Page 84 of 100 FirstFirst ... 34445464748182838485868794 ... LastLast
Results 1,329 to 1,344 of 1594

Thread: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

  1. #1329
    Oh Crumbs.... Biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N. Yorkshire
    Posts
    11,193
    Thanks
    1,394
    Thanked
    1,091 times in 833 posts
    • Biscuit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD 2700X (Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Patriot Viper 2 @ 3466MHz
      • Storage:
      • 500GB WD Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-V359
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 80/20

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by watercooled View Post
    It is?
    http://forums.hexus.net/pc-hardware/...over-soon.html

  2. #1330
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    This chap raises an interesting point about AMD moving to a bulk process:

    http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6242

  3. #1331
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,978
    Thanks
    778
    Thanked
    1,586 times in 1,341 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 5900X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 2TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 39 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 900Mb/900Mb (CityFibre FttP)

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by Biscuit View Post
    Not even sure its running at 1333, il have to check when im back home. I did notice the timings it was running were quite low though, like cas6.
    It was like £5 more and i figured it worth it if RAM Is set to get way more expensive in the coming months, if not me for a friend or family.
    Well the E450 is supposed to be capable of 1333 at least.

    My E350 has 1333 ram in it, but only runs up to 1066. Again, wasn't any cost difference at the time and it might get used somewhere else in the years ahead that *can* make use of the speed.

  4. #1332
    Oh Crumbs.... Biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N. Yorkshire
    Posts
    11,193
    Thanks
    1,394
    Thanked
    1,091 times in 833 posts
    • Biscuit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD 2700X (Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Patriot Viper 2 @ 3466MHz
      • Storage:
      • 500GB WD Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-V359
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 80/20

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Well the E450 is supposed to be capable of 1333 at least.

    My E350 has 1333 ram in it, but only runs up to 1066. Again, wasn't any cost difference at the time and it might get used somewhere else in the years ahead that *can* make use of the speed.
    Exactly, im not sweating over the ~4 quid extra it was, not harming anything.

    I also have a Samsung 830 SSD to stick in there... stupid lenovo and their 7mm slots. Looks sexy though!

  5. #1333
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,932
    Thanks
    171
    Thanked
    383 times in 310 posts
    • badass's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8Z77-m pro
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 2TB WD Green
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon RX 580
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX520W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone SG02-F
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 X64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Del U2311, LG226WTQ
      • Internet:
      • 80/20 FTTC

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by scaryjim View Post
    Interesting. It would appear that the Trinity performance testing by AMD labs used DDR3-1600, whereas the Llano testing used DDR3-1333. So the 56% graphics performance improvement will in part be down to the increased memory bandwidth available ... sneaky AMD...
    Worst case scenario for AMD, that's a 27% improvement at 1333 MHz. Still very good considering they are on the same 32nm process and Power envelope.
    "In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."

  6. #1334
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Gateshead
    Posts
    15,196
    Thanks
    1,231
    Thanked
    2,291 times in 1,874 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR4 2666
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by badass View Post
    Worst case scenario for AMD, that's a 27% improvement at 1333 MHz. Still very good considering they are on the same 32nm process and Power envelope.
    Oh, I agree completely. I just think it's snaeky of AMD to use non-comparable platforms. Also make me wonder if Trinity will benefit even more from faster RAM - 2GHz+ DDR3 is still pretty reasonably priced, AFAIK... could be possible to get even more performance out of it...

  7. #1335
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,932
    Thanks
    171
    Thanked
    383 times in 310 posts
    • badass's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8Z77-m pro
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 2TB WD Green
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon RX 580
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX520W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone SG02-F
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 X64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Del U2311, LG226WTQ
      • Internet:
      • 80/20 FTTC

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by scaryjim View Post
    That'd be a suitable conclusion if that review actually had any price comparable processors in it It has neither an E5-2630 nor an Opteron 6274, which is the midrange server point where the two processor ranges coincide, price-wise. They've attempted to produce those CPUs by disabling and downclocking higher-spec CPUs, but that's never going to give an exact representation.

    And looking at the linked chart, the Opterons are hardly incredibly slow - they turn in 93.5% of the (mocked up) roughly price equivalent Xeon's throughput performance.
    Maybe not incredibly slow then. Still not great for virtualisation since it's slower than the price equivalent processor from Intel.

    (I note the response times detailed in the power testing section of the review are far shorter - and far closer to each other - than those in the benchmarking section, indicating that the benchmarking section does *not* represent a typical usage pattern). It seems to me you're being a little unfair in your assessment...
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5553/t...-for-servers/7

    That shows a more realistic usage pattern. The response times for the 6274 are way longer than the Xeon Equivalent. Power consumption of the platform is a lot higher as well.

    On the page where the response times are similar, the price equivalent Xeon is putting more throughput out as well as having better response times.

    So, higher power consumption, lower max throughput and much worse response times than the price equivalent Xeon.
    I stand by my assertion. Bulldozer is rubbish for virtualisation.
    It's a shame really as pre Nehalem, the Opterons utterly destroyed the Equivalent Intel Processors at virtualisation. Barcelona was way ahead of its time virtualisation wise. Unfortunately for AMD, that was also it's Achilles heel. One of the things that helped its virtualisation performance was it's large, complex TLB. Unfortunately, the TLB bug caused them problems. An unfortunate situation that could have just as easily happened to Intel (and has done in the past - FDIV bug, anyone?)

    In fact, Bulldozer is pretty useless for most things. On the desktop, the cheaper to buy, much cheaper to manufacture Intel 2500k is a huge percentage faster in all but the most heavily threaded workloads, and where the FX-8150 does win, it only just wins. More than 4 cores is generally a waste of time on desktop workloads.
    In the server side, where performance can scale almost linearly with cores, the Bulldozer cores are so much slower than the Intel ones that Intel CPU's with less than half as many cores are as fast or faster.
    So if you're an extremely niche desktop user that has a workload that can properly saturate more than 6* threads, bulldozer is for you. Any other user and it's too expensive for it's performance and power consumption.

    * I chose 6 threads because in any workload with 6 or less saturated threads, the 2500k will probably still be faster due to its much faster cores.

    It may seem that i'm being inconsistent in that I think Trinity may have a chance to shine whilst I think Bulldozer is rubbish but Trinity is designed for an entirely different market and doesn't waste die space for more cores than almost any desktop user will ever use. It also looks like trinity's in for a chance of really improve lightly threaded performance - something all desktop workloads experience on a regular basis.

    Add to that the rumored quicksync equivalent and you've got something vastly better.
    "In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."

  8. #1336
    Oh Crumbs.... Biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N. Yorkshire
    Posts
    11,193
    Thanks
    1,394
    Thanked
    1,091 times in 833 posts
    • Biscuit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD 2700X (Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Patriot Viper 2 @ 3466MHz
      • Storage:
      • 500GB WD Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-V359
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 80/20

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Quote Originally Posted by badass View Post
    It's a shame really as pre Nehalem, the Opterons utterly destroyed the Equivalent Intel Processors at virtualisation. Barcelona was way ahead of its time virtualisation wise. Unfortunately for AMD, that was also it's Achilles heel. One of the things that helped its virtualisation performance was it's large, complex TLB. Unfortunately, the TLB bug caused them problems. An unfortunate situation that could have just as easily happened to Intel (and has done in the past - FDIV bug, anyone?)
    Could it be a case of the BD architecture being ahead of its time? Perhaps virtualisation on BD is something which which is yet to be optimised for?

  9. #1337
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Gateshead
    Posts
    15,196
    Thanks
    1,231
    Thanked
    2,291 times in 1,874 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR4 2666
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    *shrug* I'll happily give you that it's not as good as the Xeon. But, since you've accepted that they're not incredibly slow, to also call then "rubbish" at virtualisation seems unfair too. They're actually perfectly acceptable at virtualisation. The thing is the Xeon's are better than acceptable, at about the same price. That makes the Opterons poor value, but it doesn't make them "rubbish".

    I think we've all accepted that Bulldozer failed to acheive it's target of making AMD properly competitive again, but branding it "rubbish" and "useless" seems unnecessarily harsh. An FX4100 has more than enough power to meet the computing needs of 99% of computer users. It's not necessarily the best choice, but that makes it neither "rubbish" nor "useless".

    As you say, it looks like Trinity might be a decent improvement, and if it is that bodes well for the future Piledriver-based server CPUs. It's rare for a new architecture to be a massive improvement over the incumbent (think Netburst P4!) and all the signs are that AMD can address the deficits in bulldozer and make it competitive in the future. How effectively they do that only time will tell, but they have a decent track record of architecture tweaks in the recent past (i.e. Phenom I/II) and given that bulldozer already excels in a (very!) small number of workloads (something Phenom I didn't) they may yet produce something special.

  10. #1338
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Intel seems very annoyed with Sea Micro:

    http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise...l-took-a-pass/

    It is now basically calling them useless!! Bahahahaha! Considering that Intel rarely comments on these sorts of things it does sound out of character.

    What a load of BS,Intel was very interested in working with the very same company due to its use of Intel Atom CPUs:

    http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2011/09/12/5768899.htm

    http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/02/...ew-intel-chip/

    So,if they are so useless why did they ask them to participate in IDF and give them first access to certain CPUs??

    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 08-03-2012 at 06:48 PM.

  11. #1339
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    I just saw this:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/briancau...market-slumps/

    So the worldwide server market is slumping and if anything a move to more cost effective and cheaper servers might be quite important.

    The problem is Intel does not do cheap,they do high margin. Their "cheap" CPU is Atom. I wonder what Sea Micro was using!! Hmmmm??

  12. #1340
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,731
    Thanks
    230
    Thanked
    151 times in 132 posts
    • Sputnik's system
      • Motherboard:
      • J&W 790GX Extreme
      • CPU:
      • AMD Phenom II 720be
      • Memory:
      • OCZ DDR2-6400
      • PSU:
      • Enermax

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    I noticed some of the Athlon quad cores are now socket FM1 are the Athlons all going to become FM1 ?

  13. Received thanks from:

    Kumagoro (09-03-2012)

  14. #1341
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    11,478
    Thanks
    1,541
    Thanked
    1,029 times in 872 posts

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    The FM1 Athlons are simply Llano with failed/disabled IGP. There is no specific Athlon die in production to my knowledge.

  15. Received thanks from:

    Sputnik (09-03-2012)

  16. #1342
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,731
    Thanks
    230
    Thanked
    151 times in 132 posts
    • Sputnik's system
      • Motherboard:
      • J&W 790GX Extreme
      • CPU:
      • AMD Phenom II 720be
      • Memory:
      • OCZ DDR2-6400
      • PSU:
      • Enermax

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    That makes sense. I just wondered as they were socket FM1.

  17. #1343
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Gateshead
    Posts
    15,196
    Thanks
    1,231
    Thanked
    2,291 times in 1,874 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR4 2666
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Since we're on the topic of FM1 Athlons, anyone know if removing the IGP helps overclocking at all, or do they still have the problems of increasing clocks giving general system instability?

  18. #1344
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: AMD - Bulldozer Chitchat

    Interesting news about the IB Core i3 CPUs:

    http://www.donanimhaber.com/islemci/...e-ediliyor.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christm...holiday_season

    It seems that Trinity will be competing against the SB Core i3 CPUs for the timebeing.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Benchmarking clash between NVIDIA and AMD
    By GheeTsar in forum Graphics Cards
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 21-10-2010, 05:36 PM
  2. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 27-08-2010, 02:10 PM
  3. AMD price drops to follow Conroe launch
    By Steve in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 17-06-2006, 07:49 PM
  4. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 20-04-2005, 08:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •