!!!The Ultimate K8L Thread 2007 & Beyond!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

the really funny thing is I don't think savantu realizes that Intel still is using only Prescotts and smithfields on their 4+P market and that he is saying that Prescott is better than K8...

---

Actuallly Paxvilles and Tulsas , but I don't expect you to know the difference.

Put up or shut up , let's see if the K8 is indeed better in the 4+P space...

This is for 4P/8 way scores compiled by Michael_S

TPC-C:
1. Power5 (2200MHz) - 100 (estimated from 8-way score)
2. Montecito (1600MHz) - 67
3. Tulsa (3330MHz) - 61
4. Opteron (2400MHz) - 46

SAP-SD 2-tier:
1. Power5+ (2200MHz) - 100 (estimated from 8-way score)
2. Tulsa (3400MHz) - 77
3. OpteronF (2800MHz) - 72
4. Montecito (1600MHz) - 55

SPEC Jbb2005:
1. Tulsa (3400MHz) - 109
2. Power5+ (2200MHz) - 100 (estimated from 8-way score)
4. Montecito (1600MHz) - 85
3. OpteronF (2800MHz) - 77

link

I see that Tulsa is better than Opteron by :
- 32% in TPC-C
- 7% in SAP-SD
- 41% in Spec Jbb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

Actuallly Paxvilles and Tulsas , but I don't expect you to know the difference.

Put up or shut up , let's see if the K8 is indeed better in the 4+P space...

This is for 4P/8 way scores compiled by Michael_S

TPC-C:
1. Power5 (2200MHz) - 100 (estimated from 8-way score)
2. Montecito (1600MHz) - 67
3. Tulsa (3330MHz) - 61
4. Opteron (2400MHz) - 46

SAP-SD 2-tier:
1. Power5+ (2200MHz) - 100 (estimated from 8-way score)
2. Tulsa (3400MHz) - 77
3. OpteronF (2800MHz) - 72
4. Montecito (1600MHz) - 55

SPEC Jbb2005:
1. Tulsa (3400MHz) - 109
2. Power5+ (2200MHz) - 100 (estimated from 8-way score)
4. Montecito (1600MHz) - 85
3. OpteronF (2800MHz) - 77

link

I see that Tulsa is better than Opteron by :
- 32% in TPC-C
- 7% in SAP-SD
- 41% in Spec Jbb

---

paxville+tulsa = prescott (smithfield) + cedar mill (presler)

i''ve never seen a fanboy THAT arrogant :p:

saying that netburst in its current state outperforms K8 in 4p situations is not just arrogant IT IS DUMB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generics_user

paxville+tulsa = prescott (smithfield) + cedar mill (presler)

i''ve never seen a fanboy THAT arrogant :p:

saying that netburst in its current state outperforms K8 in 4p situations is not just arrogant IT IS DUMB

---

But as the above enterprise benchmarks, all of which are important, it can and does. Which goes to show, a big cache and smart logic are just as important as the processor in bigger socket servers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serge84

Talking like you know everything when apperently you don't Intel can not go past 2P's means limited to 8 cores. And 8 cores can not compare to 16 or 32 on one board.

---

Sorry to say, I've seen a 4 SOCKET ES c2d board running quad woodcrests with clovertown support. There's probably a reason why this board never made it to retail as performance was absolutely horrid.....:p:

P.S. The performance advantage that I stated earlier was @ a speed = to one of Intel's current PRODUCTION quads, not @ 1ghz or anything like that :p: And don't forget, this result was from a desktop cpu....I haven't yet said anything about sF yet ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s7e9h3n

Sorry to say, I've seen a 4 SOCKET ES c2d board running quad woodcrests with clovertown support. There's probably a reason why this board never made it to retail as performance was absolutely horrid.....:p:

P.S. The performance advantage that I stated earlier was @ a speed = to one of Intel's current PRODUCTION quads, not @ 1ghz or anything like that :p: And don't forget, this result was from a desktop cpu....I haven't yet said anything about sF yet ;)

---

given those numbers:.
2.93Ghz x 1.10 (or 110%) = 3.223Ghz.
Which is pretty good

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s7e9h3n

Sorry to say, I've seen a 4 SOCKET ES c2d board running quad woodcrests with clovertown support. There's probably a reason why this board never made it to retail as performance was absolutely horrid.....:p:

P.S. The performance advantage that I stated earlier was @ a speed = to one of Intel's current PRODUCTION quads, not @ 1ghz or anything like that :p: And don't forget, this result was from a desktop cpu....I haven't yet said anything about sF yet ;)

---

Well hurry up and say something about it!! heh, j/k!! really, j/k.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

given those numbers:.
2.93Ghz x 1.10 (or 110%) = 3.223Ghz.
Which is pretty good

---

I was thinking he meant desktop quads. Therefore he meant 2.66 or 2.4 not 2.93.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64

INTEL needs to be on 45nm process and looking at 25nm cause if they keep on neglecting the FSB issue they have 45nm ain't gonna be enough for them to surpass AMD in the near future, nevermind keep up with them.

---

Seeing as 32nm immersion lithography is still not settled without double exposure or doubling masking I think Intel should tackle 32nm before jumping right to 25nm. EDIT: actually this little roadbump could help AMD close some more gap a few years down the road depending on how well resist manufactures react, what immersion fluid is found with correct refractive index and Canon(not so much), Nikon, ASML's time to market after this is settled.


All I had to say gentlemen...please continue...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

given those numbers:.
2.93Ghz x 1.10 (or 110%) = 3.223Ghz.
Which is pretty good

---

You're 2 days behind. I for sure dont want a NN-step processor :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

Blal bla bla....I don't know if I should feel sorry or laugh. :stick:


For 90nm
Vdd=1.0V

IBM/AMD
NMOS=0.96mA @ 100uA Ioff
PMOS=0.48mA @ 100uA Ioff

Intel
NMOS=1.15mA @ 100uA Ioff
PMOS=0.67mA @ 100uA Ioff

Intel advantage 20% for NMOS , 40% for PMOS.

For 65nm
Gate Length: 35nm, Vdd=1.0V

IBM/AMD*

NMOS=1.14mA @ 200uA Ioff
PMOS=0.7mA @ 200uA Ioff

Intel

NMOS=1.21mA @ 100uA Ioff
PMOS=0.71 @ 100uA Ioff

Extrapolating Intel to 200uA should give around NMOS/PMOS ~ 1310/760@200uA.

Intel advantage 15% NMOS , 8.5% PMOS.

Drain leakage current is the current that still flows when the transistor is fully turned off. A good process has both high drive and a high ratio of max on-current to off-current.

For the IBM/AMD the on/off ratio is:

1.14 mA/200 nA = 1140 uA/0.2 uA = 5700:1

For the Intel the on/off ratio is:

1.31 mA/200 nA = 1310uA/0.2 uA = 6550:1

*If someone has newer values pls post them.

---

Don't make up numbers with your intel fandum bozo BS. Show links? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s7e9h3n

Sorry to say, I've seen a 4 SOCKET ES c2d board running quad woodcrests with clovertown support. There's probably a reason why this board never made it to retail as performance was absolutely horrid.....:p:

P.S. The performance advantage that I stated earlier was @ a speed = to one of Intel's current PRODUCTION quads, not @ 1ghz or anything like that :p: And don't forget, this result was from a desktop cpu....I haven't yet said anything about sF yet ;)

---

I'm pretty sure this is a joke because currently they can not make this type of board. It is impossible only in your wet dreams. Get a girl friend. You didn't see jack SH*T. The FSB would be so limited each chip would only have about 266mhz of bus per socket or less. That wouldn't scale silly. :slap: :stick: Whats wrong with you? :rolleyes: Please show what you clam or stop showing BS on my forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serge84

I'm pretty sure this is a joke because currently they can not make this type of board. It is impossible only in your wet dreams. Get a girl friend. You didn't see jack SH*T. The FSB would be so limited each chip would only have about 266mhz of bus per socket or less. That wouldn't scale silly. :slap: :stick: Whats wrong with you? :rolleyes: Please show what you clam or stop showing BS on my forum.

---

actually he is speaking of how Conroe's Prefetch compete against each other, which is why Tigerton is so delayed ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

Blal bla bla....I don't know if I should feel sorry or laugh. :stick:


For 90nm
Vdd=1.0V

IBM/AMD
NMOS=0.96mA @ 100uA Ioff
PMOS=0.48mA @ 100uA Ioff

Intel
NMOS=1.15mA @ 100uA Ioff
PMOS=0.67mA @ 100uA Ioff

Intel advantage 20% for NMOS , 40% for PMOS.

For 65nm
Gate Length: 35nm, Vdd=1.0V

IBM/AMD*

NMOS=1.14mA @ 200uA Ioff
PMOS=0.7mA @ 200uA Ioff

Intel

NMOS=1.21mA @ 100uA Ioff
PMOS=0.71 @ 100uA Ioff

Extrapolating Intel to 200uA should give around NMOS/PMOS ~ 1310/760@200uA.

Intel advantage 15% NMOS , 8.5% PMOS.

Drain leakage current is the current that still flows when the transistor is fully turned off. A good process has both high drive and a high ratio of max on-current to off-current.

For the IBM/AMD the on/off ratio is:

1.14 mA/200 nA = 1140 uA/0.2 uA = 5700:1

For the Intel the on/off ratio is:

1.31 mA/200 nA = 1310uA/0.2 uA = 6550:1

*If someone has newer values pls post them.

---

:) :) .... good one...

here is the link referencing that data, it is extracted from IEDM reported results:
http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cf...005001504&p=14

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serge84

Don't make up numbers with your intel fandum bozo BS. Show links? :rolleyes:

---

Shown above.... also, most all this data can be found by simply spending an afternoon in the library at your nearest university. All IEEE sponsored journals and proceedings from conferences are published there.... savantu has posted accurate numbers and the appropriate analysis.

All I know is, C2D is basically the P3 architecture with lots of cache thrown at it, while the K8L/K10 is a big change, and that's why I believe the K10 will bring back the performance crown to AMD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramenchef

All I know is, C2D is basically the P3 architecture with lots of cache thrown at it, while the K8L/K10 is a big change, and that's why I believe the K10 will bring back the performance crown to AMD.

---

You may want to re-evaluate what you know about C2D.... it was just as a major overhaul or more so.... and it should have been, in order to leap as far forward as it did. Deeper TLB buffers, wider SSE and FPU units, extra decoder etc. etc. It was a bit more.

Quote:

---

What is known is that Barcelona—as AMD has dubbed this first iteration—isn't so much a brand-new architecture as it is a highly refined, tweaked version of the existing AMD x86-64. Those tweaks are numerous and significant. It's probably fair to suggest that Barcelona is to the current Opterons as Intel's Core 2 is to the Pentium M—designed from the ground up, on a base of the old with a lot of new stuff rolled in.

---

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2027633,00.asp

The magnitude of the revision, I believe is roughly the same, and yes K10 will be a massive step forward. However, to deride C2D's improvement over the P3 as just larger cache is unfair to C2D as well as K8 --- and even K10, for if all it ended up being is a larger cache then it would not take much to surpass K10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JumpingJack

You may want to re-evaluate what you know about C2D.... it was just as a major overhaul or more so.... and it should have been, in order to leap as far forward as it did. Deeper TLB buffers, wider SSE and FPU units, extra decoder etc. etc. It was a bit more.


http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2027633,00.asp

The magnitude of the revision, I believe is roughly the same, and yes K10 will be a massive step forward. However, to deride C2D's improvement over the P3 as just larger cache is unfair to C2D as well as K8 --- and even K10, for if all it ended up being is a larger cache then it would not take much to surpass K10.

---

well C2D was the logical improvement of P6 architecture (the design from Pentium Pro til Pentium3) but yes there are many many improvements from the P3 to C2D. Adding cache has diminishing returns until the point where the application entirely fit into it than any extra is completely wasted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generics_user

paxville+tulsa = prescott (smithfield) + cedar mill (presler)

i''ve never seen a fanboy THAT arrogant :p:

saying that netburst in its current state outperforms K8 in 4p situations is not just arrogant IT IS DUMB

---

Are you actually dumb enough not to see what numbers tell you ?

You're the best example of rabid fanboys who have taken their beliefs to religious status.

Welcome to the real world , where Xeon has 60+% of the >=4P market and where real companies do benchmarks before they buy something.AMD can say what they want about their 4P solutions , SUN the same.Reality says otherwise you win some , lose others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramenchef

All I know is, C2D is basically the P3 architecture with lots of cache thrown at it, while the K8L/K10 is a big change, and that's why I believe the K10 will bring back the performance crown to AMD.

---

To prove that you don't know sh*t allow me to quote Randy Allen...If you don't know who Randy Allen is , Google is your friend.

Quote:

---

AMD redesigned the Barcelona core, marking the biggest changes since the company made its 2003 transition from its 32-bit Athlon chips to the current 64-bit lineup. The magnitude of the transition is about halfway between the small tweaks AMD has made to Opteron over the years and the clean-sheet redesign Intel employed in moving from NetBurst to its current Core design, Allen said.

---

link

It's good to know that Intel's biggest competitor admits that Core is a clean-sheet redesign , that's worth more than all the shouting from a specific crowd who likes to call Core a "P3 with cache".

It simply shows their level of understanding or its lack thereof...

Me come back after a lonG timee to see this. Dudez whow thatz a bummer for him. Got wiped out... just like that. Well "You're as bad a troll as Serge."

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...103048,00.html

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...114609,00.html

I think AMD has the upper hand here in this game of tag.

I'm sorry but for once somebody here is right and the other person is wrong. No offense brow. Woooh I wouldn't want to get booted out of here like the krock hunter does to a dingo on a satterday night MAN. But this is about now K10 is it not?

Can we stop talking about other people and get back on track so we can be rad man? Cuzzzz K10 is theE BOMB. Like the man said stick on topic and stop getting personal. Its like Sooo NOT COOL Bro!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savantu

Blal bla bla....I don't know if I should feel sorry or laugh. :stick:


For 90nm
Vdd=1.0V

IBM/AMD
NMOS=0.96mA @ 100uA Ioff
PMOS=0.48mA @ 100uA Ioff

Intel
NMOS=1.15mA @ 100uA Ioff
PMOS=0.67mA @ 100uA Ioff

Intel advantage 20% for NMOS , 40% for PMOS.

For 65nm
Gate Length: 35nm, Vdd=1.0V

IBM/AMD*

NMOS=1.14mA @ 200uA Ioff
PMOS=0.7mA @ 200uA Ioff

Intel

NMOS=1.21mA @ 100uA Ioff
PMOS=0.71 @ 100uA Ioff

Extrapolating Intel to 200uA should give around NMOS/PMOS ~ 1310/760@200uA.

Intel advantage 15% NMOS , 8.5% PMOS.

Drain leakage current is the current that still flows when the transistor is fully turned off. A good process has both high drive and a high ratio of max on-current to off-current.

For the IBM/AMD the on/off ratio is:

1.14 mA/200 nA = 1140 uA/0.2 uA = 5700:1

For the Intel the on/off ratio is:

1.31 mA/200 nA = 1310uA/0.2 uA = 6550:1

*If someone has newer values pls post them.

---

Try comparing history not just one sample of conroe bro. AMD's FAB capabilities are more like not comparing ratios but complexity of techniques and materials used Intel Lacks mate. Netburst was a frigin jk on a croks tail over a camp fire. Leaked like a sharks mouth is wattered 24/7 dingo. FAB VS FAB AMD's just going to flat out win because SOI-3 as said before is like trying to compare a warthog to a cheetr catz The big cat in the outback will always win with the more complex tech mate. ;)

http://fab36.amd.com/en-us/tech_silicon.aspx Read this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

hmmm, didn't checked here for a couple of days, brent triple posting, betting 50 bucks on this and that (using the same phrase each time), repeating how much AMD are skrewed, how advaced intel is and intel superiority stuff in general, all this in the AMD forum..

nice, but nothing new to see

brent, are you s7e9h3n's secretary now? :D I think the man can speak for himself if he wants to. For such an educated and well connected person you seem to be taking the forum way too serious ;)

---

:toast: Funny how they don't ban all flamers mate? That was my Bro and I'm sure he can if he was here to defend himself. But I guess he needs other ppl to do that for him because some ppl just can't talk to somebody head on and half to talk behind their backs. Cool off brent. You take things far too seriously. Its just a forum calm down. Now lets get back to the bebobing in the outback with this K10 stuff boy's and gals... are there any I wonder sometimes? :P The Tech is as new as a 1st born pocket jumper. So may we treat it as such? Who knows.

more on the bacelona from the inquirer

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37574

At the International Solid State Circuits Conference in San Francisco, which kicks off Feb. 11, the company's engineers will demonstrate new technology that will make AMD's first quad-core chip more power-efficient than previous dual-core processors.
http://www.channelinsider.com/articl.../200885_1.aspx

Quote:

---

In addition, AMD engineers will also demonstrate a feature in Barcelona that allows the four cores to be powered down independent of the system memory interface. This, according to AMD, will still allow peak memory performance, while saving on power.

The memory interface will also allow the read/write memory to power down. The result, AMD said, will allow a power savings of 80 percent with the memory controller.

---

Nice move :)

soo ok guys was readin tru and im abit confused.is k8l a new chip that will run on am2 or its own new board??

just so much amd stuf happen like the fx-74 and stuf :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awhir

soo ok guys was readin tru and im abit confused.is k8l a new chip that will run on am2 or its own new board??

just so much amd stuf happen like the fx-74 and stuf :D

---

desktop version should be out in the third quarter

supposedly it will run on am2 motherboards , with probably a bios update , but you would probably be better off to get a am2+ motherboard which would allow it to power down the cores and parts of the cpu that is not being used , another words it should be more power effivient in a am2+ motherboard

the barcelons is a server cpu , but amd may allow some to be used in the quad father motherboard

any more questioons? just ask away

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awhir

soo ok guys was readin tru and im abit confused.is k8l a new chip that will run on am2 or its own new board??

just so much amd stuf happen like the fx-74 and stuf :D

---

Basically K8L/K10 chip will work on AM2/S1207 sockets (without split power planes, so it will be less energy efficient in old motherboards).
to fully utilize its potential you will need AM2+/S1207+ sockets. Purely performance wise I can't see any significant differences between old/new variant of same socket (at least in 1P-2P motherboards).