Not being a POV expert, I can't say how it scales, or really relate this to much. As an exercise for our readership, can someone work this backwards and tell me about what the clocks here are?
Not having a clue how computers or benchmarks work, I can't say what this means or how it relates to anything. As Im too lazy, could one of the 18 people who read my blog figure this out for me?
Not having a clue how computers or benchmarks work, I can't say what this means or how it relates to anything. As Im too lazy, could one of the 18 people who read my blog figure this out for me?
Not having a clue how computers or benchmarks work, I can't say what this means or how it relates to anything. As Im too lazy, could one of the 18 people who read my blog figure this out for me?
Well thanks for clearing that up, and posting up some numbers. Now like mentioned before, Barcelona does not look that impressive at all.Task manager shows 8 cores on the left, 16 cores on the right. The rendered scene looks like the standard POVray benchmark which has predefined default settings.
If what Charlie says is true, 8 Opteron cores hit 2200 px/s and 16 Barcelona cores hit >4000 px/s. Both are 4-socket configurations, so the Opteron clocks are probably higher.
For reference, a single Merom core at 3.0 GHz using one channel of DDR2 hits about 520 px/s, but scaling is not quite linear, not to mention (1) Clovertown uses slower FB-DIMMs and (2) a 4S configuration for Clovertown may require separate nodes and thus utilize NUMA with further potential slowdown.
Edit: According to this link - http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT111406114244&p=2 - Clovertown exhibits nearly linear scaling in a 2S SMP configuration. With just 8 cores at 2.33GHz it nearly reaches the claimed benchmark readout from 16 Barcelona cores, clock unspecified. That makes AMD's bench very unimpressive.
This was my assessment -- but if this was a 1.8 GHz Barcey doing this then it is impressive, if it were a 2.2 GHz Barcey doing this, then it is not as impressive.... without clock details, this is quite meaningless.
Not being a POV expert, I can't say how it scales, or really relate this to much. As an exercise for our readership, can someone work this backwards and tell me about what the clocks here are?
Not having a clue how computers or benchmarks work, I can't say what this means or how it relates to anything. As Im too lazy, could one of the 18 people who read my blog figure this out for me?
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39756
As usual no clockspeeds given :lol:
Clock speed was roughly given when they specified that each socket was a 65W TDP part. This would be in the same power envelope as existing HE-series Opterons.This was my assessment -- but if this was a 1.8 GHz Barcey doing this then it is impressive, if it were a 2.2 GHz Barcey doing this, then it is not as impressive.... without clock details, this is quite meaningless.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGiv9Dtrc5Q
So it's 16 K10 vs 8 K8...
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39756
Using 65W chips
I don't think these benches were configured the way most sites do..
No man, they didn't! The only way that the barcelona system can somehow conform to their numbers is that the Opteron system features the newest 3.0Ghz Opterons and the barcelona is clocked @ 1.9Ghz.We know that AMD has managed to outperform their own last gen CPUs.
Better than nothing :lol: