AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[palladin9479]

At this point their is no way i could recommend anything from Amd at this point from the AM3+ side and quite honestly i'm happy i did not buy the 8350fx and instead got some new headphones.

The 63xx series is still amazing for the money, the 8350 is also pretty good provided you actually have a task that wouldn't be done with the 63xx.

The problem I still see people using is they look at absolutes and not realities. Intel's highest performing CPU is better then AMD's higher performing CPU, nobody doubts that. Money wise it's incredibly hard to not recommend the $119 USD FX6300 for lots of builds. The FX8350 itself $170 USD with the FX8320 being $160. The only Intel CPU in that range is the i3 with the occasional low power i5 dipping into the 83xx range. So many people want to do a "well the fx8 can do 8 threads and so can the i7, lets compare them", or "the fx4 is the low end so lets compare it to the i3" and end up with slanted results. When comparing CPU's of the same price range the conclusion changes dramatically.

Just stop and think, I have a $1600 USD graphics solution coupled with a $300 USD case and a $400~500 USD cooling solution. A $170 USD CPU is running all that without any issues and I foresee zero reasons to change it anytime soon.

It gets a lot easier to not recommend those chips when their is no upgrade path.

Vs what exactly ....

I might be getting amnesia in my semi old age but I think I remember Haswell requiring a different socket and thus new motherboard then Ivy Bridge. Yeah real "upgrade path" you got there. Plus what exactly are you upgrading? The era of Socket 7, Slot 1 / Socket A plug and play CPU's is long gone. Now every CPU iteration tends to require a different socket due to implementation of some new technology or some incompatibility with previous technology. You can expect to replace your MB CPU together every three to four years unless you buy OEM in which case you'll just buy a new system.

 

[jdwii]

At this point their is no way i could recommend anything from Amd at this point from the AM3+ side and quite honestly i'm happy i did not buy the 8350fx and instead got some new headphones.

The 63xx series is still amazing for the money, the 8350 is also pretty good provided you actually have a task that wouldn't be done with the 63xx.

The problem I still see people using is they look at absolutes and not realities. Intel's highest performing CPU is better then AMD's higher performing CPU, nobody doubts that. Money wise it's incredibly hard to not recommend the $119 USD FX6300 for lots of builds. The FX8350 itself $170 USD with the FX8320 being $160. The only Intel CPU in that range is the i3 with the occasional low power i5 dipping into the 83xx range. So many people want to do a "well the fx8 can do 8 threads and so can the i7, lets compare them", or "the fx4 is the low end so lets compare it to the i3" and end up with slanted results. When comparing CPU's of the same price range the conclusion changes dramatically.

Just stop and think, I have a $1600 USD graphics solution coupled with a $300 USD case and a $400~500 USD cooling solution. A $170 USD CPU is running all that without any issues and I foresee zero reasons to change it anytime soon.

It gets a lot easier to not recommend those chips when their is no upgrade path.

Vs what exactly ....

I might be getting amnesia in my semi old age but I think I remember Haswell requiring a different socket and thus new motherboard then Ivy Bridge. Yeah real "upgrade path" you got there. Plus what exactly are you upgrading? The era of Socket 7, Slot 1 / Socket A plug and play CPU's is long gone. Now every CPU iteration tends to require a different socket due to implementation of some new technology or some incompatibility with previous technology. You can expect to replace your MB CPU together every three to four years unless you buy OEM in which case you'll just buy a new system.

Lol F Intel this has nothing to do with them from a Amd fan standpoint why buy a AM3+ board when no future products will be coming out for it. I like to have a upgrade path when i buy something

 

[noob2222]

Seems like a problem right now no matter what cpu you buy. Fm2+ offers only quad core and low-middle motherboard options for single gpu only unluess you want to run x4 pci-e.

 

[palladin9479]

At this point their is no way i could recommend anything from Amd at this point from the AM3+ side and quite honestly i'm happy i did not buy the 8350fx and instead got some new headphones.

The 63xx series is still amazing for the money, the 8350 is also pretty good provided you actually have a task that wouldn't be done with the 63xx.

The problem I still see people using is they look at absolutes and not realities. Intel's highest performing CPU is better then AMD's higher performing CPU, nobody doubts that. Money wise it's incredibly hard to not recommend the $119 USD FX6300 for lots of builds. The FX8350 itself $170 USD with the FX8320 being $160. The only Intel CPU in that range is the i3 with the occasional low power i5 dipping into the 83xx range. So many people want to do a "well the fx8 can do 8 threads and so can the i7, lets compare them", or "the fx4 is the low end so lets compare it to the i3" and end up with slanted results. When comparing CPU's of the same price range the conclusion changes dramatically.

Just stop and think, I have a $1600 USD graphics solution coupled with a $300 USD case and a $400~500 USD cooling solution. A $170 USD CPU is running all that without any issues and I foresee zero reasons to change it anytime soon.

It gets a lot easier to not recommend those chips when their is no upgrade path.

Vs what exactly ....

I might be getting amnesia in my semi old age but I think I remember Haswell requiring a different socket and thus new motherboard then Ivy Bridge. Yeah real "upgrade path" you got there. Plus what exactly are you upgrading? The era of Socket 7, Slot 1 / Socket A plug and play CPU's is long gone. Now every CPU iteration tends to require a different socket due to implementation of some new technology or some incompatibility with previous technology. You can expect to replace your MB CPU together every three to four years unless you buy OEM in which case you'll just buy a new system.

Lol F Intel this has nothing to do with them from a Amd fan standpoint why buy a AM3+ board when no future products will be coming out for it. I like to have a upgrade path when i buy something

This isn't rational thinking as neither would any other board / product you would purchase. Your reasoning, when applied to the decision of buying / building, has you purchasing... nothing. The APU lineup doesn't even factor as they serve an entirely different market then the aforementioned platforms. The strongest APU is significantly weaker then the fx63xx which also happens to be cheaper. Physics being what they are after all.

Your building / buying a PC, you must chose a platform to base it on. In the market there are two competitors (actually three but we're leaving Via out of this) to decide. Your either going to purchase an Intel CPU and Intel MB, or a AMD CPU and AMD MB. You must chose one and both fail to qualify under your above stated reasoning as both will not have an "upgrade path" when it's time for you to actually upgrade. Both companies have a demonstrated history of switching compatibility whenever a new technology or feature is required. If anything, historically speaking, AMD has a better track record for at least trying to make that work.

Now here is what's really happening. Your feeling disappointed and betrayed as you hoped / expected something. That something didn't happen and that left you with a feeling of anger / loss, now this isn't a big deal but it's still a negative feeling associated with a particular brand / object. You can't recommend fx63xx/83xx because of your negative feeling not because of a rational objective decision. And that's ok, that's how most healthy people function, advertisement and marketing companies entire business model is based on their ability to target that emotional decision making.

 

[Cazalan]

The failure to release a product is the only thing killing DT.

.

More like a chicken and egg effect. There really isn't any new compelling software/hardware to make people want to buy high end PCs. Other things need to catch up. If a 4K monitor was $200 instead of $4000 people would need faster PCs. Or if VR headsets like Oculus got cheap people would need more powerful hardware to drive 2 high res LCDs at 60 fps.

The new Crytek engine (Ryse) looks like it can do some pretty cool stuff. Likewise with the new Frostbite engine.

 

[palladin9479]

The failure to release a product is the only thing killing DT.

.

More like a chicken and egg effect. There really isn't any new compelling software/hardware to make people want to buy high end PCs. Other things need to catch up. If a 4K monitor was $200 instead of $4000 people would need faster PCs. Or if VR headsets like Oculus got cheap people would need more powerful hardware to drive 2 high res LCDs at 60 fps.

The new Crytek engine (Ryse) looks like it can do some pretty cool stuff. Likewise with the new Frostbite engine.

Current hardware is stupidly overpowered for the vast majority of folks. Enthusiasts happen to like to build their own box's and play around, but 99.99% of the population doesn't. They just want a box that turns up, lets them browse social media / internet, work on and publish media and do basic office productivity tasks. Communication and portable media consumption has been pushed into the phone / tablet world. Gaming has gone into the console world which are themselves just cheap dedicated PC's purpose built for games. That leaves a small niche of dedicated gamers who want better experiences and are willing to pay the money for it. Or an even smaller niche of dedicated professionals who actually need high end power for their own work or research.

So yeah general purpose DT computing has slowed to a crawl cause a PC from four years ago can do it just fine. Gaming has expanded but is a small group and goes unnoticed most of the time.

 

[gman97005]

... Is the A10 7850k better than my fx 6300 that I should jump ship to FM2+

If Piledriver is an improvement over Bulldozer and Steamroller is an improvement over Piledriver then, yes..

 

[gman97005]

Is the A10 7850K the best out of the Steamroller range ?

It appears so, for the moment..

 

[Cazalan]

but it’s unlikely to stretch far enough to accommodate the full range of AMD’s product line. That’s probably part of why we see TDPs yanked down to 65W for Excavator.

Are we destined to see another clock speed drop with Carrizo ... This is whats killing the DT sales. lack of any reason to upgrade because its all a downgrade. Intel hasn't improved much over SB and it looks like AMD is going backwards.

To drop 30% TDP seems a major shift. That would likely be a 20nm GF design.

SA is saying early adopters will have it in 2014 and non-early adopter production in 2015. AMD could take a sweeter spot in the middle as yields start to improve.

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/04/02/global-foundries-talks-about-tsvs-on-20nm/

And look at that 20nm test package with 2.5D. They could put a couple memory die on there to boost performance.

 

[Cazalan]

My question is the new APU better than a 6300 CPU wise to merit a platform upgrade? I know you guys battled it out in the last couple of pages but it was painful to read so I just skimmed parts of it. Is the A10 7850k better than my fx 6300 that I should jump ship to FM2+?

Also I doubt it that AMD will quit dGPU for the reason that you still can't match top end performance with current solutions. (APU's)

I don't think AMD or Intel expect people to upgrade a 1 year old PC. I doubt anyone upgraded from ivy to haswell, or sandy to ivy. A single year doesn't make a big enough upgrade.

 

[Ags1]

I'm still using a 2008 laptop.

 

[palladin9479]

I don't think AMD or Intel expect people to upgrade a 1 year old PC. I doubt anyone upgraded from ivy to haswell, or sandy to ivy. A single year doesn't make a big enough upgrade.

That's pretty much how it works, you skip generations. I went from a 970BE to an FX8350 and I only purchased then 970BE because I needed something better then the 940BE I was using. I upgrade way more frequently then most people and even I don't see "upgrade path" as a reason to chose one platform over another.

 

[Ags1]

Spoiler

It helps when you close firefox and all my other background stuff I have running.

Ok reposed new results and surprisingly I did better. Was running coretemp and Nvidia's GPU widget and actually paid attention during the benchmark. Integer and FPU are spot on. Graphics performance is trash, Java OpenGL isn't the best language for doing these in. Geometry is accurate but texture and pixel are both severely single thread CPU bound. My one 780 was at 20~25% tops during those benchmarks while a single core was at 100%. I suggest a rewrite of those metrics as there is entirely too much CPU overhead involved with each repetition. Java OpenGL has overhead but not that much. Also found out why the memory transfer was weird, it's a test of your cache subsystem which we can all agree Intel dominates in. I don't think java has the ability to write code that would bypass the CPU's caching to actually test the IMC.

So for that benchmark, CPU performance is a pretty solid test. Graphics is mostly a test of your CPU's single thread ability and memory is a test of your cacheing subsystem. Pretty good as long as people know what each thing does. Also I was using latest 64-bit java 1.7_45.

http://www.headline-benchmark.com/results/403bbefa-261b-4637-90de-a43fe7c8fc00/403bbefa-261b-4637-90de-a43fe7c8fc00

That's what I got. I want to know what gamer did to his setup to get that seeing as its not even being detected right. The software detected my CPU right, memory wrong though(16GB) and I think it's only using one of my 780 Hydro's. Does having SLI enabled degrade it's performance?

My CPU/RAM wasn't detected at all, but it looks like it performed right as far as the benchmarking went. (2600k & 8GB 1333 DDR3) Kinda surprised Yuka's 2700k gets detected and my 2600k didn't though. More confusing, other people's 2600k got detected right... *shrugs* And I know its not OC'd right now (it was at one point, but had a few cooling issues and haven't bothered to re-OC yet), so that probably isn't it either.

I'll toy around tonight and see if I can track down what went on there.

Doesn't make sense, I'm running an fx8350 @4.8Ghz and 16Gb DDR3-1600 yet your getting 2x memory performance. And the weight of the benchmark seems to place inordinate amount of weight on memory performance for pretty much everything. Also the 770 is showing higher then a 780 hydro, hydro's are factory overclocked higher then regular 780's as they expect you to be using a decent WC setup. I'm gonna dig around, I'm thinking something is up with the memory transfer test. I know AMD's IMC is weaker then Intel's but it's not that weak, especially seeing as mine is OC'd to 2.2Ghz.

Blah, forgot my 770 is factory OC'd. Still, I'd imagine a factory OC'd 780 would still win, unless temps/throttling are REALLY coming into play.

Ok reposed new results and surprisingly I did better. Was running coretemp and Nvidia's GPU widget and actually paid attention during the benchmark. Integer and FPU are spot on. Graphics performance is trash, Java OpenGL isn't the best language for doing these in. Geometry is accurate but texture and pixel are both severely single thread CPU bound. My one 780 was at 20~25% tops during those benchmarks while a single core was at 100%. I suggest a rewrite of those metrics as there is entirely too much CPU overhead involved with each repetition. Java OpenGL has overhead but not that much. Also found out why the memory transfer was weird, it's a test of your cache subsystem which we can all agree Intel dominates in. I don't think java has the ability to write code that would bypass the CPU's caching to actually test the IMC.

So for that benchmark, CPU performance is a pretty solid test. Graphics is mostly a test of your CPU's single thread ability and memory is a test of your cacheing subsystem. Pretty good as long as people know what each thing does.

That, would do it. I'm just going to say though, for the GPU tests, a single core on my 2600k never got above ~20% or so, if memory serves.

Still, if anything, this kinda shows how hard it is to write an unbiased benchmark at the OS level. What is looks like is happening is the CPU side of the house (driver side) is actually causing my OC'd 770 to perform faster then Palladins OC'd 780, even in GPU based testing. As for the memory test, well, as Palladin stated, AMD's cache issues are going to KILL them, and there really isn't much you can do to get around this as far as testing goes.

Thanks for the comments. Palladin, I can't explain your findings on the GPU tests. For example, in the shader test the only thing that changes is the number of iterations of a loop in a shader - the geometry and draw calls are the same, so there is no reason why CPU would climb to 100%. In fact as load on the GPU goes up, the CPU should have less load as it has to do its small part less often. CPU should go up to 100% briefly when the shader is compiled, and it is possible the compilation might take longer in later tests (if the compiler 'unrolls' the loop).

Going by the number CUDA cores in your 780 and my 430, I calculate you should be seeing roughly 2-3 times more performance in the shader test.

Perhaps the issue is related to the dual-GPU configuration, or possibly to the fact that the code uses OpenGL 2.0 (for portability) and your GPU driver is doing some CPU-intensive backwards compatibility stuff. It may also be an effect that only appears for very powerful GPUs which I can't see on my more modest systems.

You are right the memory test is primarily a test of the caches - I try to overwhelm the caches by swapping blocks up to 32MB in size, but cache performance still seems to predominate.

That, would do it. I'm just going to say though, for the GPU tests, a single core on my 2600k never got above ~20% or so, if memory serves.

Well, that is what I expect to happen gamerk - this suggests to we are seeing an effect specific to running on Palladin's machine.

Honestly I believe it might be a limitation with Java OpenGL, it's never been particularly good at high performance. One of our major products we provide to customers is a modification of NASA's Whirlwind and it relies heavily on Java OpenGL, we ALWAYS have performance issues with it even on Quadro equipped systems. What version of JRE are you running on the development system? We've seen that effect performance profiles before. As for the cacheing, the only way around it is to transfer very large amounts of memory randomly. 32~128M sizes though anything larger then the L2 cache size will create a noticeably different result.

On a side note, during the texture transfer benchmark many of the textures are constantly blinking and something looks very wrong. I have a feeling that software is doing some of the rendering due to some incompatibility.

Thanks. I'm using several different JREs - 5, 6, and 7. When I build the Windows installer, it will force a version of 7+.

Hopefully I will get some more really high-end GPU results and then we can see what the issue is.

The texture flashing is an old bug I confess. It is caused by overlapping textures being rendered at the same z depth. I will fix that this weekend.

Yuka may have found a genuine exploit, so I will look at plugging that this weekend too.

 

[Cazalan]

So yeah general purpose DT computing has slowed to a crawl cause a PC from four years ago can do it just fine. Gaming has expanded but is a small group and goes unnoticed most of the time.

Couple that with the incredibly boring screens you see on all the windows 8 laptops/desktops at the retail stores. I rarely see a demo that is the least bit compelling.

Walk by a Xbox/PS4 demo and those look cool. The PC marketing guys have some things to learn.

 

[jdwii]

The community from IGN is retarded i love talking about the xbox one spec's compared to the PS4 its funny when they call me a Sony fanboy(from stating facts) even though i hate sony and i love nintendo and PC gaming.

 

[palladin9479]

Alg is your benchmark CPU ISA specific? It's java so it should be capable of being run on a non-x86 ISA but not sure how detailed you went into it. Would be interesting to run it on some of my more exotic hardware.

 

[esrever]

The community from IGN is retarded i love talking about the xbox one spec's compared to the PS4 its funny when they call me a Sony fanboy(from stating facts) even though i hate sony and i love nintendo and PC gaming.

If you say anything negative about anything, you are a fanboy to people. Its especially bad with consoles because they are usually owned by younger people.

 

[juanrga]

And what can I do with integer performance inside my daily life, Juan?

Cheers!

EDIT: This question reads a bit trollish, but trust me it ain't that the case. I really want to know what we use on a daily basis that is biased towards integer performance.

Integer performance must be the most important metric for average user, because most most processing (including OS tasks) is done on this sort of data. Floating point performance is relevant for spreadsheets and some graphics programs and games that make use of the FPU.

If you take a look to my BSN* article you can find lots of benchmarks where Kaveri performs as a i5. This is because the test relies on integer performance. When you find one test like this

it indicates a heavy use of the FPU. The i5 are much faster because have twice more floating point execution units.

However, the tendency is towards offloading the CPU and using the GPU as a giant FPU. Next gen games will do (I gave before Cerny talk about how the PS4 GPU is specifically designed for that). Next gen spreadsheets will use the GPU for computations (AMD is already working in HSA Spreadsheet with developers) and we will see HSA enabled graphics programs as well.

 

[juanrga]

I'm sticking to a 15% improvement on average for CPU performance compared to the A10 6800K. 4.2Ghz downclocked to 3.7Ghz is a 13% reduction in clock speed and at most Amd only improved per clock performance by 25-30%. Its GPU however will be massively bottlenecked by its memory controller and DDR3 memory more so this time around.

Richland is not 4.2Ghz and if you compare turbo frequencies instead base clocks the reduction in clock speed is less.

We don't know the IMC used in Kaveri and its iGPU is GCN not VLIW4, but If you believe that the iGPU in Kaveri is "massively bottlenecked" then what happen with a HD7750 DDR3? Is it ultramegamassively bottlenecked?

Kaveri iGPU is about a 33% bigger than Richland iGPU, and offers about a 30% more performance. That doesn't look as a massive bottleneck.

For one never compare turbo speeds since its not consistent
" then what happen with a HD7750 DDR3? Is it ultramegamassively bottlenecked?"
Yes it is bottleneck and quite frankly a horrible product
"Kaveri iGPU is about a 33% bigger than Richland iGPU, and offers about a 30% more performance. That doesn't look as a massive bottleneck."

Die size alone is not what matters Amd can add 43% more transistors(290x vs 280x) but yet it still only provide 25% more performance(based on techpowerup benchmarks)

So again with memory still being DDR3 its hard to say if 33% more die space will add 30% more performance without throwing "up to" statements around instead of averages(which matter way more)

Working frequency will be between base and max. turbo clock. If you want to compare clocks you have to use both to obtain an lower and upper limits. You used the most unfavorable case by selecting only base clocks and you improved the unfairness by using a wrong Richland frequency.

Therefore the HD7750 with 1600MHz DDR3 is according to you "bottleneck", but Kaveri with 2133MHz DDR3 (and possibility to use faster modules 2400, 2600...) is, again according to you, "massively bottlenecked". LOL

I didn't mention number of transistors. I did mean 33% more shaders. And my point remain: 30% faster with 33% more shaders indicates there is no massive bottleneck.

 

[juanrga]

There is no Excavator FX, just as there is no Steamroller FX. If you refer to Carrizo neither it is a 6-core APU nor it is made at 20nm.

Isn't that just as much of a claim as saying the roadmap can't change eventhough AMD says it can change today, tomorrow or next week? Do you have any specific authorized AMD evidence to support your claim?`I would acknowledge your claim, if it was a press statement from AMD saying that this would be the way the future goes. Then it would also go from claim to fact... But as long as it is only suggested by a roadmap that has a disclaimer saying that they can change it any time they see fit, I don't really buy it, although it is indeed plausible.

Is the term roadmap mentioned in my post? No.

When I first said that the FX-9590 launch indicated the end of FX numeration. People at this thread did laugh.

When I first said that server roadmap indicated no steamroller FX. People at this thread did me "wait for the desktop roadmap".

When I first got a copy of the 2014 desktop roadmap and it indicated no steamroller FX. People at this thread did me "no, you may have the APU roadmap that everyone have, not the desktop roadmap".

When the 2014 desktop roadmap was officially released and it indicated no steamroller FX. People at this thread did me "wait for the 2015 desktop roadmap".

When I first published the 2015 desktop roadmap in my twitter account, before it was leaked by news sites and before it was mentioned here, I did laugh again. Now I am said "but roadmaps can change..."

Any bet that by 2017, people at this forum will continue speculating about when comes the inexistent Steamroller FX to the desktop?

 

[noob2222]

^^ your reasons are why no one listens. your reason was that kaveri was going to be soo bad ass that AMD wouldn't need any other products. You claimed that its AMD's decision because Kaveri is all that is needed.

Truth is that GF is at fault and its bulk silicon is too weak, hot, and power hungry. Another point you praised for being a great decision rather than having their hand forced by GF because GF didn't want to spend the money on the SOI equipment.

If AMD can find a source for SOI nodes, I guarantee their roadmaps will change.

 

[juanrga]

Go back a few pages. I posted some with the a10 5700. Closest I could find. Compared to the 4300 the a10 is up to 40% slower. Certain games need the l3 cache.

http://m.techspot.com/review/670-metro-last-light-performance/page6.html

Yes you cherry picked this benchmark before and used it to spam your nonsense that Kaveri will be 37% slower than Bulldozer. LOL

First, the same game in another review (TR) shows Richland and Trinity almost on pair with FX-4350 (which is faster than your 4300). The 4350 (4.2GHz) is a 8% faster than Richland (4.1GHz)

Second, the same site that you mention ever and ever also has benchmarks where Richland is equal than FX-4350

 

[noob2222]

Spoiler

Go back a few pages. I posted some with the a10 5700. Closest I could find. Compared to the 4300 the a10 is up to 40% slower. Certain games need the l3 cache.

http://m.techspot.com/review/670-metro-last-light-performance/page6.html

Yes you cherry picked this benchmark before and used it to spam your nonsense that Kaveri will be 37% slower than Bulldozer. LOL

First, the same game in another review (TR) shows Richland and Trinity almost on pair with FX-4350 (which is faster than your 4300). The 4350 (4.2GHz) is a 8% faster than Richland (4.1GHz)

Second, the same site that you mention ever and ever also has benchmarks where Richland is equal than FX-4350

Ya, i cherry picked a list of 12+ games that show APU's aren't designed specifically for gaming systems with discrete cards. There are differences in how the games were tested and thats why they are different.

TR : 1200x800 - medium quality, 4xaf, low Motionblur.
TS: 1900x1200 - HQ, 16x af, normal motion blur.

Sure, if you plan on playing at 1200x800 and low to medium quality settings an APU will work fine.
If you want all your eye candy on and see what the game was Intended to look like ... well guess what.

When you run into situations where L3 cache makes a difference ...well ... APU's don't have ANY

Some people may be interested in the best possible expectations, but when they try to demand more than what their system can actually handle ... guess who will be disappointed.

Lets face it, you and me will never see eye to eye. You want to see the golden eggs from the goose and throw away the bad eggs, I want to know if the goose has insurance because I'm going to abuse it.

 

[Ags1]

Alg is your benchmark CPU ISA specific? It's java so it should be capable of being run on a non-x86 ISA but not sure how detailed you went into it. Would be interesting to run it on some of my more exotic hardware.

The JOGL library is native code, so ISA specific. I want to get it running on Android and Backberry, however.

If I cut out the GPU tests, it can easily be adapted to anything that runs a JVM. I will put up a no-JOGL version on the Website - just a JAR. I'll PM you when it is there.

 

[juanrga]

^^ your reasons are why no one listens. your reason was that kaveri was going to be soo bad ass that AMD wouldn't need any other products. You claimed that its AMD's decision because Kaveri is all that is needed.

Truth is that GF is at fault and its bulk silicon is too weak, hot, and power hungry. Another point you praised for being a great decision rather than having their hand forced by GF because GF didn't want to spend the money on the SOI equipment.

If AMD can find a source for SOI nodes, I guarantee their roadmaps will change.

You don't listen. I know, but you feel a strong need to lie about what I say.

And yes, AMD moving from SOI to bulk has proven to be a fantastic choice. They are now starting to sell Kaveri, which is a clear winner. you preferred future was with AMD being stuck to SOI and unable to release anything new in next year because, as we already knew, Glofo couldn't deliver. You typical AMD hate afloat again. The same hate why you are spreading FUD and BS against Kaveri in a daily basis.