perf/Watt comparison, at equal power of course, not like with Intel chips benched at 2x the official TDP while the competition is left at nominal power :

Lol, the higher i7 part is below the lower performing Carrizo SKU !!

 

[mikk]

This shows the extent of his confusion. He clutters indiscriminately TDP and power consumption.

What do you expect from someone that can't even read a table properly.

 

[CHADBOGA]

How is it at Intel currently you think..?..

I mean they must be quite annoyed with Carrizo, despite a hyped 14nm they are obliterated by a chip using a 28nm process, how will their marketing react you think..?.

Intel might have a lead with manufacturing process, but no one can touch AMD's Powerpoint prowess.

 

[Abwx]

Intel might have a lead with manufacturing process, but no one can touch AMD's Powerpoint prowess.

As i told you powerpoint prowess of Core M is unbeatable, one year later we re left waiting for the myths to materialize.

All while Intel is right in the middle of their third paper launch in less than one year, you think how much power point slides are totaled for those..?.:biggrin:

Get used to it, and indeed your propension to elude any technical debate is telling, Intel hyped mobile line is obliterated by a chip that is 1.5 node late, so much for Intel s process lead, lol..

And since you like slides, one that talk of performance, you re not going to protest against an ICC compiled bench, do you.?.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Carrizo-Mainstream-APUs-Overview.144035.0.html