No, I'm comparing a server product with a server product. What exactly do you think the main purpose of Sandy Bridge E is?Quote:
Originally Posted by pipoo
Printable View
No, I'm comparing a server product with a server product. What exactly do you think the main purpose of Sandy Bridge E is?Quote:
Originally Posted by pipoo
This is the most lucid statement I have seen made on the Intel/AMD S**T storm on the internet as of date.Quote:
Originally Posted by Halk
yep. amd will price it right.
Um, while i agree with most of the quoted statment, I think there are alot more people than just forums posters and gamers that care about the AMD/INTC competition. There are people around the world making decisions all the time in a computer purchase(of all kinds, tablets ect) that it matters to.
If that chart is right and Zambiezi is even slightly better than and i7-2600k, thats a home run for AMD, plain and simple. Im looking at more of a stock play than anything else. If that chart is right, AMD is a stock double by the end of year.
AMD will not have the best processor, but thats enough for now. Next year is a different story, as 22nM and Tri-Gate technology will put AMD a full 2 generations behind again.
RussC
Quote:
Originally Posted by saint-francis
First, I am skeptical about this PCmark as any kind of indicator, that bench is not at all a very good indication of raw CPU performance (it is influenced way too much by harddrive metrics, yada yada yada). However, if BD comes up on par with a 2600 CPU, then I don't see how this changes much from the current status quo.Quote:
Originally Posted by RussC
The 1100T is roughly in the same leage as a midrange Intel quad (i860/875) today and, as such, it is price pegged down to below 300 bucks. Just performing around a 2600K processor will price peg BD to that below $300 range, then shortly after Intel fills out a new performance/high end range with SB-E.
So, if this holds up, it is a massive improvement but not a home run.... this is of course speculative, I don't think PCmark in this frame of reference is going to be a good indicator.
A homerun would come if BD can perform well in the server market, AMD asbolutely has to turn that around and soon.
I am not entirely sure how much this will play into the equation -- AMD's 45 nm turned out pretty darn good. 32 nm may be good enough, with a good design, to hold the fort against 22nm etc.Quote:
AMD will not have the best processor, but thats enough for now. Next year is a different story, as 22nM and Tri-Gate technology will put AMD a full 2 generations behind again.
RussC
Even PC Mark Vantage uses GPU during global test ...Quote:
Originally Posted by richierich
Guys, I hope you're not planning on getting 8 core CPU to play PC Mark, coz it's weakly threaded.
We need to wait for more tests from various apps to see any real indication of Bulldozer speed. Gaming is again only part of the equation, 3D Modeling/Rendering and DTP/DTV being another part.
Competing with todays Intel is a lot harder than back in late 90' or early 00'.
Still I think AMD will close the gap significantly and at least win in some computing areas on pure performance.
Time to launch is closing by really quickly now :)
Yeah..can't wait to see his performance with Chess and where it will take place in my list..we will know soon!
JP.
BD isnt a 8 core CPU. zambezi has 4 modules and 1 module is NOT equal to 2 cores.
Here we go again. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
If it has 4 modules, then how many cores does it have? :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
Yep its better! Just think of all that cache used by 1 core in certan situations!Quote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
Quick, someone do the math for the intel fanboys.1 Module has many shared transistors, so one module is not 2 cores.
On the intel side, HT takes up die space also, should we treat it like additional "cores" ? :P.
Anyhow going back to CORE of the problem, most valuable metrics someone can do is die area on the same process node (even that isnt 100% accurate as 32nm Glofo process isnt 32nm intel process and there can be various differences like transistor density).
But even thah doesnt concern us, users, what concerns us is cost and power consumption (cost over time).
I don't know why people find it necessary to try and fit the new CPU topology into old terms. It has changed and we need to accept that. The CPU has four modules each one of which has two full integer cores and one floating point core that can either operate as a single 256 bit FPU or dual 128 bit FPU. It is probably best just to call it an 8-core in colloquial conversation since that's how it's going to show up to the system and that's what it'll really be most of the time for general usage. It's not analogous to hyperthreading since there are two full pipelines in a module instead of one. It's important to keep proper perspective, however.
some people need to have :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:slap buttons down by the quote and multi quote buttons. if they get enough :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:slaps then they are automatically banned for a day lol
^my best idea ever...^
Ok, simply....
BD is physically and logical 8-cores CPU with basic building unit "one modul". This one modul has 2 cores, shared FP and L2 cache.
SB 2600K is physically 4-core with some next tranzistors for HT, logical is 8-cores CPU (8 threads in OS).
In the end what really matters is performance/price & performance/watt. Core count is not so important to me. Its bit like arguing whether car engine should have 8 or 6 cylinders. Of course i understand also that people here try to speculate what the performance will be.
If amd can get to same performance level with intel and hold there i think that would be a great achievement considering how much smaller company amd is.
there is an 8 core 16 thread 20mb cache sandy engineering sample on ebay right now.Intel said its 22nn 3d transistors are up to 37% more efficient,if that is true BD is going to have one hell of a battle to fight in the server market.
Right, the Tri-gate technology runs at almost 1/2 the current 22nM votage(0.7V) in the notes I read and the gates switch faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skratch
As some others have said, BD being on par with i7 is a home run. It will take market share(albeit small) and raise margins for AMD, thats the easy call. INTC will lower prices a bit and AMD will be able to raise prices a bit. That helps AMD way more than it huts INTC till next year when they trounce them again.
RussC
I feel bad for AMD as intel has the money and power to always be a few steps ahead of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by RussC
If there 22nn is as they say we can expect 6ghz overclocks with quad core chips.
and lets not forget that almost every 2600k will do 4.7ghz on air and we dont know how BD will clock
If that 4 module CPU beats Intel's six-cores in some tests, Intel marketing will be the first one to convince everybody there's actualy 8 cores inside. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
What are people going to say when in the future there will be one decoder for 4 cores - the whole chip? And it won't be an AMD Cpu? :rolleyes:
37% more faster at the same voltage, and at that, low voltage. we may see a 10-20% faster clocked chip with double the cores.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skratch
22nm consumes half the power at the same performance of 32nm.
i agree, but an argument about this will go nowhere really quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
my guess is that AMD went with the naming scheme to be able to say they have 8 core products. now we are in the core wars, like the megahertz wars of the good old days. having a 4 core bulldozer would sound.. err lame. we had quadcores almost 4 years ago.
*prepares for JF to quote himself from when he already said it has 8 full integer cores*
Do we really need people in here stating "intel will trounce/smash/run over/etc AMD next year" ? Really?
Nope not at all :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky