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. claylomax

    claylomax

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,586 (1.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    255
    Location:
    London
    Some members here at TPU have this mobo, including myself; it does 2x16 lanes and support DDR3. I get similar results to X58 SLI systems on 3DMARK Vantage and 11 on extreme settings, obviously not on the performance setting which is cpu demanding. http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120367
  2. legends84

    legends84

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    344 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    18
    Location:
    Jitra, Kedah, Malaysia
    claylomax.. i use to have this mobo bro.. but I changed it to Asus Crosshair 4 formula... :)
  3. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Unlock PHENOM II X2 555 !!!! 4,5Ghz and northbridge freq. 3300Mhz ???
    what cooling system ??
    Very very nice with budget cpu !

    I compare AM3+ with 1155 :) !

    Nvidia does not make any AM3+ mobo & chip ...
  4. Fourstaff

    Fourstaff Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,154 (5.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,959
    Location:
    Home
    Which is why AMD is so screwed because it will not be able to compete against the LGA2011 later this year.
    With new deal, they don't need to, and they can focus on Tegra or whatever.
  5. Bjorn_Of_Iceland

    Bjorn_Of_Iceland

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,172 (1.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    375
    @charts

    Hah!
    Jonap_1st says thanks.
  6. claylomax

    claylomax

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,586 (1.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    255
    Location:
    London
    I copy your post to include the link, I feel lazy ... :laugh:
  7. claylomax

    claylomax

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,586 (1.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    255
    Location:
    London
    Dumo probably used some kind of extreme cooling for that. Here's another link: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=249897 EDIT: he used single stage.
  8. devguy

    devguy

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,239 (0.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    Location:
    SoCal
    Yeah, that's kind of what I was getting at about PCMark. Wait for other benches!

    As for those who think the Bulldozer module is closer to hyperthreading than to two cores, think about what task the Interlagos processor (from which Zambezi is designed from) was designed for. In the server space, Integer performance is more valuable than floating point performance, and while the module may only have one fetch/decode unit, it has two integer execution units. Further, each has their own L1 Data cache, and the L2 cache is able to be dynamically divided amongst the cores in a module (even unfairly). As such, for integer processing, it performs about as well as two cores without any components shared.

    As for floating point, there may be only one FPU, but with each cycle, either core can operate on 256 bits of parallel data via two 128-bit instructions or one 256-bit instruction, OR each of the integer cores can execute 128-bit commands simultaneously. This is actually an advantage over Sandy Bridge, as while Sandy Bridge may also support 256bit AVX instructions, should a program not be programmed to take advantage of those, it is limited to a single 128bit FPU. Further, bear in mind that a 256bit FPU takes up a huge amount of die space, and so sharing it is an important way of saving chip real estate (put it towards the massive L3 cache these chips will have).

    AMD "averages" their module design performance by saying that if both cores in a module are active, you'll get around 80% the throughput performance of having two separate cores without any shared resources, but at a significantly lower amount of power consumption. On the other hand, looking at Intel's Hyperthreading, you're lucky to get more than 15% throughput increases on an out-of-order execution processor, but still with a noticeable increase in power consumption. Hyperthreading is much more beneficial on in-order execution processors like the Atom or the Xbox 360s PowerPC CPU, as the pipeline is stalled significantly more often.

    For Zambezi at the desktop, one also has to take into consideration how the power saving settings are in the OS (likely configurable by an Administrator). Say a Bulldozer's cores are set up like this (grouped in twos):

    12|34|56|78

    One can choose from a maximum power saving profile, or a maximum performance profile. Let's say we are executing a program that takes advantage of a quad core, and no additional cores (like many games). If we're interested in maximum power saving, we'd see these cores activated:

    12|34

    On the other hand, if we're more interested in performance, we'd see this:

    1|3|5|7

    In the latter case, no resources would be shared (other than L3), and we'd have each individual core running with a full 2MB L2 cache and complete access to the FPU. As most games don't take advantage of more than 4 cores, and because we are enthusiasts here, we'll probably select that option. But others (especially mobile users) will likely opt for the first.
  9. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    I didnt knew that about sandy . Thanks :)


    Can we program that or Windows doing accidentally ? Ιf windows change that in application (plan a, plan b), did we have delay ?
    Last edited: May 4, 2011
  10. devguy

    devguy

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,239 (0.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    Location:
    SoCal
    It will likely be a windows power setting, or some AMD driver one has to install. As for

    I never said that. The L2 cache is dynamically allocated to a core depending on its needs at the time. If it only needs 512k, then it'll be split .5MB/1.5MB. If it needs more, it'll request more, and either be denied or approved. Really cool, huh?
  11. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    This chart is a load of shiste, they compare the x6 to a 950, which is socket 1366, then in the feature comparison compare it to a socket 1156 which is a truelly dead socket, AMD can't even inflate it's own numbers without failing.
  12. rem82 New Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Yes I understand is dynamically. But if windows change from plan A to plan B in application, ,because cores want bigger cache, did we have delay ?

    Plan A (12l34)

    Plan B (1l3l5l7)
  13. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,855 (8.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,413
    [​IMG]
    [H]@RD5TUFF says thanks.
  14. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Did I catch a nerv?

    The reality is this I personally believe the chart is a well done troll rather than a leaked internal presentation slide, I personally want AMD to succeed so we can get a price war going, but it's hard to believe that AMD has to power to change their tune and go from the red headed step child to the favorite son (see what I did there). On the other hand I kinda want to see AMD fail so all the fanboy trolls can cry and be butt hurt, but cheaper chips trumps the pleasure of fanboy tears.
  15. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,855 (8.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,413
    Whatever you gotta tell yourself.
    [H]@RD5TUFF says thanks.
  16. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA

    Awwww QQ ?

    [​IMG]

    Just for you;)
  17. devguy

    devguy

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,239 (0.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    Location:
    SoCal
    I haven't been told those kinds of specifics yet. I doubt Windows itself would just change power plans without manual intervention, so I don't see that happening. As for delays when changing cache size, there might be a couple special AMD instructions that execute to do that, but I doubt it'd be more than that. No human noticeable delay...

    I also have little idea how the module determines how much L2 to allocate per core. If I had to guess, I'd say something like how a mutable array (like an ArrayList) manages it's back bone array data structure, where if it gets full past a certain threshold, then it requests more. Alternatively, if it is empty past a threshold, it reorganizes, and frees space. Just a guess.
    Last edited: May 4, 2011
  18. mechtech

    mechtech

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    Messages:
    251 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    18
  19. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Nope it's a self portrait . . . see you can clearly see the camera in my hand . . .
    theoneandonlymrk and Ev1LrYu say thanks.
  20. Jonap_1st

    Jonap_1st New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    288 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Location:
    South Green Jakarta
    so did i believe the graph? no.. i'm just showing for what TPU had posted before.

    like everybody said, i'll wait for the *real* benchs..
  21. 20mmrain

    20mmrain

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,765 (1.59/day)
    Thanks Received:
    824
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    If I understand this right the 8 core Bulldozer is on par with the 4 core 2600k. The only reason the P score is higher is it was tested with the 6670 GPU? Or am I reading this wrong.... valid question not trying to guess I really think I am reading this wrong? Or am I ???
  22. Imsochobo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    514 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Location:
    I live in Norway, in the province Buskerud.
    what i'm guessing it is for krisna which will have 8 "bulldozer cores" and 6670 or something like that.
    But I have no clue if that's how it is or not, if its a non apu bulldozer with dedicated graphics then its bye bye amd...
    But I sincerely hope not.
  23. mybestfriendskip New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    45 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    You are not reading it wrong. It takes AMD 8 cores to be equal to Intel's 4 - something AMD should be embarrassed of publishing.

    The 6670 GPU is part of AMD's Vision/Fusion APU where the CPU and GPU are integrated like with Intel's HD graphics.

    AMD's graphics are obviously going to be stronger than Intel's HD graphics so therefore AMD's the P score is higher.

    As far as value goes, AMD wins if the 8 core pricing is right because the CPU is on par with the 2600k but the graphics is MUCH better - so a better value over Intel's offering....especially if the 6670 GPU is better than what GPU the customer currently has in his/her machine.

    As far as CPU power, AMD inappropriately chose "bulldozer" as their codename...I believe it's clear who has the bulldozer. lol

    BL
  24. Nesters New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Messages:
    121 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Why actually? If die size is around the same, overall chip performance is what really matters. Sure anyone could want to see AMD beating Intel clock-per-clock but if they can find different approach to fight against Intel and maybe even succeed in the long run - that's their choise.
  25. filip007

    filip007 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Messages:
    151 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Location:
    Slovenia
    This new AMD CPU is complex that's for sure, how it will handle that's unknown, it's a bit harder for AMD if nobody supports AMD, it's still in Intel shadow one way or another.

    AMD is going for the future here, home system don't need 8 cores or 6 because it's not so far supported like professional software is, sure some exceptions are there but still, that's workload for massive streams of data it's not about the same as high GHz does it, so this CPU will be just ok if proper prised but still if it's FX than i don't know for what it will be than.

    Winrar supports max 4 cores "developer info", the rest is just HT bumping the data so AMD will go fast in Winrar that's for sure.

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

Share This Page