September 22nd ETA for AMD FX processors

[Rudy Toody]

Maybe you should read a book.

 

[Riek]

Jezus christ...

They are not real "cores". Wouldn't it be embarassing if it happens that Intel's 6-core and 4-core CPUs are able to beat AMD's "8-core" CPU? Then there will be those up in arms shouting and asking "what's going on"?

If i'm correct a dual Quad core Xeon Core Duo @ 2Ghz will get his ass whiped by SB 2600 in 8threaded applications..

So those 8core Xeon from back then are no more cores!!!! they were 8cores back then, but now they are effectively promoted to a quad core!!!

Why don't you answer my questions when i ask you what performance a core should deliver to be called a core?
you are arguing that a core is defined by its performance... so ? Maybe over 5years we can say... a quad core SB isn't a quad core... its 1core look at the performance compared to todays core's!

Having a thread for the GUI and one for the work does make an app multi-threaded. however one of those threads will be idle like 99.9% of the time. Software that actually needs multiple cores to run better is pretty rare. Gaming is probably the most prominent one but what else? video encoding? probably 1% of users or less.

I agree that for a typical user here you are right 2-4 threads matter but for most users I would choose a beefy single core over a dual-core Atom with HT any day.

I don't think i would advice people to buy a single Core Zacate @ 1.5Ghz above a dual core Atom @ 1.8Ghz with HT.

If any process is hanging/doing something extreme your system will hang on the zacate, it wont on the dual core.

Now how about you have that 2threaded application, now add virusscanner, spy ware scanner, open browser with flash content, play music in the background.

I don't want a single core for such a system. Back in the days people bought dual socket systems just to have a smoother feel in all those applications.

And now we are talking about very easy taks for any cpu available.

Again single thread performance isn't the factor anymore. 2-4 threaded is. If you have good 2-4 threaded performance you will also have enough single threaded performance to be useable. (not the bottleneck). But having single threaded performance doesn't mean the reverse.

I you compare a dual core Zacate with a dual core atom with a single core Zacate you will get:

Zacate single threaded = Zacate dual core single threaded > Atom dual core single threaded.

dual threaded Zacate dual core > atom > Zacate single core
triple threaded Zacate dual core > atom > zacate single core
Quaddriple threaded Zacate dual core = atom > zacate single core.


So the funny thing you will notice is that looking at 1 thread performance limits your performance view dramatically because you have absolutely no id about performance in real life scenarios.

When you look to the 2-4threaded performance you have a broaden view on the performance while single thread performance is relevant enough to be factored in.

And this 2-4 threaded is for most desktop user workloads (multiple applications in light threaded environment). Professionals are above that, they can look at 2-12 threaded.

 

[996GT2]

Tricked? Then you better watch this video carefully >> Maximum Speed | AMD FX Processor Takes Guinness World Record. You will find Chew* in there.

Just to give you guys an idea of who we're dealing with, here are some of NostaSeronx's posts from over at OCN (his username there is just Seronx). I'm assuming he added the "Nostra" in because of his definite claim that Bulldozer would be released in August.

Bulldozer competes with Sandy Bridge-E

Regardless of the Price Points

CPU always goes against CPU

APU always goes against APU

A8-3870K vs i7 2600K

FX-8150 vs i7 3960X

APUs and CPUs are designed differently and will eventually have different fabrication processes

Bulldozer(Piledriver) on the APU side is going Bulk
while Bulldozer(Bulldozer) on the CPU side is staying SOI

In Architecture and ISA stand point Bulldozer doesn't have a competitor

It's main focus was to go head to head with what is going to be Haswell

Bulldozer doesn't compete with SB or IB it competes with Haswell

Bulldozer has 2 years till Haswell on the enthusiast side hits market if things continue

And then there was this gem:

 

[smakme7757]

Just to give you guys an idea of what we're working with, here are some of NostaSeronx's posts from over at OCN (his username there is just Seronx):

So he's saying that Bulldozer is going to compete with Intels next generation after Ivy-Bridge?

 

[996GT2]

So he's saying that Bulldozer is going to compete with Intels next generation after Ivy-Bridge?

That's not even the most facepalm-worthy of all the things he's said, I just don't want to waste my time to find all of his other laughable posts.

 

[NostaSeronx]

No.

Sandy Bridge 2600k:
1 CPU/1 Processor -> 4 Cores -> 8 Virtual Cores(4 FPU/4 Integer shared) > 8 Threads

Zambezi:
1 CPU/1Processor -> 4 Modules/Cores -> 8 Virtual Cores(4 FPU/8 Integer Shared) > 8 Threads.

Nope.

Everything else you said had no meaning

So he's saying that Bulldozer is going to compete with Intels next generation after Ivy-Bridge?

Nope, I said it was going to compete with Haswell, architecturally

and only CPUs go against CPUs

EE vs FX

That's not even the most facepalm-worthy of all the things he's said, I just don't want to waste my time to find all of his other laughable posts.

Unlike you I don't spread FUD

 

[smakme7757]

Nope.

Everything else you said had no meaning

Nope, I said it was going to compete with Haswell

That's what i said, you said!

Haswell is due for release after Ivy-bridge which isn't even released yet. How can you expect Bulldozer to compete with something that's to be released after Intels next release?

You must just be shit-stirring, i can't take you for real on that one.

 

[sm625]

Phenom I DID beat the Core 2 Quad. In terms of performance per dollar. Not just beat it but mopped the floor with it. No other stat matters, as long as the two competitors can both make enough money to stay in business.

 

[NostaSeronx]

Haswell is due for release after Ivy-bridge which isn't even released yet. How can you expect Bulldozer to compete with something that's to be released after Intels next release?

ISA Advantage
FMA3 =Equivalent> AMD Bulldozer has FMA4
AVX2 =Equivalent> AMD Bulldozer has XOP+AVX+CVT16 and other various instructions

Architecture doesn't equal actual product :whiste:

Knowing that Bulldozer is 1-2 years ahead any short falls coming now will definitely be fixed by each consecutive year(Tape out 2010 -> Release 2011 -> Revision Release 2012 -> Next Gen Release 2013)

PpW
Bulldozer is the first line
E BD is the second line
NG BD is near the third line

So, I take lines equal times so 3~x improvement over Bulldozerv1

 

[MisterMac]

Nope.

Everything else you said had no meaning

Your doing it again.

Your defining integer clusters as cores, despite marketing from both sides have called things differently for years.


Your a [wonderful person] - cause your turning this into a definition question.
In which case intel calls them cores and i believe intel, your wrong.
tralalalala.


Your a fanboy MASSIVE.


And your the type we'll make fun of if/when bulldozer fails to beat a 2600k.

hell... a 2500k....

You're quickly trying my patience. Behave yourself and stop attacking other people or I'm going to throw you out.
-VIRGE

 

[996GT2]

Your doing it again.

Your defining integer clusters as cores, despite marketing from both sides have called things differently for years.

Your a donkey**** - cause your turning this into a definition question.
In which case intel calls them cores and i believe intel, your wrong.
tralalalala.

Your a fanboy MASSIVE.

And your the type we'll make fun of if/when bulldozer fails to beat a 2600k.

hell... a 2500k....

That's what i said, you said!

Haswell is due for release after Ivy-bridge which isn't even released yet. How can you expect Bulldozer to compete with something that's to be released after Intels next release?

You must just be s**t-stirring, i can't take you for real on that one.

He's been posting similar things on OCN for the past 3 months. I just ignore most of his posts now, as do many of the other posters at OCN (even posters with AMD systems). Probably a good idea considering now extreme of an AMD fanboy he is.

For the record, what happens on other forums is not our business. We'd appreciate it if you could keep the drama from other forums on those forums.

-Thanks
ViRGE

 

[Tsavo]

Your doing it again.

Your defining integer clusters as cores, despite marketing from both sides have called things differently for years.


Your a donkey**** - cause your turning this into a definition question.
In which case intel calls them cores and i believe intel, your wrong.
tralalalala.


Your a fanboy MASSIVE.


And your the type we'll make fun of if/when bulldozer fails to beat a 2600k.

hell... a 2500k....

How old are you, three?

Here's a link for you to read, it might broaden your horizons a lot:
http://www.wikihow.com/Use-You're-and-Your

 

[Idontcare]

Phenom I DID beat the Core 2 Quad. In terms of performance per dollar. Not just beat it but mopped the floor with it. No other stat matters, as long as the two competitors can both make enough money to stay in business.

LOL, I'm pretty sure my Casio calculator beat both C2Q and PhI for performance per dollar Doesn't mean the performance itself is relevant to the market, as evidenced by the marketshare which PhI and Barcelona held in both the consumer as well as server spaces.

 

[MisterMac]

He's been posting similar things on OCN for the past 3 months. I just ignore most of his posts now, as do many of the other posters at OCN (even posters with AMD systems). Probably a good idea considering now extreme of an AMD fanboy he is.

Well there's a fine line from Passioned supporter to troll.

When your team fails, there's not many other routes sadly.


Also extremely sad that a BD core is pointing towards being half the strength of a Sandy maybe even westmere core.


It's funny people just won't accept intel decided to yank up the middle class to the higherish end with SandyBridge Pricing and that's killing AMD atm.

 

[MisterMac]

How old are you, three?

Here's a link for you to read, it might broaden your horizons a lot:
http://www.wikihow.com/Use-You're-and-Your

You're right, that totally ruined the message of my post.
How will anyone even get the point - i was trying to make.


Useless post is useless.

 

[Edrick]

Nope, I said it was going to compete with Haswell, architecturally

The only point you have here is that BD will have instructions like FMA, which Intel will not have until Haswell. But that does not mean that BD will compete with Haswell. Naturally future versions of BD will compete with Haswell, but that is a discussion for 2013.

I think it is very clear that BD will be competing with 2600K (and maybe low end SB-E).

 

[996GT2]

Just found this gem. Seronx actually PM'd this to me, why? I have no idea:

Although I did hear on OCN that he was 15 years old, which would explain a lot of things.

Netburst from Pentium III
22+ Stage Pipeline from 12 Stage Pipeline

Bulldozer from Phenom II
17 Stage Pipeline from 12 Stage Pipeline

Bulldozer's IPC is 4
Sandy Bridge's IPC is 5

Sandy Bridge can only achieve that IPC by using hyperthreading(1.5 ALU/1 AGU per thread)

Bulldozer doesn't need hyperthreading(2 EX/2 AGLU)

Execution units are what you expect ALUs to do but they do alot more than that

AGLUs do some ALU and AGU work but in this case Bulldozer does AGLUs the most

and in the IPC warground

Bulldozer beats Sandy Bridge

Real world benchmarks will show it but after this point IPC doesn't matter

 

[Riek]

Also extremely sad that a BD core is pointing towards being half the strength of a Sandy maybe even westmere core.
.

That would imply that a BD core would need 6Ghz to ty with a 3Ghz Sandy bridge?

If you make up numbers, can you at least keep them within the realm of possibilities.

 

[NostaSeronx]

Just found this gem. Seronx actually PM'd this to me, why? I have no idea:

I can upgrade that for you

Sandy Bridge and Sandy Bridge-E

Per core have 3 ALUs(2 ALUs 1 ALU/Jump) and 3 AGUs(2 Store/Load 1 Store) <-- these get halved and stalls happen if Hyperthreading is turned on

Bulldozer

Per core has 2 EX and 2 AGLUs <-- No stalls chief

Sandy Bridge and Sandy Bridge-E

128bit Int/FP FADD 128bit Int/FP FMUL 128bit Int/FP* FMisc
*Mostly FP

Bulldozer

256bit FP FMA/FADD/FMUL, 256bit Int AVX/SSE/MMX/ALU

:whiste:
Do I need to go on to show more flaws of the Sandy Bridge so many worship?

It is one Sandy Bridge

 

[MisterMac]

That would imply that a BD core would need 6Ghz to ty with a 3Ghz Sandy bridge?

If you make up numbers, can you at least keep them within the realm of possibilities.

Didn't mention one number, you did.

If the performance is pointing core for core to half strength, that's half strength. That's not half clock speed, or half l1 cache is it? or half l2.
or Half ringbus bandwith for that matter.


Grow up?

Use a brain?

 

[sequoia464]

I think it is very clear that BD will be competing with 2600K (and maybe low end SB-E).

First off let me say that I hope you are correct as I am currently running a 990FX board, but so far, and maybe I'm interpreting things incorrectly, I am seeing mostly negative posts on BD. Have you read anything to the contrary?

Not arguing any points here - I don't personally have a clue. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places for answers.

 

[smakme7757]

First off let me say that I hope you are correct as I am currently running a 990FX board, but so far, and maybe I'm interpreting things incorrectly, I am seeing mostly negative posts on BD. Have you read anything to the contrary?

Not arguing any points here - I don't personally have a clue. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places for answers.

Just wait until there are some reliable reviews from reputable websites. At the moment it's all rumor and "I think". That's why people are having such lengthy discussions, there are no hard number to refer to.

 

[NostaSeronx]

Use a brain?

Where would this half come from ?

Bulldozer can do FMA4 and 256bit AVX <-- 2x and 4~x

Bulldozer has 1ALU/1AGU missing I talked about that many times already

33.33% is the supposed decrease in the Integer Cluster(Core) performance when compared to Sandy Bridge while the improvement from Phenom II is 25%

:whiste:

 

[Riek]

Didn't mention one number, you did.

If the performance is pointing core for core to half strength, that's half strength. That's not half clock speed, or half l1 cache is it? or half l2.
or Half ringbus bandwith for that matter.


Grow up?

Use a brain?

half strength implies what it implies.

If i can lift 50kg half the strength is 25kg. So you need to do double the lift with 25 to get the 50kg movement.

So lifting a 50kg bag 3000times a day the other guy would need to lift his bag 6000 times a day..



also Bd has alot more l1 cache and l2 cache than SB so by that strength measurement (ridiculous analogy ..) BD would be a few times stronger than SB.

 

[MisterMac]

Just wait until there are some reliable reviews from reputable websites. At the moment it's all rumor and "I think". That's why people are having such lengthy discussions, there are no hard number to refer to.

The problem lies in:


between the few real engineering samples seen/benchmarked, you can't expect the retail stepping to have a 50% increase in performance all around.
And the numbers are worrying - along with delays.


If Bulldozer doesn't DESTROY Sandy like Phenom 1 should have destroyed the Q6600, an Ivy "2500k" is gonna be 350+ bucks.