Anyone else extremely disappointed in jaguar? Competing in laptops for 350-500$ is a horrible idea. And to think this is what's going to be in the next consoles. Man.
You do realise that the Jaguar in the consoles is a prototype Jaguar and far more robust than in AMD's mainline of products, Sony and MS specially ordered these cores at a much higher cost and hence they deliver much more performance.
I don't see what is so disappointing, it was comparitive with the i3 with all round lower clocks and RAM frequencies and did what was expected, opperate on low power consumption if you are expecting a supercomputer from a 15w part then you were living in la la land.
Anyone else extremely disappointed in jaguar? Competing in laptops for 350-500$ is a horrible idea. And to think this is what's going to be in the next consoles. Man.
The price is always high at the start. AMD is expecting ultrathin laptops with these at the $500 mark and normal laptops at $350. Price will drop pretty fast once supply is ready I would assume.
I'm far impressed with these 15w A4's. Shoot, AMD is getting straight jiggy with intel here. People wanted lower power consumption, they're getting it!
Also, whats in the consoles are 8 core CPUs, not these little quad cores being benchmarked. I also heard they're clocked higher? There's still a lot of speculation floating around on consoles. It's almost like a totally different beast. It's lean like an Olympic runner, but I don't see it lifting heavy.
Again the consoles are custom Jaguar designs not mainstream Jaguar and hence a lot more powerful. And again the A4 5000 competes with 35w Laptops when its strength is premised for ultrathins and tablets.
Price wise the Kabini should be able to replace every E series E300/E350/E1200 box out there and destroy it in performance. Those are in the $250-$350 price range when you go into a retail store like Walmart.
Also, if you consider, even the US Government has conceded Linux is worthy by switching over. Many public/private sector entities are switching over because it's more efficient, and has better security than windows.
Not just no, but hell no. The US Government most certainly isn't using Linux as a desktop OS and NT (Server 2003/2008/2012) is the prevalent server OS. You only see Linux is net-app style devices (McAfee security devices, RPAs, IDS and various other utility systems) or where they deploy ESXi. For heavy processing Solaris is the preferred choice, previously on SPARC but their now using x86 due to costing. This is pretty much the same thing you see in Corporate America and for a very good reason.
Microsoft provides an extremely wide range of management services and solutions along with best practices and a very robust credentialing system. That all works to reduce man-hour requirements for administration of IT services which is the largest driver of IT cost. A handful of college students with Linux knowledge may be able to provide services for small business's but absolutely doesn't work for Corporate solutions. The predominate Linux for big corporate isn't Ubuntu but RHEL and it's twin sibling CentOS. Anyone who's planning on working Linux in big IT needs to be intimately familiar with RHEL.
In July 2001[1] the White House started moving their computers to a Linux platform based on Red Hat Linux and Apache HTTP Server.[2] The installation was completed in February 2009.[3][4] In October 2009 the White House servers adopted Drupal, an open source content management system software distribution.[5][6]
The United States Department of Defense uses Linux - "the U.S. Army is “the” single largest install base for Red Hat Linux"[13] and the US Navy nuclear submarine fleet runs on Linux.[14]
In April 2006, the US Federal Aviation Administration announced that it had completed a migration to Red Hat Enterprise Linux in one third of the scheduled time and saved 15 million dollars
The US National Nuclear Security Administration operates the world's tenth fastest supercomputer, the IBM Roadrunner, which uses Red Hat Enterprise Linux along with Fedora as its operating systems.[34]
In June 2012 the US Navy signed a US$27,883,883 contract with Raytheon to install Linux ground control software for its fleet of vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) Northrup-Grumman MQ8B Fire Scout drones. The contract involves Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland, which has already spent $5,175,075 in preparation for the Linux systems.[45]
The government hasn't what? If the White House and the DoD and all military installations and congressional offices use Linux...then what part of the government that's left wouldn't be using it?
Even the major stock exchanges run Linux:
The New York Stock Exchange uses Linux to run its trading applications.[86]
The London Stock Exchange uses the Linux based MillenniumIT Millennium Exchange software for its trading platform and predicts that moving to Linux from Windows will give it an annual cost savings of at least £10 million ($14.7 million) from 2011-12[87][88]
EDIT: Of course it's RHEL, and they were changing the DoD over to Linux in pieces before I quit working for them 13 years ago...that was the "test bed" for the rest of the Government offices to my knowledge. The logic was Linux is free, and can be shaped into their demands for security much more easily than windows.
"It's been coming" has been said for 20 years now, it's still not here. And you should go reread what was posted, I made a special comment that the anomaly for Linux adoption is webservers due to how much better Apache is over IIS. Though if you want to get into real webapp power your talking something like Oracle Weblogic (they bought BEAWLS) though that can get crazy expensive with all the components needed to make it work.
Linux will never see desktop prevalence in corporate IT, and definitely not DoD systems. I can speak with the utmost authority on the DoD side. The central issue is automated management, something that RHEL (CentOS) is so far behind in it's just not a contest. Thing is, Linux is not a full Operating System, it's only a Kernel and set of standards for inter-compatibility. RHEL, CentOS, SUSE, Ubunto, those are actual Operating Systems as used in practice. Due to their open nature there is limited incentive for heavily monetized R&D work. You don't spend 11 million USD developing a solution just to have your competitor swipe it and use it for free. The Linux community demands openness and thus create it's own barrier to growth. It takes a company like Apple to actually create a feasible mass marketable product out of "Open Source" (BSD in their case).
Anyhow the cost of the "OS" is absolutely nothing compared to the cost of support, Installation & Engineering (I&E) and Operations and Maintenance (O&M). If anything you can claim that the concept of Linux scared the piss out of MS and forced them to develop solid cheap (relatively speaking) solutions for the I&E and O&M components of IT. SCCM is a good example of that in practice.
The DoD, and particularly the intelligence community in the DoD, have more programmers than anyone else in the world. They can make modifications that are not open source based on national security reasons. Even Linux developers cannot argue with that.
Additionally, they were already using Linux desktops in many areas of the DoD 13 years ago.
What makes you think they're not now? Most of them were on RH back then...which I would imagine hasn't changed, or if they're bothering with a newer distro it's likely Fedora (for obvious reasons).
The government has to pay the coders/programmers/IT guys that they have anyway...they're all salary. So working 40 hours or 100 hours per week makes no difference, the pay is the same. They have the manpower, and the man hours, to be able to do whatever they want with any Linux distro they want.
You're talking to someone who was in the intelligence community working on hardware...
Additionally, if you think the white house is still running windows exclusively...you'd be wrong. The majority of desktops in the white house run Linux. The president's PC may be windows, or something like that. However, the staff have transitioned since the Bush Administration. That was one of the more "progressive" things Bush did for the country (it also helped trim quite a bit of fat from the budget by doing so...but I digress).
IPv6 connectivity from anywhere. Only a few of the DREN sites planned to support IPv6, yet the IPv6
pilot wanted to offer IPv6 connectivity to the entire HPCMP user community, including users at sites that
only supported IPv4. Providing connectivity was complicated by the variety of operating systems on the
users’ desktop computers, which included versions of Linux, UNIX, and a lesser number of PCs on Microsoft Windows, and Apple OS X.
Connectivity was provided by installing a pair of Hexago4 Gateway6 tunnel brokers at a total cost of less
than $70,000, one for users at IPv4-only DREN sites, and one for users on the Internet5.
The Intelligence community is wed to Sybase & Solaris 10 & OWLS. I know this not from some far gone age but from what I do on a day to day basis, their my primary customer. The Ops community is wed to Oracle & Solaris 10 & OWLS, both groups use SPARC hardware but due to costing are now exploring x86 alternatives, lots of recoding of their core apps needs to be done before that's possible. Even the logistics community prefers to use Solaris for their backend servers with a NT client.
The DoD is most definitely not using linux for desktop use (and won't anytime soon). It's MS for core services + MS Clients with everything else being a PM controlled product. I know for a fact that the Intel and Ops community is using XP SP3 as their current baseline client OS due to software compatibility with GCCS & JOPES. The service branch's themselves have mostly moved onto Vista and are now transitioning to Windows 7. If you had a CAC and actually worked in that environment you would be able to go download the AGM and pre-STIGed images. The security accreditation and requirements pretty much rule Linux out as a desktop product. Code openess has never been an issue for the DoD as they can get access to any manufacturers code (yes even MS's) to determine FIPS 140 compliance amongst others (technically NSA does this not the DoD).
Anyhow that's a discussion WAY outside this thread. Just know that you've done the equivalent of walking into MS HQ and proceeded to tell their developers how their code works.
I am well aware of the way the DoD apprises things...and openness of code was never a problem...security loopholes were the issues. I am not going to dive any further into that, as I can't really elaborate on the subject...
Anyone else extremely disappointed in jaguar? Competing in laptops for 350-500$ is a horrible idea. And to think this is what's going to be in the next consoles. Man.
The major change between AMD’s Temash/Kabini Jaguar implementations as what’s done in the consoles is really all of the unified memory addressing work and any coherency that’s supported on the platforms. Memory buses are obviously very different as well, but the CPU cores themselves are pretty much identical to what we’ve outlined here.
kabini vs arm/i5. Even ARM's A15 is 40% slower than kabini at a faster clock speed. The best ARM Gpu is 50% of kabini. ARM isn't taking over DT any time soon.
The interesting matchup will be the 4W temash vs atom.
Kabini hit the power numbers easily on the cpu side, coming in at only 11.5W for total system power during the test.
Anyone else extremely disappointed in jaguar? Competing in laptops for 350-500$ is a horrible idea. And to think this is what's going to be in the next consoles. Man.
You do realise that the Jaguar in the consoles is a prototype Jaguar and far more robust than in AMD's mainline of products, Sony and MS specially ordered these cores at a much higher cost and hence they deliver much more performance.
I don't see what is so disappointing, it was comparitive with the i3 with all round lower clocks and RAM frequencies and did what was expected, opperate on low power consumption if you are expecting a supercomputer from a 15w part then you were living in la la land.
I guess so, From a performance perspective it looks like its half the performance of Trinity looking at the majority of the benchmarks since it has half the Power consumption i suppose its ok. I was just going by Toms reviewer and I would never Pay more then 400-500$ for a tablet with this in it and i wouldn't pay more then 350$ for a laptop with this in it. I still don't get this whole tablet,Ultrabook thing anyways. Me i'd rather have a A10 Richland laptop and a smartphone on the go.
Also i would LOVE to see how "supercharged" this design is for the consoles and what that actually means outside of marketing. I hope sites review that when it comes out because if it has anything short of Piledrivers IPC its going to be quite pathetic honestly from a consoles viewpoint.
Supercharged means full HSA and HUMA. it means software innovation will come from the consoles in droves, and it will benefit kaveri/steamroller dramatically.
Anyone else extremely disappointed in jaguar? Competing in laptops for 350-500$ is a horrible idea. And to think this is what's going to be in the next consoles. Man.
You do realise that the Jaguar in the consoles is a prototype Jaguar and far more robust than in AMD's mainline of products, Sony and MS specially ordered these cores at a much higher cost and hence they deliver much more performance.
I don't see what is so disappointing, it was comparitive with the i3 with all round lower clocks and RAM frequencies and did what was expected, opperate on low power consumption if you are expecting a supercomputer from a 15w part then you were living in la la land.
PS4 and XBO Jaguar parts are not prototypes, they are APUs with custom Sony/MS intellectual property added on.
For example, PS4 APU might have proprietary Sony Vector Units derived from what was in Cell. This was a big thing that AMD was talking about before, "offering building blocks where clients can add their own intellectual property into a final APU."
Some infos here
http://codedivine.org/2013/05/25/amd-jaguar-vs-amd-llano-k10-at-same-clocks/
Would have been nice to see powerconsumption. Though if it is like with the pentium, jaguar using half the power of the a8, (which I would say might be roughly the case as the a8-3500 has a tdp of 35w) It would be quite awesome. 80% of the performance using half the power.
Also i would LOVE to see how "supercharged" this design is for the consoles and what that actually means outside of marketing. I hope sites review that when it comes out because if it has anything short of Piledrivers IPC its going to be quite pathetic honestly from a consoles viewpoint.
Supercharged by having twice as many cores (8 vs 4), and 6-9 times more Graphic compute units. Kabini only has 2 CU compared to Xbox (12 CU) and PS4 (18 CU). PS4 also gets GDDR5 and Xbox One has 32mb eDRAM. The extra custom stuff is likely just for DRM but combined that easily qualifies the term supercharged.
Anyone have any idea on what Steamroller's performance increases would be over Piledriver?
Pretty sure no1 does right now, other then AMD. Hopefully. it is at least 15% stronger clock for clock with Piledriver (single thread) though, and even if it is only 10% stronger, I will still buy the 8 core chip because Intel's Failwell give AMD more time to catch up!
I don't think IPC is going to be as important anymore to get your game to run and look fantastic. Now that the console coding will be PC friendly, I think the difference between an i7 and a FX 8350 are going to be minor compared to what it was. I think AMD is going to have the CPU department in the bag with steamroller. We're soon going back to the days when investing into a GPU was far important than investing into a CPU.
I'm predicting more benchmarks are going to start looking like BF3 With this 8 core support.
Also i would LOVE to see how "supercharged" this design is for the consoles and what that actually means outside of marketing. I hope sites review that when it comes out because if it has anything short of Piledrivers IPC its going to be quite pathetic honestly from a consoles viewpoint.
Supercharged by having twice as many cores (8 vs 4), and 6-9 times more Graphic compute units. Kabini only has 2 CU compared to Xbox (12 CU) and PS4 (18 CU). PS4 also gets GDDR5 and Xbox One has 32mb eDRAM. The extra custom stuff is likely just for DRM but combined that easily qualifies the term supercharged.
But it still has the horrible single threaded performance(60-90% of a K10 Consoles CPU is basically a 1.2Ghz 8 core Athlon II), why didn't they just go with a 4 Core Processor at a clock speed of 3.2Ghz.
The only thing is, how long it will take games to scale better against multiple cores? Will it be 2014 or 2015? Will the new consoles even affect PC gaming? In the coming years more cores will eventually take over, but by then Piledriver and Bulldozer may be too old to benefit. I haven't even run into a game that stresses my current system out yet, but I still want to upgrade for some future proofing (and I want to be able to max Sims 4 out next year).
Many mainstream consoles games take between 9 to 12 months to get onto shelves. We'll just assume an average of 10 months. If the PS4 and XBO launch in November 2013, excluding the release of pre-development and launch titles, a true flood of additional games will begin to arrive in September 2014. So you aren't wrong to expect this shift in game processing expectations to occur until 2014+. However, I don't anticipate Bulldozer or Piledriver 8XXX chips to be incapable of console port gaming by that time.
I don't think IPC is going to be as important anymore to get your game to run and look fantastic. Now that the console coding will be PC friendly, I think the difference between an i7 and a FX 8350 are going to be minor compared to what it was. I think AMD is going to have the CPU department in the bag with steamroller. We're soon going back to the days when investing into a GPU was far important than investing into a CPU.
I'm predicting more benchmarks are going to start looking like BF3 With this 8 core support.
Yea the 8 steamroller cores should outdo a 4 core i5 with the new consoles, which means if you bought an AM3+ board, it could be the best investment of your life!
But it still has the horrible single threaded performance(60-90% of a K10 Consoles CPU is basically a 1.2Ghz 8 core Athlon II), why didn't they just go with a 4 Core Processor at a clock speed of 3.2Ghz.
Power consumption. The Jaguar cores are twice as efficient per watt, which leaves room for the 18 CU GPU.
You're looking at a 130 Watt GPU coupled with a 40 Watt CPU. That adds up to quite a beast in a single chip.
![url]](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F%5Burl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fimages.anandtech.com%2Fdoci%2F6979%2FSlide37.jpg%5Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fimages.anandtech.com%2Fdoci%2F6979%2FSlide37.jpg%5B%2Furl%5D&hash=4f320653e42a31c442ba64a3852e2547)
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram