Tuesday, April 10th 2012

Trinity (Piledriver) Integer/FP Performance Higher Than Bulldozer, Clock-for-Clock

AMD's upcoming "Trinity" family of desktop and mobile accelerated processing units (APUs) will use up to four x86-64 cores based on the company's newest CPU architecture, codenamed "Piledriver". AMD conservatively estimated performance/clock improvements over current-generation "Bulldozer" architecture, with Piledriver. Citavia put next-generation A10-5800K, and A8-4500M "Trinity" desktop and notebook APUs, and pitted them against several currently-launched processors, from both AMD and Intel.

It found integer and floating-point performance increases clock-for-clock, against Bulldozer-based FX-8150. The benchmark is not multi-threaded, and hence gives us a fair idea of the per core performance. On a rather disturbing note, the performance-per-GHz figures of Piledriver are trailing far behind K12 architecture (Llano, A8-3850), let alone competitive architectures from Intel.


Source: Expreview
Add your own comment

115 Comments on Trinity (Piledriver) Integer/FP Performance Higher Than Bulldozer, Clock-for-Clock

#1
xenocide
That table is odd, why are several CPU's listed twice when thers are only listed once?
Posted on Reply
#2
Oberon
On a rather disturbing note, the performance-per-GHz figures of Piledriver are trailing far behind K12 architecture (Llano, A8-3850), let alone competitive architectures from Intel.
*sigh* More "RAWR, NEED MOAR IPC" nonsense.

Question: If I produced with a CPU with half the throughput per clock as BD but clocked it five times higher, would anyone really complain about IPC? Didn't think so. Unless you're doing architectural comparisons between mildly like architectures, nobody actually cares about IPC.
Posted on Reply
#3
slyfox2151
by: Oberon
*sigh* More "RAWR, NEED MOAR IPC" nonsense.

Question: If I produced with a CPU with half the throughput per clock as BD but clocked it five times higher, would anyone really complain about IPC? Didn't think so. Unless you're doing architectural comparisons between mildly like architectures, nobody actually cares about IPC.
except it doesnt clock 5x as much.... AMD has the same clocks as Intel... so yes IPC does matter.
Posted on Reply
#4
BeepBeep2
by: xenocide
That table is odd, why are several CPU's listed twice when thers are only listed once?
Because BOINC is rather inconsistent...
Basically the chart shows the FP went up 0-5%, and int went up about 10% at same clock.

Trinity has no L3 cache so add about 5% performance for 5-10% FP and 15% int at same clock when Vishera comes around.

Now if they can get clock speeds up 200-400 MHz stock for Vishera desktop products over current BD (think 3.8-4 GHz with 4.6 turbo), maybe they have a product of worth which would have ~10-20% better performance in single thread than Bulldozer.
Posted on Reply
#5
NC37
Certainly has my interest for mobile if the price is right but I'm leaning more and more towards Intel Ivy build on the desktop area.
Posted on Reply
#6
Oberon
by: slyfox2151
except it doesnt clock 5x as much.... AMD has the same clocks as Intel... so yes IPC does matter.
In the face of EVERY OTHER difference? No, not really.
Posted on Reply
#7
xenocide
by: Oberon
nobody actually cares about IPC.
Except for all those people who make a living doing stuff like encoding and rendering, and all those people that play games.
Posted on Reply
#8
Vulpesveritas
by: xenocide
Except for all those people who make a living doing stuff like encoding and rendering, and all those people that play games.
Well, no not really if it had half the IPC and 5x the clocks at the same wattage, then it is still 2.5x faster/ watt. Which is really what people who do things like encoding, rendering, and gaming mostly care about. What is the fastest chip I can get at a reasonable cost within a reasonable TDP limit.

That said, curse you lack of L3 cache. Still looking to be decent though, you basically get the equivalent of what, like a 4.3-4.5ghz bulldozer, so like 3ghz SB or thereabouts. Though I do say I was expecting more IPC. Ah well.

How much longer till we see 3rd party reviews again?
Posted on Reply
#9
Zubasa
by: Oberon
In the face of EVERY OTHER difference? No, not really.
Like what difference? The fact that the Bulldozer have crap performance/watt also?
If they manage to get enough Performance/Watt and clock speed I wouldn't care too much about IPC, but the fact is they could not.
Posted on Reply
#10
Xajel
by: Oberon
*sigh* More "RAWR, NEED MOAR IPC" nonsense.

Question: If I produced with a CPU with half the throughput per clock as BD but clocked it five times higher, would anyone really complain about IPC? Didn't think so. Unless you're doing architectural comparisons between mildly like architectures, nobody actually cares about IPC.
Yes, If you clocked it five times higher, then TDP and temps will be high... just take a look back at Prescott !!
Posted on Reply
#11
Vulpesveritas
by: Zubasa
Like what difference? The fact that the Bulldozer have crap performance/watt also?
If they manage to get enough Performance/Watt and clock speed I wouldn't care too much about IPC, but the fact is they could not.
which says nothing for piledriver and if the leaks we have seen are real it is more power efficient than Llano.
Which is the hope that remains.
Posted on Reply
#12
Zubasa
by: Vulpesveritas
which says nothing for piledriver and if the leaks we have seen are real it is more power efficient than Llano.
Which is the hope that remains.
That is a lot of "ifs", I wouldn't hold my breath given that Piledriver is Bulldozer based.
I would love to grab a Trinity notebook if it turns out to be as good as you hope it will be.
Posted on Reply
#13
OneMoar
by: Oberon
In the face of EVERY OTHER difference? No, not really.
you mean the fact that Bulldozer is hotter running ,slower ,uses more power and costs more then the now 3 year old Deneb core ? the fact that AMD has done nothing but hype and bullshit people lately only to fail to deliver when it matters ? and they continue to attempt to bluff there way out of a hole they dug because of bad management
if so RIGHT ON!
I used to be a AMD guy then I read a very interesting post by a EX employee
AMD need to get there shit in gear or put simply they won't be around much longer at AMD current rate of screw-up's I estimate they won't be around in as little as 3 or 4 years
ARM is gaining ground and will gain even more of a presence with the release of windows 8
Intels new chips are getting into the sub 50watt range and still kicking the shit out of AMD's top end parts and there iGPU's are getting faster every reversion the AMD 7 series was a JOKE yea .. there in trouble
and trinity isnt looking like its gonna pull AMD's ass out of the fire ...
AMD already has limited financial resources and they are bleeding out FAST
Posted on Reply
#14
eidairaman1
This is about Trinity, not bulldozer, keep it on track people
Posted on Reply
#15
seronx
I like how everyone lies... :toast:
Posted on Reply
#16
Vulpesveritas
by: Zubasa
That is a lot of "ifs", I wouldn't hold my breath given that Piledriver is Bulldozer based.
I would love to grab a Trinity notebook if it turns out to be as good as you hope it will be.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there supposed to be a 3.6ghz 65w A10 sku?
with that integrated 7660 GPU at 800mhz?
lol. Wonder how those 35w parts will be in the end.
Posted on Reply
#17
Over_Lord
News Editor
Barely anything. I just want the GPU, TRINITY bring it on!
Posted on Reply
#18
eidairaman1
instead of trying to pass judgement on something why dont we wait till it comes out instead of bashing it ya know. Reviews here are legit
Posted on Reply
#19
OneMoar
by: eidairaman1
instead of trying to pass judgement on something why dont we wait till it comes out instead of bashing it ya know. Reviews here are legit
that is a little late
personally at this stage I think we(the consumer) need to make it VERY CLEAR to AMD that son is disappoint and they need to step it up or step out
AMD kept a fairly tight lid on bulldozer probably because they knew they where not gonna be able to keep up with there hype and it backfired ...
when a manufacturer doesn't talk to you about there product's in development it means one of two things
either they are making some really great and don't want to let the competition in on it
OR more often then not they are having trouble and are hoping you wont notice
the problem here is the majority of AMD's consumer base happen to know what the fuck they are talking about and wont have the wool pulled over there eyes very easily
Posted on Reply
#20
Melvis
All i want is a 8core or 10 or whatever it may be to perform around a 2600K or alittle more and id be very happy and upgrade to that, if not then i to might move to intel =/
Posted on Reply
#21
seronx
by: Melvis
All i want is a 8core or 10 or whatever it may be to perform around a 2600K or alittle more and id be very happy and upgrade to that, if not then i to might move to intel =/
:shadedshu , It's like you don't even know how FX eight cores even score... :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#22
OneMoar
Intels logic
Great performance per-core > lets add some more of them
Amd's logic MEH lets just throw some fake cores at the problem and hope it helps
kk enough AMD bashing for onenight off to bed with me
Posted on Reply
#23
Vulpesveritas
by: seronx
:shadedshu , It's like you don't even know how FX eight cores even score... :laugh:
Maybe he is looking for a rendering PC that won't break the bank and prefers AMD?
Posted on Reply
#24
Thefumigator
by: OneMoar
Intels logic
Great performance per-core > lets add some more of them
Amd's logic MEH lets just throw some fake cores at the problem and hope it helps
kk enough AMD bashing for onenight off to bed with me
Intel's logic is "lets punish resellers and OEMs with several menaces so they stop selling AMD CPUs until we have a competitive core, and then as the design will be superior it will sell itself, then lets improve the cores sequentially and flawlesly, and then lets add some more of them. If they put us under trial for illegal practices, we just pay the thingy and go on."

AMD's logic is "ok, we lost several thousand million dollars along the way since 2003 because of intel illegal practices, we could have made things better if those millions were available before. So instead of paying extra (unavailable) cash for a bunch of talented engineers, we hired a bunch of guys who barely knew what happened with netburst, so they made bulldozer and they took several years to develop it. Of course we got the money from intel after the trial, but it came late, when the damage was already done. Now we have to play catch up, so Intel strategy worked as a charm" :shadedshu "Of course buying ATI is a long term investment which is saving our asses today, and if we didn't sell spansion we would have had some serious extra revenue. Driving the company to the wrong direction also made us loose millions. And not to mention world economical crisis, which also has its side effects"
Posted on Reply
#25
HumanSmoke
by: eidairaman1
instead of trying to pass judgement on something why dont we wait till it comes out instead of bashing it ya know. Reviews here are legit
Yup. Hate all that passing-judgement-before-the-launch bs...
by: eidairaman1
Unbeatbly tired and yawning at the talks of how great kepler is. Reminds me of how effective the POTUS talks are of spurring the economy which are lies.
/amazing what 90 seconds of search brings up

Personally I won't believe a word about about Trinity/Piledriver core performance until I hear it from John Fruehe....oh wait
by: eidairaman1
your post here is offtopic
Happy now?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment