1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD FX Series and A Series First Performance Projections Surface

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, May 4, 2011.

  1. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Bulldozer module has:

    one FETCH
    one DECODE
    one FPU
    two Integer scheduler
    one L2 Cache for module.
    one L1 instruction cache

    Same number of transistors with sandy 2600K

    Yes , 8-core Bulldozer is a true 4-core chip with excellent HYPER TRANSPORT technology !!! Not true 8-core !!

    Bulldozer architecture is very elastic !! That is the power and secret for bulldozer ... 2x128bit FMAC or 1x256bit FMAC or 4x64bit !!!

    [​IMG]
    Last edited: May 4, 2011
  2. heky

    heky

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    884 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Location:
    Slovenia, Europe
    Ok, but if it is such a excellent HYPER TRANSPORT technology, why the low performance numbers and why does AMD call it a 8 core proc? Intel doesnt call the 2600K a 8 core.

    Real cores for real men my ass then!
  3. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    1) Βecause the extra logical core (HT) has CACHE !!!!
    2) Because has two integer scheduler !!

    This chip will be very good in performance/per watt !!!
  4. Fourstaff

    Fourstaff Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,154 (5.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Location:
    Home
    Marketing hype? I think AMD have said that they are going to market them as modules rather than cores.
  5. heky

    heky

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    884 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Location:
    Slovenia, Europe
    We will see about that. But it better deliver, its about time.
  6. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Νow you have six cores in 1100t. When you run a single thread application one core run and the others sleeping.

    With bulldozer architecture 2 X 128 FMAC are linked in 1x256bit fmac in this application !! Double performance with the same number of transistors (double performance per watt) !!!! All this in clock to clock comparison but bulldozer is 32nm architecture with higher clock at the same TDP ! Pc mark cannot show you the difference !!!

    When you run multi thread applications FPU can be 4x64bit for better performance !!
    That is elastic architecture !!!!!

    Bulldozer has not IGP inside and must be more overclock-able than sandy. I think for the same reason this chip will have better default clocks than sandy in the same TPD ......... We learn in a month.

    You must wait for applications benches and real benches!!!! That is a projection :)
    Last edited: May 4, 2011
    Melvis and heky say thanks.
  7. heky

    heky

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    884 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    142
    Location:
    Slovenia, Europe
    Nice, thanks for the info. Now it will be even harder to wait and see the real world comparison against the 2600K.
  8. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,201 (11.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,572
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    A module is not a core, and AMD doesn't call a 4-module chip a quad-core. They're for all intents and purposes marketed as eight-core. So yes, it takes 8 core AMD chips to compete with 4 core Sandy Bridge. CFC.
  9. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    For me , Ι5 2600Κ and four module bulldozer will have the same performance , but AMD will deliver us better platform !!

    AM3+ platform will have many lanes for CROSSFIRE & SLI !!!!(both x16 pci-e), true native SATA III for all sata and will be more future proof ! That is the deference between 1155 & AM3+ .

    For people how want IGP, there is 980G chip in AM3+ with HD4250 or better IGP with sideport technology.
  10. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,201 (11.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,572
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Not according to AMD. It is an 8 core chip.
  11. Melvis

    Melvis

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    3,543 (1.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    510
    Location:
    Australia
    Which has HT that gives about 25% extra performance for each thread, so its more like a 6core.
  12. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    A module = two cores ???? No .....

    There is no distinguishable deference between logical and physical cores in this season.

    Υου don`t remain in words. AMD speak for 8-cores and Intel for Hyper transport+ 4-cores ... So what ??
  13. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,201 (11.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,572
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    No, it does not. Intel does not call them 6-core chips.
  14. Melvis

    Melvis

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    3,543 (1.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    510
    Location:
    Australia
    Did i say it was a 6 core chip??? NO, i said it acts more like a 6 core since it has four HT cores does it not?
  15. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,201 (11.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,572
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    No, a module = [something the end user shouldn't care about].

    The end user is shown core count, not thread count. The core count is 8.

    It acts like a 4-core chip with 8 threads. There's no way to show that it acts like a 6-core chip, since there is no 6-core Sandy Bridge chip.
  16. Jonap_1st

    Jonap_1st New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    288 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Location:
    South Green Jakarta
    it's better if they honestly said it was 4 core with unbelieveable compute power rather than just said it has "native" 8 cores..

    :rolleyes:
  17. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,201 (11.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,572
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    [​IMG]

    8 core. No threads, no modules.
    heky says thanks.
  18. Melvis

    Melvis

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    3,543 (1.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    510
    Location:
    Australia
    Yea there is because it does NOT give a 100% increase in performance for each extra thread, there for as stated by intel it will give you around 25% increase. So add that on top of the original 4cores you would get something like real 6 core performance.
  19. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Bulldozer module has:

    one FETCH
    one DECODE
    one FPU
    two Integer scheduler
    one L2 Cache for module.
    one L1 instruction cache


    Same number of transistors with sandy 2600K

    If a module has 2-core , it must have

    two FETCH
    two DECODE
    two FPU
    two Integer scheduler
    two L2 Cache for module.
    two L1 instruction cache

    AMD speak for 8-core because the logical core inmodule has & hardware structure = integer
    Last edited: May 4, 2011
  20. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    [​IMG]
  21. Nesters New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Messages:
    121 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Well, it's 8-core processor but you can hardly call them REAL cores.
    8 integer units doesn't mean they're real cores because the resources are shared between two of those.
  22. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,201 (11.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,572
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    That argument doesn't fly. AMD doesn't refer to a module as a core, it maintains that "each module is a set of two cores", and its four module chips are marketed as 8 core. Not "4 module" or "4 core/8 thread".
    heky says thanks.
  23. naoan New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Messages:
    304 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    62
    nah, it would be easier to market higher core counts than "unbelievable compute power" to mass market.
  24. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    I cant tell you why amd refer this chip as 8-core but if you see the architecture, you can understand me !:)

    Marketing trick ? No.
    8-cores? No !
    Something like 1,3 core per module (two integer)? Yes!
    Last edited: May 4, 2011
  25. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,384 (3.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,086
    Intel was kinda stagnated then so no suprise here. They're at a whole other level now.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page