AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[iceclock]

u guys are totally off base. this is about steamroller not whos the nerdiest in town.

 

[sonoran]

AMD's own compiler...only on linux)

AMD's compiler produces code that won't run on AMD (on Windows)! Since their compiler doesn't support Windows, which most people use, there's clearly a conspiracy at AMD to screw themselves over! Somebody call the FTC! Make them pay themselves a big fine! Split up the company!

 

[BuddiLuva]

u guys are totally off base. this is about steamroller not whos the nerdiest in town.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL.

1+ for comedy

 

[gamerk316]

Unless no one wants to buy AMD at all I doubt the separate states of the world would let it happen. It would be the biggest monopoly in the known universe!

No it wouldn't. Between ARM and PPC for low power devices, and SPARC for servers, Intels X86 has PLENTY of competition. And theres plenty of OSs which support other CPU architectures out there, even a few mainstream ones (Linux/BSD).

 

[gamerk316]

lower rez uses less GPU, causing more fluctuation in the CPU.

Not quite; at a lower resolution, the GPU does less work compared to what the CPU does; eg: While both do less work, the GPUs workload falls faster then the CPUs workload, so you get a better indicator of CPU performance.

SC2 was made before Intel was court ordered to quit supplying crippling compilers.

Really simple test then: Someone with SC2 needs to run PEiD (or some other program) and find out what compiler was used on it.

http://sumtips.com/2012/05/detect-identify-exe-compiler-packer.html

My current suite; don't have SC2, so can't test. I'd suspect MSVC 2005 though.

 

[noob2222]

@ Noob222 :

I think you are confusing "active game development support" with "Using Intel compiler".
The former does not imply the latter. The former usually means help the game devs in writing code in such a way which takes into account the quirks of the Intel processor architecture. Which usually means it wont run too good on AMD hardware. It may also include giving them some money in return for using the game for "intel winz" promotion.

The 'discrimination' of Intel compiler has ceased to of concern in most cases. These mostly include HPC sector. And the people there do extensive testing before buying any hardware, and software.

Whats the easiest way to optimize a program for your product if you already have a compiler that does that for you?

Granted it doesn't 100% mean they used it, but it would be pretty stupid to rewrite and insert the same Intel code into the compiler thats going to be used.

As far as optimizing for one and not the other, you check the cpu id flags and NOT THE CPU VENDOR. There is no reason to check the vendor string other than to cripple the code, ie sse2 for AMD or AVX for GenuineIntel.

I love the Intel excuses that "AMD's SSE doesn't work". Its not AMD's SSE, its Intel's that AMD purchased with the cross liscence agreement, only to be disabled yet again by the Intel compiler.

Is that how business is supposed to work? Liscence a technology only to have it disabled by the same company that you paid?

Funny, I don't see AMD disabling x86-64 on GeniuneIntel, but maybe they should since its ok for Intel to do that.

 

[Blandge]

I love the Intel excuses that "AMD's SSE doesn't work". Its not AMD's SSE, its Intel's that AMD purchased with the cross liscence agreement, only to be disabled yet again by the Intel compiler.

Is that how business is supposed to work? Liscence a technology only to have it disabled by the same company that you paid?

Funny, I don't see AMD disabling x86-64 on GeniuneIntel, but maybe they should since its ok for Intel to do that.

AMD only bought the license to the patent, they didn't buy anything related to Intel's compiler. If AMD wants compiler support so badly they should build their own.

 

[gamerk316]

Whats the easiest way to optimize a program for your product if you already have a compiler that does that for you?

Setting the '/O2' flag to enable the most aggressive optimizations within the optimizer. [/O3 (Ox for MSVC) is too unstable to be used in most cases]

 

[iceclock]

interesting

 

[butremor]

you guys also can't wait to see Tom's article on Athlon X4 750K?

 

[sarinaide]

Whats the easiest way to optimize a program for your product if you already have a compiler that does that for you?

Granted it doesn't 100% mean they used it, but it would be pretty stupid to rewrite and insert the same Intel code into the compiler thats going to be used.

As far as optimizing for one and not the other, you check the cpu id flags and NOT THE CPU VENDOR. There is no reason to check the vendor string other than to cripple the code, ie sse2 for AMD or AVX for GenuineIntel.

I love the Intel excuses that "AMD's SSE doesn't work". Its not AMD's SSE, its Intel's that AMD purchased with the cross liscence agreement, only to be disabled yet again by the Intel compiler.

Is that how business is supposed to work? Liscence a technology only to have it disabled by the same company that you paid?

Funny, I don't see AMD disabling x86-64 on GeniuneIntel, but maybe they should since its ok for Intel to do that.

It was never going to ever benefit AMD, a) x86 licenses owned by Intel who basically drain AMD of resources on a year to year basis and b) developer code would not favor the lesser player it will favor the company with the foot in the door. Intel have more money and hence more partners to work with. Basically AMD need to continue producing CPU's that are faster than the predecessor's irrespective of the limitations and handicaps that is the target.

 

[amdfangirl]

you guys also can't wait to see Tom's article on Athlon X4 750K?

Unlikely to happen. This isn't 2007. They review other things, like tablets etc. now.

 

[iceclock]

amd needs to come out with a cpu that blows intel out of the water. i really want to see amd on top again. been waiting for this for a while

 

[Cazalan]

Umm, you just agreed with me. They are designing for 32bit systems. The market only has a few competitors.

If you consider 8 as a "few competitors" I guess so. That's how many have publicly mentioned working on ARMv8 designs (64bit).

 

[Chad Boga]

AMD's compiler produces code that won't run on AMD (on Windows)! Since their compiler doesn't support Windows, which most people use, there's clearly a conspiracy at AMD to screw themselves over! Somebody call the FTC! Make them pay themselves a big fine! Split up the company!

:lol: What a company, no wonder they blame Intel for all their problems rather than look in the mirror.

 

[iceclock]

lol

 

[esrever]

If you consider 8 as a "few competitors" I guess so. That's how many have publicly mentioned working on ARMv8 designs (64bit).

without fabrics. which means their designs can be incorporated into AMD's servers just like how AMD is also making servers with Intel chips. If AMD develop a fabric for ARM servers, they can license out any ARM design to be used inside their own servers. If AMD has to, they don't need to directly compete with most of the other players in the market.

 

[anxiousinfusion]

Noonen highlighted included Cyclos Semiconductor, whose resonant clocking technology was first deployed in AMD's Piledriver core and contributed to its substantial power savings over the Bulldozer core made on the same process.

A few pages back I was informed that the RCM technology was scrapped for the Piledriver chips. I want to get this straight did Piledriver incorporate RCM or not? And if it was scrapped for PD will the same apply to SR?

 

[noob2222]

Rcm is in pd. The thing is slight imperfections affect the outcome. The best binned efficiency cpus are Opterons and the 65W trinity, clocked only 100 mhz slower than the 100W k chips. The power hungry rcm chips are saved for overclockers. Even so the power reduction is still there, just not as obvious.

 

[iceclock]

they need to reduced the die to 25 nm atleast

 

[gamerk316]

Just to settle this debate with noob in regards to Intels compiler, a few sample games I currently have installed, and their compiler (as detected via Exeinfo PE)

(Note: When I don't give an exact version, I'm basing on the most likely signature based on the deep scan results. In all cases, only one compiler pattern is detected)

XCOM: Microsoft Visual C++
Witcher 2: Microsoft Visual C++ v.10
Sleeping Dogs: Microsoft Visual C++
Sins of a Solar Empire - Rebellion: Microsoft Visual C++
Sim City 4: Microsoft Visual C++
Civilization V: Microsoft Visual C++
Resident Evil V: Microsoft Visual C++ ver. 8.0 / Visual Studio 2005
Portal 2: Microsoft Visual C++ v.10 - 2010
Left 4 Dead 2: Microsoft Visual C++ ver. 8.0 / Visual Studio 2005
Mass Effect 3: Microsoft Visual C++
Dragon Age 2: Microsoft Visual C++
Battlefield 3: Unknown (No signatures in Advanced Scan I can tie to a compiler)

So while only a handful of cases were able to ID the EXACT compiler version, all the deep scans (BF3 being the lone exception) saw signatures consistent with some version of Microsoft Visual C++. In all my tests, NOT A SINGLE USE OF INTELS COMPILER WAS DETECTED. I even double checked with a few other programs (PEiD) just to make sure. I triple checked both can detect programs compiled by Intels compiler, just to be extra safe (they can).

Everyone uses Microsoft Visual C++, because its the most powerful development platform on the planet. Period. Even the Linux and BSD guys don't argue that fact. So to blame Intels compiler is just an excuse to try and justify AMD's performance in games.

(I HOPE I finally put this point to rest once and for all. Back to your regular "Is AMD doomed" thread.)

 

[iceclock]

amd isnt doomed, also steam rollers gonna be 1337

 

[BeastLeeX]

I think the Piledriver refresh will help AMD, they need higher clocks on stock chips (although they are high already) and we might see the Piledriver refresh beat i3 in games that use less threads, or programs that use less threads in general.

 

[esrever]

Anyone see tom's new CPU article. It seems like somethings different.

 

[tonync_01]

Anyone see tom's new CPU article. It seems like somethings different.

That's interesting, it looks like the higher-end amd chips have lower frame latency than intel on most games tested.