AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

Page 226 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

szatkus

Honorable
Jul 9, 2013
382
0
10,780


My assumptions are based on existing reviews and most recent informations about Steamroller. Without any Steamroller benchmark it's the best estimation I can do.



4.4 GHz * 1.05 = 4.62 Ghz



Most software don't use GPGPU.
 

8350rocks

Distinguished


There are more and more examples of software taking advantage of OpenCL/HSA type functions to increase performance...this trend will only continue.
 

juanrga

Distinguished
BANNED
Mar 19, 2013
5,278
0
17,790
For those interested in performance per watt, I would add that Berlin APU will be a giant leap from the flagship Opteron 6386SE:

The processor boasts four next-generation "Steamroller" cores and will offer almost 8X the gigaflops per-watt compared to current AMD Opteron 6386SE processor. It will be the first server APU built on AMD’s revolutionary Heterogeneous System Architecture (HSA), which enables uniform memory access for the CPU and GPU and makes programming as easy as C++. "Berlin" is expected offer extraordinary compute per-watt that enables massive rack density. It is slated to be available in the first half of 2014.
 

8350rocks

Distinguished


FX 9590 = 4.7 GHz * 1.05 = 4.935

Also, you are basing your information using Turbo Core, of which you have no practical data. That is my point. You cannot consider Turbo for either one because you cannot reasonably expect how it will behave.

Also, most software like what? Windows 8.1? Linux OS? Mac OS? Solaris? Adobe products? Rendering programs? Media Encoders? Compression programs? Encryption programs? Games? In fact, other than MS Office and Internet browsers, most programs do support OpenCL these days...just to varying degrees.
 

8350rocks

Distinguished


I am just about done with you...if you don't knock it off, I am going to go on a rant about Intel the likes of which will make your head spin. I would like to add, the things I know about Intel you cannot possibly say anything positive about because it casts them in the absolute worst possible light.

So, having said that, I don't care about your nitpicky rubbish at all. I don't care how you attempt to claim anything is "unfair" because frankly...nothing Intel ever puts out to attempt to show any advantage of any kind is ever "fair" by your same criteria. So you're comparing apples to oranges to begin with. Like the AnTuTu benchmarks they faked recently in a competition vs. ARM processors...and this is just the first in a long line of tricks. In the industry, it's almost a running joke...seriously. No one even looks at Intel's "propaganda" anymore, except naïve consumers, which is sadly their target anyway.

If you were more knowledgeable about how things really are in the PC world, you would know and understand what I am talking about.

I have had it with Intel conversation in this thread, and if you say one more word about any tech company that has a first letter of I in their name, I am going to go nuclear about Intel.

Do you understand?

Am I perfectly clear?

Do you have any questions as to what will happen if you mention Intel again?

Have I left any doubt?

You will get a text wall that will make you extremely depressed and rip the "Intel Inside" poster off the ceiling above your bed...

Understand?

Are we good?

NO MORE INTEL IN THIS THREAD
 

juanrga

Distinguished
BANNED
Mar 19, 2013
5,278
0
17,790


In magic world of Intel-Land? Maybe. In real world? No



No. Many independent measurements show that 4770k CPU can consume more power than 3770k CPU.



In that review they changed their long used x264 software by a different one... optimized for Intel. Use software optimized for AMD and roles will change. Their measurement of energy was also a bit high.



The 9590 is an enthusiast line not a mainstream line. It is aimed to enthusiast users with PSU > 1200W. They don't care about power consumption. The 3960x OC to 4.6--4.8 GHz will consume much more power than the 9590.



In the magic world of Intel-Land? Sure. In real world even Anand accepts that Jaguar is the best and has not competition. The quote was given above, but please ignore it again.



Different benchmarks with different settings. Your attempt to comparison with the other benchmark is useless.



More trolling.
 

cowboy44mag

Guest
Jan 24, 2013
315
0
10,810
When the fanboyism battle starts the truth is the first "casualty of war". I think everyone on here can agree that right now, at this particular moment in time Intel has a lead over AMD. No one is debating that. The only thing in debate is that lead is not as great as Intel fanboys want to make it sound. Intel fans want to believe that AMD is 6,7,8 years behind Intel and its just not the case. Right now when you take pure computing ability without any bias Piledriver is equal to and slightly edging Sandy Bridge. Yet the Intel fan club is saying that Steamroller won't reach Sandy Bridge. And to back their claims they use bias benchmarks and pretend that the only thing that matters is single core execution while totally dismissing HSA as "junk" technology.

The only other tech debate that draws as much passion is Apple vs Android. You have the Apple fans who basically look at it as I paid more, you get what you pay for so mine is better. And you have the Android fans who point out that their Android can do anything an iPhone can. So which is better? I bet Intel is still kicking themselves for not getting a patent on a square processor with rounded edges!!

When it comes down to it AMD processors can do anything Intel processors can. They can run all the same programs with quality levels that are so close you can't tell which is better by just looking at side by side monitors. When benchmarked the difference isn't measured in hours, as Intel fans like to make it sound, but mere seconds. Intel processors can easily run twice as expensive or more. For twice the cost I want a bigger performance gap than a few seconds LOL!!
 

juanrga

Distinguished
BANNED
Mar 19, 2013
5,278
0
17,790


HSA != OpenCL...

A current problem with GPGPU is that programming model is different than for CPU. HSA solves that simplifying programmers job. Moreover HUMA allows both the CPU and GPU to work collectively, eliminating bottlenecks/latencies associated to PCI and the extra cycles spent on reading/writing/copying data from CPU to GPU and viceversa.



Take Richland CPU scores add a 20% better performance, and you obtain i5 IB CPU level for several benchmarks. It is easy. Isn't?



I gave a slide showing the exponential increase in software supporting GPU acceleration: web browsers, compression software, image editing...

This will include software which is now under active development: games, spreadsheets...

There are software, such as word processing that will not benefit from GPU, but that is the kind of software for which even Celerons and A4s have enough performance. Or do you need a 9590 or a 3960x to write a letter in Word/Writer? :)
 

Cazalan

Distinguished
Sep 4, 2011
2,672
0
20,810


Actually I was the one that first pointed out the FMA support as a possible reason for the disparity. Later I found a much slower Sandy bridge Mac with SSD that broke that theory having over 4k score.

As I said before the only way to isolate the CPU on that test is if you ran it from a RAMDisk. I dropped talking about it because the benchmark is too specific to be useful.
 

noob2222

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2007
2,722
0
20,860


+1

I especially love the TR efficiency testing method. x264 only.

We've devised a new x264 test, which involves one of the latest builds of the encoder with AVX2 and FMA support.

seeing as x264 is open source, does that mean their version is compiled with ICC? such that intel cpus use the avx2 and fma support while AMD is reduced to sse2?
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=158934

x264.png

mainconcept.png


Id say the chances are high.
 

noob2222

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2007
2,722
0
20,860


Fact 3: Wrong. single thread turbo, 3.4ghz base, 3.8 ghz max, 11.7%
multicore turbo, base 3.4 ghz, max 3.5-3.6 ghz or 3-6%

using 15% overinflates the i5 considerably especially on multicore.

SR is supposed to increase module scaling by 5-10%, though likely thats primarily going to be on the ALU side of things.

The biggest unknown with kaveri will be clock speeds and the new 28nm from GF. Will kaveri catch the i5? not likely unless clocks are really high. Will kaveri close the performance gap? yes.
 


Which, in the grand scheme of things, doesn't have THAT huge an impact on performance. Latencies, yes, adding a ms or two worth of delay. But absolute performance? Not much; maybe a tenth of a FPS or so.

Also remember the downsides: You have to hope the scheduler never assigns a serial task to a GPGPU core, or vice versa. Whats the cost of a branch mis-prediction inside the APU rather then the CPU? Cache latency timings between the CPU/APU?
 

szatkus

Honorable
Jul 9, 2013
382
0
10,780


We are talking about APU, not Centurion.



Ok, you're right, Turbo is usually unpredictable.


Almost nothing supports OpenCL these days. Few games, Photoshop for some filters, Bitcoin miners. The most CPU intensive applications I use doesn't support OpenCL.
 


I confirmed a few pages back that the 'official' x264 release was compiled against MSVC. Straight C/C++ can be compiled against basically any IDE/Compiler without modification, hence why these projects typically don't have project files included with the release.
 

hcl123

Honorable
Mar 18, 2013
425
0
10,780


I don't pretend to know the PostGre engine well... but you ARE WRONG

Usually "database engines" run their data loads from DRAM not "disks". That is, when the engine starts one of its databases, it launches all its "records" into DRAM memory (small databases like in that test so need small DRAM space, but BIG ones need big DRAM space, virtual memory files or "swap" partitions on disks wont do (edt)). That is why even those 1 socket (1P) servers can have up to 16 DIMM slots... its special for databases(other cases also apply)... its usual to have those 1P or 2P "smaller" database servers with 128 or 256GB(or more) of memory. Good luck deploying a database server and relying on disks, even SSDs, to serve a lot of clients well.

 

Cazalan

Distinguished
Sep 4, 2011
2,672
0
20,810
PGBench should be dropped like SuperPI from meaningful discussions.

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/pgbench.html

"It is very easy to use pgbench to produce completely meaningless numbers. "

"A limitation of pgbench is that it can itself become the bottleneck when trying to test a large number of client sessions. This can be alleviated by running pgbench on a different machine from the database server, although low network latency will be essential. "
 

8350rocks

Distinguished


1.) We are talking about PD Cores vs. SR cores...you think there won't be a SR FX series? Because the consensus from AMD is that it is indeed coming...

2.) OpenCL Programs:

-Adobe Photoshop
-Adobe Premiere Pro
-AIDA64
-Battlefield 3
-Final Cut Pro X
-Corel Video Studio
-Darktable
-Handbrake
-HMPP Workbench
-Image Magick
-Indigo Renderer
-LuxMark software
-MAGIX Movie Edit
-Mathematica 8
-Mental RAY
-Movie Studio HD 11
-MulticoreWare
-Linux OS
-Mac OS
-Windows 8.1
-H.264/AVC Pro Encoder
-Panorama Maker Pro 6
-Par4All
-PhotoMonkee
-POV-RAY
-PowerDirector
-ReconstructMe
-Ruby
-Stage Presence
-THEIA RT
-TotalMedia Theatre 5
-Triton Ocean SDK
-Vantage Transcode
-Vegas Pro 11
-Viewdle Face Recognition
-VLC Media Player
-V-RAY
-vReveal
-WinZip
-7zip
-WinRAR
-Wireless Security Auditor

Additionally CLCC is the Open Source OpenCL compiler for x86
 

juanrga

Distinguished
BANNED
Mar 19, 2013
5,278
0
17,790


Do you mean for ordinary games designed to maintain CPU and GPU interacting the less possible and minimizing the PCI bottleneck/latency? Or HSA enabled games where both CPU and GPU work together to move certain tasks.?



Do you believe that tasks will be assigned arbitrarily to heterogeneous cores? I don't.



I didn't wrote that.
 

szatkus

Honorable
Jul 9, 2013
382
0
10,780


At that point we were talking about APU and i5. Read carefully, context is important.


[/quotemsg]
It's not big number. And some of them even doesn't support OpenCL :>
 

8350rocks

Distinguished
FX 9590 tested thoroughly:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/62166-amd-fx-9590-review-piledriver-5ghz-16.html

62166-amd-fx-9590-review-piledriver-5ghz-16.html


Who was talking about Company of Heroes 2 not doing well on AMD systems? They must have been crazy...

Overclocking results, as I know you're all interested to hear:

They could get 5.0 GHz fulltime OC on all cores stable, They could get 5.2 GHz to boot, but it would restart on completion of boot....no BSOD or fatal errors, so they imagine that the MB they had just didn't have the juice to push the chip any further...

This means if you're going for big numbers on the 9590 on the OC, you need to get a meaty board, like an Asus Crosshair, or perhaps a good solid Gigabyte board. You need some monster VRMs and very well built construction to hold up with any extreme OC. Also, they went to some pretty high end air coolers to get those results...(Noctua NH-U14)...they said to expect a follow up article with a high end water cooling setup in the near future.
 

8350rocks

Distinguished


Which ones do not support OpenCL? That list came off OpenCL organization's website...plus, there were many others...but some were SDK's and other things which were more aimed at science communities and developers.
 




NOM NOM, I WANT ME A V10 :3!
 
Well the FX9590 has been met with rather muted acceptance but I think there are a few impressive features;

To run 5ghz across all 8 cores at the voltage needed and the total power used is actually good considering a 4.5ghz 3930K uses more power. On the benching side a lot of benches show it competitive with i7's and Intel Extreme processors and it cannot claim core advantage as the Extremes have 12 vs 8 threads so that aspect is impressive, one other feature I liked was that at 5.2ghz the most that HS/f used in the HWC benches could handle at those clocks the 9590 was around 15-20% faster than its baseclock speed so perhaps its reached that point where the massive clocks overcame the IPC limitations on the architecture.

Pricing wise its hard to knock AMD choosing that mark albeit I think maybe $500 and $330 respectively would have been better publicity but again these are not average joe chips.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.