AMD Piledriver rumours ... and expert conjecture

[Reynod]

We have had several requests for a sticky on AMD's yet to be released Piledriver architecture ... so here it is.

I want to make a few things clear though.

Post a question relevant to the topic, or information about the topic, or it will be deleted.

Post any negative personal comments about another user ... and they will be deleted.

Post flame baiting comments about the blue, red and green team and they will be deleted.

Enjoy ...

 

[dogman_1234]

Well, if it manages to be in the same ballpark as the mobile i5 (CPU), it would put it in the middle of Intel's line up. Maybe getting close to an i7 won't be possible in a realistic scenario (CPU wise, off course), but as an APU, they could be trading blows perfectly in different disciplines (gaming, Video and OCL/DC).

The SB mobile i5s are quite good to be honest, so if Trinity manages to get in that league alone, they'll become very good P/P contenders in mobile. Right now, Llano is not on par with the i5s, so they're restricted to slow i3s territory (CPU wise).

Also, hopefully VCE will be available... Hopefully... =/

Cheers!

Please explain what VCE is?

 

[-Fran-]

Please explain what VCE is?

Its the integrated decoder and encoder in AMD's video cards (and APU in this case)... The competition (of sorts) to Quick Sync and nvENC. Don't have the details of what it has and how exactly gets the job done, but so far, no Software on earth supports the feature, hahaha.

Cheers!

 

[truegenius]

but so far, no Software on earth supports the feature, hahaha.

i will ask my buddies who lives on mars to buy that software for me which can support that feature.
😗

 

[amdfangirl]

Depends... does the software rely on regioning?

 

[Cazalan]

They way they're doing is just making Atom irrelevant.

Actually the opposite. Intel is ramping Atom to be the first 14nm chip.
They want in the cell phone/tablet market badly.

 

[Cazalan]

Intersting tidbit, hp has named their AMD ultrabooks. http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/05/hp-announces-new-ultrabooks-introduces-sleekbooks/

I cringe when I look at these things. 13inch screens. I got a 17in laptop I can barely stand to look at. After using dual 24" LCD everything looks tiny.

 

[dogman_1234]

Actually the opposite. Intel is ramping Atom to be the first 14nm chip.
They want in the cell phone/tablet market badly.

Can you say Quantum Tunneling!

I cringe when I look at these things. 13inch screens. I got a 17in laptop I can barely stand to look at. After using dual 24" LCD everything looks tiny.

I hope AMD does well in the mobile area. I have to say that the screen is not that bad...but this is coming form a guy who uses a 15'' sceen currently.

 

[truegenius]

Can you say Quantum Tunneling!

here it is, on very demand
rumors are that 25th gen pentium's transistors are will be only the size of 2 spiral, with a total die size of 10times the atomic radius of truegenium 😗 atom (150th atom of periodic table)
:lol:

 

[palladin9479]

Hmm synthetics are good for showing the potential of a CPU, all they do is run a series of computations over and over again then report how many where done in a given time. Actual software performance is 100% up to the programers and engineers, especially games. "Games" tend to only use one to two "cores", the better ones as many as four. With modern CPU's starting at four and going to eight (or pseudo six) you end up with large portions of the CPU simply not being used. Thus a synthetic can show what the total potential of that hardware resource (CPU / memory / GPU / disk storage / ect..) but it's not guaranteed the software your running can reach that potential. Company's spend millions of USD to analyze performance on big ticket software items (*cough IBM Oracle cough*) and figure out how to get the most out of their target hardware platforms.

For us lowly consumers we're restricted to whatever console infected "games" gets thrown in our general direction. This isn't a knock of software devs, their ridiculously understaffed and overworked for what their expected to produce. It's only expected they implement the most effective time vs effort course of action.

It doesn't help that AMD makes some very funny decisions, APU's don't really belong in the desktop space yet they are marketing them there. Their really good for notebooks / ect.. and console / kiosk / appliance devices. Otherwise .. don't make sense. Another thing that's worrying me is the 2.0Ghz clock on the Trinity mobile APUs, I'm ~ALREADY~ hitting that with my 3550MX and the BD uArch needs higher clocks overall. They need to be putting out 2.5~3.0 Ghz mobile APUs to stand a chance at competing. If their design is as open as the current K10's then I should be able to tweak the heck out of it, but I fear they might start to lock it down and limit the niche OCUV club that's been forming.

 

[noob2222]

Granted the apu are limited for their use in desktop computers, the do have a few places that make sense. Mainly for the all-in-one and cheap business thin clients that rely on the smallest ammount of desk space.

 

[dogman_1234]

here it is, on very demand
rumors are that 25th gen pentium's transistors are will be only the size of 2 spiral, with a total die size of 10times the atomic radius of truegenium 😗 atom (150th atom of periodic table)
:lol:

Tony Stark? Is that you?

 

[truegenius]

especially games.
"Games" tend to only use one to two "cores", the
better ones as many as four.

the BD uArch needs higher clocks
overall.

Few years ago, people used to talk
'wow 😱 you got a 500mhz single core cpu in your phone'
Now
'lol you got only a duel core at 1ghz only :lol: '
Means every thing is getting on more core road, so maybe we will see threaded apps in a short time

But more cores use more ram, and thus we need more bandwidth

and ebd it is not bd, maybe amd done some paparapa (babidi's magic) and viola ++ipc

Tony Stark? Is that you?

Its top secret 😉
Btw string it is not spiral 😛

 

[jimmysmitty]

AMD gives me 75FPS instead of Intels 80FPS > Jump ship to Intel

Thats the thing. For most of the enthusiasts that upgrade every year, thats what they look at and they want the best of the best.

The majority of enthusiasts here are more budget oriented, I like to stay within $1500 if possible, and that means best bang for the buck within that budget. Then there are a few who want the best bang in a much lower budget.

But if you had a Athlon 64 X2 on a AM2/AM2+ motherboard and were looking at BD vs SB right now, without any sway to either side, and considering the prices are well within each other, would you buy BD or SB based on reviews?

Thats what its about.

If AMDs BD had smashed Intels SB when I upgraded (again I only upgraded because I got a much larger tax refund due to a new car purchase) then I would have bought the best chip within $200-$250. But it wasn't the best bang for buck.

But my BDay is coming up and my girl is thinking of getting me a new GPU and I will still probably go with a HD7900 series. The GTX680s are very hard to find. We scavanged 4 for a set of server builds and finally got a 5th one in just this week.

Its the integrated decoder and encoder in AMD's video cards (and APU in this case)... The competition (of sorts) to Quick Sync and nvENC. Don't have the details of what it has and how exactly gets the job done, but so far, no Software on earth supports the feature, hahaha.

Cheers!

That will be interesting to see as the reviews I saw, nVidias nvENC didn't come close to Ivy Bridges QS 2.0.

 

[sarinaide]

Thats the thing. For most of the enthusiasts that upgrade every year, thats what they look at and they want the best of the best.

The majority of enthusiasts here are more budget oriented, I like to stay within $1500 if possible, and that means best bang for the buck within that budget. Then there are a few who want the best bang in a much lower budget.

But if you had a Athlon 64 X2 on a AM2/AM2+ motherboard and were looking at BD vs SB right now, without any sway to either side, and considering the prices are well within each other, would you buy BD or SB based on reviews?

Thats what its about.

If AMDs BD had smashed Intels SB when I upgraded (again I only upgraded because I got a much larger tax refund due to a new car purchase) then I would have bought the best chip within $200-$250. But it wasn't the best bang for buck.

"Enthusiast" is often a word that can be stretched to suit a particular user, or in a way I would consider myself a enthusiast, but not a performance junky. The performance junky buys the 2700K or 3960X under the belief it will create a better performance matrix than the other chips, a fact which is rebutted and disproved. To me I am a enthusiast but I don't feel the compulsive urge to buy something that is far more expensive for a marginal gain.

We also need to consider the different approaches from AMD and Intel, to me AMD are far more consumer conscious and design to give the end user more goodies for less (exclude performance debates), and thats what you tend to feel when you buy a AMD setup, not really that expensive even for a high end hex or octocore on a highend platform along with all the bells and whistles. Intel for me chase the dollar sign, they target a specific user, namely the enthusiasts(overclockers and hardcore gamers) or hefty server market, they have neglected the basic consumer market and populated it with overpriced "lowend chips" with very little joy for the basic end user.

The indictment of the claim that Intel dominate the budget spectrum is when you are tasked with taking $300 and seeing what you get. The AMD APU's for a person looking to game on the affordability bracket can get a APU which on IGP performance obliterates anything Intel has on HD side, with the option of asymetrical crossfire which is a factor which makes it very appealing for a person that wants to play at medium settings on high res and higher settings on older conventional res.

The other factor which is overlooked is the money, intel is a global corporate monolith with resources that petty AMD's resources, more money results in better products which is true in this case but a question is; do you honestly believe you get all you can get from intel. Every Intel chip I own feels watered down and bare minimum. Some say Intel doesnt need to or is not obliged to give you more due to lack of competition. I reject that arguement on the premise that every corporation is obliged to give consumers the best available product irrespective of the competitions standard, by holding back and overpricing it is bad business practise, but why would they complain when people are happy to be overcharged for a little slice of psuedo paradise.

 

[amdfangirl]

I hate how Intel cuts features.

During the LGA 775/AM2+ even the Athlons had AMD-V, but it wasn't until the end of the platform before we saw Vt-x supporting chips.

Annoys me so much that my Core 2 Duo e7200 doesn't have VT and my Athlon X2 BE-2400 does...

On a more recent example how is it that AMD Brazos (Hudson) FCH gets more SATA 6Gb/s ports than a Z77 chipset and the H61 gets none?

 

[sarinaide]

Tangible needs vs frivolous needs; do I need a Audi R8 for the extra 5km/h it has over my M3, no I do not. Would a upgrade from my old VW GTI to a M3 be more feasible, yes it was.

Long story short, I don't need a Intel to make me feel like I am getting more out a situation, because in all due respects the differences are not even noticeable in real world experiences.

 

[truegenius]

Tangible needs vs frivolous needs; do I need a Audi R8 for the extra 5km/h it has over my M3, no I do not. Would a upgrade from my old VW GTI to a M3 be more feasible, yes it was.

you bigboys with your multiple sets of wheel driven by 100s of horse's power

i got a bycycle only, and i think if i need to oil the gears for extra smooth ride or not 😀

 

[sarinaide]

The wheels are the reason I can't afford a X79/3960X to begin with, but thats a different point altogether.

 

[truegenius]

^
i will do that 😉

 

[noob2222]

I especially like the thin plastic gas tank ... look out for that ... rock, too late.

 

[viridiancrystal]

So much riding on PD... Can't wait for the trinity benchies in a few days.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

I cringe when I look at these things. 13inch screens. I got a 17in laptop I can barely stand to look at. After using dual 24" LCD everything looks tiny.

Well I have an Asus 17" lappy and really, when typing on the keyboard, it's about the same as my desktop with a 27" monitor since the Asus screen is about half the distance away .

I'd have to compare the HP laptops to the Dell XPS Ultrabooks (which according to the news, are selling so fast Dell can't make enough of them). The Dells come with a touchscreen which I think is is an excellent idea in a device between a tablet and a notebook. And although a lot of the complaints about the HP Ultra & Sleekbooks, over on Dailytech, have to do with the 720P screen, I don't see that as much of a problem given the small screen in the 13" and 14" size. I do like the backlit keyboard feature on the Dell - handy on overnight flights or in a dark room..

 

[sarinaide]

The wait for a release is painful. I am certain I will be buying a Trinity APU for a HTPC/Multimedia/younglings gaming rig/experimentation chip.

 

[jimmysmitty]

"Enthusiast" is often a word that can be stretched to suit a particular user, or in a way I would consider myself a enthusiast, but not a performance junky. The performance junky buys the 2700K or 3960X under the belief it will create a better performance matrix than the other chips, a fact which is rebutted and disproved. To me I am a enthusiast but I don't feel the compulsive urge to buy something that is far more expensive for a marginal gain.

We also need to consider the different approaches from AMD and Intel, to me AMD are far more consumer conscious and design to give the end user more goodies for less (exclude performance debates), and thats what you tend to feel when you buy a AMD setup, not really that expensive even for a high end hex or octocore on a highend platform along with all the bells and whistles. Intel for me chase the dollar sign, they target a specific user, namely the enthusiasts(overclockers and hardcore gamers) or hefty server market, they have neglected the basic consumer market and populated it with overpriced "lowend chips" with very little joy for the basic end user.

The indictment of the claim that Intel dominate the budget spectrum is when you are tasked with taking $300 and seeing what you get. The AMD APU's for a person looking to game on the affordability bracket can get a APU which on IGP performance obliterates anything Intel has on HD side, with the option of asymetrical crossfire which is a factor which makes it very appealing for a person that wants to play at medium settings on high res and higher settings on older conventional res.

The other factor which is overlooked is the money, intel is a global corporate monolith with resources that petty AMD's resources, more money results in better products which is true in this case but a question is; do you honestly believe you get all you can get from intel. Every Intel chip I own feels watered down and bare minimum. Some say Intel doesnt need to or is not obliged to give you more due to lack of competition. I reject that arguement on the premise that every corporation is obliged to give consumers the best available product irrespective of the competitions standard, by holding back and overpricing it is bad business practise, but why would they complain when people are happy to be overcharged for a little slice of psuedo paradise.

How do you consider AMD more consumer conscious when the only reason why the products they release are cheaper is because they can't topple the performance of the competition? The last time AMD had the best performance, they had CPUs ranging from $200 on the low end (not including Sempron) to $1000+ on the high end (Athlon 64 FX).

Then the HD7900 series hit a few months before the GTX680, beats the GTX580 in every aspect and we see the first card in quite a few years to be priced higher on the high end than sub $400 (most of the HD7970s were about $6t00 at release).

The second AMD has the higher performance, they will price it accordingly. The only reason why AMD seems that way is because their last three CPUs have not been able to outperform the Intel equivalent thus the price is lower. But if Phenom I came out swining and beat Kentsfield, you better believe there would have been a $1000 BE/FX (there was a FX Phenom planned originally for the Quad FX like setups) and you might not feel the same way.

AMD is a company and their price gouging of the HD7970 shows it off very well. If the HD7970 didn't beat the GTX580, it would have hit at the same price point as the HD6970 did and not almost 2x the price.

To think otherwise is just absurd. AMD cares about one thing in the end and thats market share and profits, just like every other company in the world.

And I will say this much; considering the lack of competition for Sandy Bridge, my 2500K in no way feels "watered down". It screams at anything I throw at it and I only paid $200 for it. Not a bad deal overall. I have the second to top end Asus Z68 and it has plenty of features overall.

Watered down is what you get when you buy a very low end mobo or you buy a Dell/HP.

 

[keithlm]

How do you consider AMD more consumer conscious when the only reason why the products they release are cheaper is because they can't topple the performance of the competition? The last time AMD had the best performance, they had CPUs ranging from $200 on the low end (not including Sempron) to $1000+ on the high end (Athlon 64 FX).

Please remind me: how much was Intel charging for the competing chips? (So then which company affects price points the most?)

And back at that time the Intel chips were slower clock per clock.

(Of course at that time time the Intel advocates totally opposed doing that type of comparison.)