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 ...

 

[noob2222]

Anand has some Cinebench single/multi benchmarks that are concerning.

In the single core benchmark Trinity was still 10% behind Llano clock for clock.
Scale that to desktop 4.2ghz clock speeds and piledriver (without L3) is still below an i7@2.8Ghz. The 2627M was closest to the extrapolated score of 1.01 for a 4.2Ghz Trinity (turbo single core).

Just 1 benchmark but it scales fairly linearly.

Edit: Found a Bulldozer @ 4.22ghz getting 1.03 cinebench single threaded. So basically unchanged for this benchmark.

http://wccftech.com/amd-bulldozer-fx8150-pitted-phenom-ii-x6-1100t-clocktoclock-benchmark-comparison/

thats part of the problem with trying to assume that in single thread it ran at turbo speed of 3.2 ghz. It doesn't always hold true.

sure, turbo worked, but didn't stay at 4.2, and in fact barely got there a few times. Cinebench has some odd properties, its faster when memory is set to 1T, but doesn't seem to care much about speed. My memory is rated at 2T, will run some programs at 1T but isn't 100% stable.

multi-thread tests are still going to suffer the module scaling. 1T @4.69ghz = 1.19 (1.28 on 1T previously tested) 4C on 4M = 4.52 4C on 2M = 3.78

 

[Cazalan]

cpu wise Intel has an edge ,and AMD will no doubt hamper the APU to some extent to make way for Vishera
We will see.
Haswell cast a big shadow and the billions at Intel's disposal may determine much
But I for can't help but piture the Apu igp spinning at 1ghz computing.

Intel is adding L4 cache for Haswell, and transactional cache.

The question is can AMD afford to do the same. Check slide number 8.
http://sites.amd.com/la/Documents/TFE2011_001AMC.pdf

 

[Cazalan]

sure, turbo worked, but didn't stay at 4.2, and in fact barely got there a few times. Cinebench has some odd properties, its faster when memory is set to 1T, but doesn't seem to care much about speed. My memory is rated at 2T, will run some programs at 1T but isn't 100% stable.

A turbo bug? That's not controlled by the application.

 

[noob2222]

A turbo bug? That's not controlled by the application.

without forcing thread affinity, cinebench bounces from core to core, keeping more than one core busy.

the cpu only turbos to maximum when only one core is active. but because cinebench is bouncing across them all ... yep, lower turbo scores.

I can post a screen if i run it again, but its 1 core ~70%, 2 others ~10% and one kinda bouncing from nothing to ~10.

Edit: since my system is running with turbo off, the score is the same if I force affinity or not. But thats not the case when turbo is being ... killed off by mutiple cores being used.

 

[jdwii]

I'm cautiously optimistic. We shall see when the desktop Piledriver arrives.

Since i rate the 8150 as being 5% faster overall compared to the 1100T at stock, Not to mention my processor is overclock at 3.9Ghz while being real cool. It will have to beat that and my processor has the same performance as a 4.4-4.6Ghz Bulldozer. I would like to have a 4.2-4.0Ghz 8 core PD. That should probably be the same or more performance over my overclocked Phenom. Then i hope i can overclock the PD to at least 4.6Ghz on my cooler.

But Like you said "We shall see"

 

[jdwii]

thats part of the problem with trying to assume that in single thread it ran at turbo speed of 3.2 ghz. It doesn't always hold true.

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/cpu/amd/Bulldozer/Review/cinebench-fx8150.jpg

sure, turbo worked, but didn't stay at 4.2, and in fact barely got there a few times. Cinebench has some odd properties, its faster when memory is set to 1T, but doesn't seem to care much about speed. My memory is rated at 2T, will run some programs at 1T but isn't 100% stable.

multi-thread tests are still going to suffer the module scaling. 1T @4.69ghz = 1.19 (1.28 on 1T previously tested) 4C on 4M = 4.52 4C on 2M = 3.78

I got a 1.18 on my phenom clocked at 3.9Ghz and i get a 6.91 with all 6 cores.

Also i got this on my Athlon II x4 620 OC to 3.25Ghz


single core: 0.92
all cores: 3.63

On cinebench

 

[palladin9479]

A turbo bug? That's not controlled by the application.

Yeah the application isn't allowed to tell the OS what target to put it's threads on. Only the OS's scheduler is allowed to decide that, thankfully at least Windows exposed some of that in the form of affinity flags.

Noob,
CB isn't bouncing the thread around, that's Windows doing it. You will notice this behavior on all primarily single threaded applications (games usually), its the reason why every review / benchmark site gets poor performance from boosting. Windows 7's scheduler is designed to try to keep all cores equally busy, it would rather have four cores @15% then one core at 60%. This goes against the design methodology of TB / TC and other core disabling / idling technologies.

Honestly AMD needs to release their own software program that allows the user to control their CPU's performance profile similar to what K10stat allows. Windows needs to introduce an application that allows the user to determine how Windows handles thread assignments. This will be required for future processor uArachs as we're going to a more modular power on-demand approach.

 

[viridiancrystal]

Does anyone think AMD will add more cores for Steamroller? If so, would it benefit them at all?

 

[amdfangirl]

Nope. It's 4-8 thingos only says the roadmap. 😛

 

[jimmysmitty]

Piledriver over Bulldozer. Its not even much a prediction as we all ready seen Piledriver cores without L3.

15-20% more performance(On average not upto statements based on the majority of app's not 1 or 3) at launch compared to Bulldozer plus 10-20% more efficient as well.

Piledriver will advance over BD. But as to the IPC, be it clock or actual gains, I can't predict anything yet. Trinity was mainly compared to Llano which I would expect mostly better performance after all BD did perform better than Athlon II, just not better than or not much better than Phenom II.

Off Topic:
Got my HD7970 OC today. It is a sexy beast. Now to see what it can do until MP3 hits.

 

[-Fran-]

Piledriver will advance over BD. But as to the IPC, be it clock or actual gains, I can't predict anything yet. Trinity was mainly compared to Llano which I would expect mostly better performance after all BD did perform better than Athlon II, just not better than or not much better than Phenom II.

Off Topic:
Got my HD7970 OC today. It is a sexy beast. Now to see what it can do until MP3 hits.

From what the reviews have shown, there is a tangible IPC increase in Trinity, but the low speeds don't make it stand out that much.

And I got a GTX670 today for myself, hehe. It's quite the upgrade over my good old 4890 xD

Cheers!

 

[amdfangirl]

Really excited about Nvidia's new range. Might grab something to replace my aging HD 4770.

 

[anxiousinfusion]

As a Core i7 2600 user, would I be an idiot for swapping out to Piledriver?

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

No, its an upgrade, or will be on DT

 

[-Fran-]

Really excited about Nvidia's new range. Might grab something to replace my aging HD 4770.

The GTX670 is very quiet and cool. Uses less power than the 4890 as well. AMD has nothing against it for now and I got impatient 😛

As a Core i7 2600 user, would I be an idiot for swapping out to Piledriver?

Not an idiot, but it would be very weird TBH.

Until reviews come out, I would hold any buy thoughts on PD. I'm a PhII 965 @3.98Ghz owner and PD will have to rock my world to do the swap and your i7 is way better than my PhII I'd say, so don't be hasty.

Cheers!

 

[anxiousinfusion]

I'm interested in using my current processor for a dedicated Minecraft server. (Some testing reveals that i7 is an absolute beast in that application). And if Piledriver is equal to or greater than Sandybridge I will be making the swap.

 

[jimmysmitty]

From what the reviews have shown, there is a tangible IPC increase in Trinity, but the low speeds don't make it stand out that much.

And I got a GTX670 today for myself, hehe. It's quite the upgrade over my good old 4890 xD

Cheers!

The 670s looked nice but I wanted the 3GB of GDDR5. Never can have too much memory.

Plus this GPU looks to be able to overclock very well. Most sites can max it out to about 1280MHz core and 1860 memory with 1.30v which seems pretty good and the cooler does a very good job.

And so far Skyrim maxes out on its own with the HD texture pack.

No, its an upgrade, or will be on DT

How do we know PD will be an upgrade over SB? Without any real info and nothing concrete to go on, we have no idea how well it will or will not do much like we didn't know about BD until near the release.

I'm interested in using my current processor for a dedicated Minecraft server. (Some testing reveals that i7 is an absolute beast in that application). And if Piledriver is equal to or greater than Sandybridge I will be making the swap.

I can understand if its better but equal to? Why spend the money if it is just equal to? Its like Ivy Bridge. Its not bad but its not better by enough to justify moving to it from Sandy Bridge.

If anything if PD is equal to SB and its release is late Q3 or possibly Q4 (everything we have seen points to Q3 though) then not too far down is Intels Haswell which is a Tock, meaning new arch, which might just beat PD and if you always want the latest and greatest you will just spend a lot of money.

 

[palladin9479]

I'm interested in using my current processor for a dedicated Minecraft server. (Some testing reveals that i7 is an absolute beast in that application). And if Piledriver is equal to or greater than Sandybridge I will be making the swap.

BD / PD are mostly upgrade paths for users who are currently invested into AM3+ platforms. The price / performance ratio goes out the window if you start switching platforms back and forth. If your on an SB platform now then you should stay there for the foreseeable future. If your required to build a new box from scratch then and only then would it make sense to switch platforms, and until we know more about PD, we can't guarantee any sort of performance increase over the previous SB/IB platform.

 

[anxiousinfusion]

No, its an upgrade, or will be on DT

I'm unfamiliar with "DT". What is it?

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

OK, its getting late, I swear I saw an old 2600 discrete there.
No, I wouldnt put PD against a 2600 and say it would win, but the igp in trinity is better than a 2600
My mistake, I thought youd meant a graphics card called the 2600, got distrated and replied wrong.
Stick with your 2600 Intel

 

[sarinaide]

Okay since everyone is getting hold of new Graphics Cards, I am getting hold of a Ghz edition 7970 for some testing from a AMD contact, the word of mouth is GTX680 equivilant at the current 7970 pricing, that would be a great deal provided the numbers stack up, which I expect they will with a nigh on 200mhz core bump at stock.

The sad news is, I can't afford anything new right now, so I will be rocking the 6970's, which is rather tragic.

 

[dogman_1234]

@sarinaide: At least you can afford A graphics card at all!

 

[triny]

Again, look to Pitcairn/GCN IGPs, with some memory tweaks.
If you look at perf/watt, its tough to beat, and an early 28nm node as well.

Point here is, very nice improvements without all the GGPU added
Rumors of steamroller appear to be sparse, but looks good from what Ive seen.
Some are being compared already as well

Though Intel still holds an edge on cpu ,we can clearly see how amd has improved immensely using HSA.
2nd gen piledriver 32nm compared to 3rd gen I5 22nm.
that it did not surpass Intel in some metrics is hardly surprising.
I concur with you down the road once HSA is fully implemented and supported I can't see AMD behind Intel
Vishera may be a surprise

 

[triny]

Intel is adding L4 cache for Haswell, and transactional cache.

The question is can AMD afford to do the same. Check slide number 8.
http://sites.amd.com/la/Documents/TFE2011_001AMC.pdf

$$$$ For those with big money no doubt Intel is the top pick but don't forget it is generation 4
AMD is only now producing gen 2 thus it should compete against SB
Haswell competes with excavator not steamroller Intel is 1 gen ahead
But we should not underestimate HSA computing it's sink or swim as far
as I can tell. The future will not be determined by nm process nor l4 cache
who will put the super computer in the hands of the poor first will
rise to the top, however long that takes .

 

[triny]

BD / PD are mostly upgrade paths for users who are currently invested into AM3+ platforms. The price / performance ratio goes out the window if you start switching platforms back and forth. If your on an SB platform now then you should stay there for the foreseeable future. If your required to build a new box from scratch then and only then would it make sense to switch platforms, and until we know more about PD, we can't guarantee any sort of performance increase over the previous SB/IB platform.

I see computers like cars buy what you like keep it 2-3 years sell and buy new.
that way you don't lag behind the advancements too badly costs a bit more though.