AMD answers some questions about Bulldozer

Discussion in 'Processors and motherboards AMD' started by Snappy, Dec 1, 2011.

  1. Snappy

    Snappy Member Guru

    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    ATI 5850
  2. bonob

    bonob Master Guru

    Messages:
    339
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    radeon hd 6970 2 go
    it's always the same problem, AMD just don't hav enought weight in term of money and market share to push developper to use their specific architecture, where both intel and nvidia can do it and when a software is not optimized for a specific brand AMD/Intel and AMD/nvidia are very close in term of perf. Look at the post http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=354707 how can you explain such a difference in the same app, i know sandy bridge is faster clock for clock but in that example it's enormous with the same cpu clock.
     
  3. Raider0001

    Raider0001 Master Guru

    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    41
    GPU:
    PowerColor RX 6800
    Wait for proper module implementation in windows 7/8!

    Im so excited now, just cant wait for windows 7 scheduler update, GO AMD GO !
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2011
  4. bfburkejr

    bfburkejr New Member

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    nvidia gt240 512meg
    AMD Interlagos(Bulldozer)CPU ROCK and at a great price, they entered the Guiness book of World Records as THE fastest CPU on the planet. CRAY uses them in their top super computers. The fastest 16 core chip idles at 2.6Ghz and maxes out at 3.0ghz for somecores and 3.3Ghz for the others for 140 watts($list $1019 - less when bought on the market when they reach it). The Intel Xenon 8 core chips are thousands the AMD 8 core running at 3.0-3.6ghz are WELL under $1000...closer to $500 I think. CRAY uses the Hgh efficiencey 8 core's that dram like 65085 wgat's, when there is 250,000 cpu's it makes a HUGE difference in operating costs, both in electricity to run the chips and to cool them. AMD is also opening up some of the Interlagos for overclocking gamers! And now that they own ATI they own the GPU market. Of course many won't agree, do the research. AMD are number crunchers and have more flops per watt by a huge margin. Don't write them off just yet...
     

  5. jhelsas

    jhelsas Master Guru

    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    PC HD 7970
    Could you confirm this point?

    I Would like to see those numbers, if possible both on performance/W AND total performance.

    I do number crunching daily, so this kind of information is very important to me. I was looking on some people using the IBT on the 2600K to test an OC, and I found something that I don't know if I was looking wrong or not.

    The 2600K was performing between 40 Gflops and 48 Gflops, so, almost the same per-core performance/core than my 1090T(that makes 60 Gflops, goes to 69 Gflops @ 3.6).

    So, unless I read wrong, and I hope so, I don't know what to think. I was hoping something like 80-120 Gflops from the 2600K, based on gaming and Drystone and Whetstone(Sisoft Sandra) difference. Do anyone have linpack performance for the Sandy-bridge?

    Edit:
    I read wrong about 2600K aparently. I found that people are reaching 107-110 Gflops with it @ 4.8 GHz on linpack, what would give about 75 Gflops @ 3.4 GHz, WAY more core performance than my 1090T.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2011
  6. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    IMO the biggest problem that AMD faces is the marketing disaster that BD was. It should not have focused on the 8 integer cores but at the 4 BD modules with 8 threads total, then explain away that the software cant fully utilize the 2 threads per module design. I like the BD architecture and I do think it's ahead of it's time. Another AMD short fall is it out-sources it's production.
     
  7. Xtreme1979

    Xtreme1979 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,328
    Likes Received:
    26
    GPU:
    ROG Strix RTX 2070
    Was going to say in linpack I get 92-93 Gflops at 4.0ghz.
     
  8. Raider0001

    Raider0001 Master Guru

    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    41
    GPU:
    PowerColor RX 6800
    Who told You how much threads per module Bulldozer uses ? 8 core bulldozer is in fact 4 threaded monster!
    but not now, windows needs a scheduler update... (remember old AMD slogan ? Future is fusion ?)
    BD cant utilize 2 threads on module, 2 threads on module are sequentially distributed. So, when You are using 2 threads on 1 module, module is saying now its time for core 1 to act and then its time for core 2 to act, not at the same time...
    When We get scheduler update, we gain 10% in games performance and that means a whole lot more percentage in real life performance.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2011
  9. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Dude don't attack me like I'm and idiot. If you look at how the BD architecture is setup you will see that an 8 core 8120 or 8150 is 4 modules with two integer cores in each totaling 8 cores. Each of those cores can handle one thread meaning that one module has two full threads (see where I'm going now). But if I take your explanation then the BD is not a 8 core chip and AMD is falsely claiming that they have the first 8 core cpu. All I was saying is that if they would have made it out as essentially a "4 core" cpu that can handle 8 full threads then it may not have been as much of a let down. Don't get me wrong I am by no means an intel fanboy, I wanted AMD to kick the $hit out of intel with the BD but it did not happen. And on the windows scheduler thing 10% is max expected average will be about 7% improvement I think the i7 will still be top dog for a bit longer:bang:, but for everyone's sake I hope AMD has something up their sleeve that will throw us all for a loop.:infinity:
     

Share This Page