AMD K10 SuperPi Reults

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

08-30-2007, 01:11 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by caligula

Somebody please come up with some Core Celeron SuperPI scores@2GHz. Just to give AMD a hint what their work can be compared with :(
I am totally disappointed. Looks like AMD is willing to give the CPU market to Intel. Start stashing thousands of dollars for the next Intel CPU :(

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
08-30-2007, 01:13 PM
AliG

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eldonko

I hope performance improves a ton from this, because if not AMD will be gone. :(

that's what I'm worried about:(
08-30-2007, 01:13 PM
m411b

This is a waste of space!!
08-30-2007, 08:58 PM
FlawleZ

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mav451

B/c Netburst did well at SuperPI is the reason i discount SuperPI entirely.

It's nice as an initial check on system stability, but that's about it.

What? Netburst sucked royally at SuperPi. The only DECENT Netburst numbers were 4.5+ Ghz.
08-30-2007, 09:04 PM
FlawleZ

Quote:

Originally Posted by uOpt

I and several other people have reviewed the list of actual changes to the K10 integer units and I came up with a prediction of 5% win over K8 per-core same-clock. I have documented this prediction here and at 2cpu and you won't see my posts haven't been edited since then.

The new L3 cache won't do much for per-core performance since L2 is already big enough for most real-world applications common demands (it was in K8) and going through an additional level of cache has a cost associated to it.

The point about K10 is to delivery many-core low-power systems with good IPC in the server segment and quad-core low-cost systems in the desktop and home use segment.

The huge and unexpected win that Core2 had over K8 is from my observation largely based in the L2 cache design with it's aggressive and speculative prefetch. AMD did not try to do this for K10. The L3 cache in K10 is complicated and it will be useful to improve finely threaded code running in all 4 cores of a L3 cache. But the K10 L3 cache does not include improvements that would be useful per-core like Core2 introduced.

I agree wholeheartedly. And maybe for the end consumer's sake, your predictions are slightly conservative.
08-30-2007, 11:51 PM
mAJORD

oh yeah re the "L2 being disabled" business, Sorry but that is completely impossible. Super pi would be up in the 20min region for 1mb ( I have run it without L2 on a K8 before via a corrupted bios somehow managing to disable it)
08-31-2007, 12:49 AM
davidletterboyz

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparkyJJO

I wouldn't rate how good a CPU is on how it does on superpi. Oooo goody, intel's CPUs can calculate pi faster, whoop-de-do, who gives a crap. I'm interested in the overall total performance. And I'm waiting until release to believe too much about it, a few benchmarks here and there with a lack of total system specs isn't very helpful to me.

Now I guess if calculating pi to the nth digit is your thing then whatever, do what you want.

Ya, agreed. Anyway, SuperPi is not a good program to measure multicore CPU. AFAIK, it's a single threaded program....
08-31-2007, 02:17 AM
caligula

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidletterboyz

Ya, agreed. Anyway, SuperPi is not a good program to measure multicore CPU. AFAIK, it's a single threaded program....

..as well as the other 99% softwares you have installed on your everyday machine.
To continue logically, we can deduce that AMD remains to be well suited only for multicore apps. In this case, who would buy it anyway? Enterprise users. And not even them, since in the enterprise world Intel has secured itself a huge share.
Think, people, think. Sometimes it's harder than everything.
08-31-2007, 02:58 AM
Hornet331

i dont think its that bad, nowadays more and more software trys to utilize manycores. For example games.
08-31-2007, 03:13 AM
dinos22

Quote:

Originally Posted by dinos22

horseshyte man

K8 was absolutely demolishing Intels(netburst) until Ln2 was taken into consideration or until people starting seriously benching centrino (but not many guys did that really cept for a few loyal intel guys and a couple of hard core guys)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeardyMan

LOL
You seme to forget that amd was pushing to 21.00secs where intel was at already sub 18secs...:ROTF:
670 anyone?

yes just as i insinuated

what about equivalent cooling above ambient ;)
08-31-2007, 06:19 AM
davidletterboyz

Quote:

Originally Posted by caligula

..as well as the other 99% softwares you have installed on your everyday machine.
To continue logically, we can deduce that AMD remains to be well suited only for multicore apps. In this case, who would buy it anyway? Enterprise users. And not even them, since in the enterprise world Intel has secured itself a huge share.
Think, people, think. Sometimes it's harder than everything.

What I mean is that multicore CPU should be tested with multi-threaded program.... and superpi is not multi-threaded. :p:
08-31-2007, 09:02 AM
Jimmer411

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparkyJJO

lol somebody fell for it already, I just stuck it there a couple minutes ago :p: :lol2:

I have to admit tho I almost smacked my screen not long after putting it there hehe

I just tried to but stopped before touching it since its a LCD. Canned air didnt get it either! :rofl:
08-31-2007, 09:41 AM
Gothic

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidletterboyz

What I mean is that multicore CPU should be tested with multi-threaded program.... and superpi is not multi-threaded. :p:

sure a multi-core should be tested with multi-thread apps. But performance per core has to be good too.

I posted on page 2 and repeat: This "K10" (wich we are not sure) @ 2GHz performs just about the same as a K7 @ 2.5GHz on PI.

Hope something is REALLY wrong...
08-31-2007, 09:59 AM
freeloader

I really don't care how this chip "SuperPIs". What I'm interested in is video encoding and rendering. I'll wait the ten days to see how this CPU performs.
08-31-2007, 10:39 AM
annaconda

Even SuperPi is a single core bechmark C2D still beats K10. What's the point single core or dual core, we can match core for core. If Intel's Quadcore can get under 10 sec superpi then AMD should also. :shrug:
09-01-2007, 03:50 AM
leoftw

When I use SuperPi on my quad , it doesn't even use any of my other cores. I don't really give a crap what superpi calculations crap is.
09-01-2007, 03:51 AM
leoftw

Here are my calculations in my quad core opteron system 2.6 though

4gigs of ddr2 667 ecc registered ram

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e3...titled-1-1.jpg
09-01-2007, 04:50 AM
PetNorth

30% more clock than 2.0ghz K10, but only 5% faster. It seems K10 L3 has a nice effect in this crap test.
09-01-2007, 04:59 AM
leoftw

I really don't give a crap about this test either
09-01-2007, 06:25 AM
tictac

yeah... the board looks impressive... lets hope K10 wont take emm down :up:

http://www.bit-tech.net/news_images/...0-733-news.jpg
09-01-2007, 06:56 AM
Monstru

I will believe any result when I see them posted on XS with an actual AMD K10 Cpu and with some screens with ram timings and all the stuff we usually use. Until than, I believe that that screen at the beginning of thje thread is just a hype or a teaser. as I am sure that the new K10 can't perform just like (or worst than) the old K8. Pretty soon will see what AMD's new arhitecture is all about....
09-03-2007, 04:06 PM
KTE

2GHz quad K10 at 39 seconds? Hmm... look at the other K10 thread SPI 1M result, K10 quad core 1.8GHz, B0 step:

http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/3...220rs69uk5.jpg

Something is wrong with these tests - either one of them is not representative of the actual launch product by what I'm seeing. Why are they so unexplainable and contradictory?

Quote:

Originally Posted by caligula

Somebody please come up with some Core Celeron SuperPI scores@2GHz. Just to give AMD a hint what their work can be compared with :(

I've already done something even worse, just to show how wrong this all looks. Heck a cheap old Celeron 256KB L2 which was murdered by Athlon 64 became close to the 39 second K10 time. :confused:

P4 Celeron 3.5GHz 1x 512MB 2-2-2-5 SPI 1M: http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/2747/sp47dm3.jpg

I'm not even going to post the dual channel time it used to give. :ROTF:

The K10 32 seconds looks far more genuine than the 39 seconds result. This is too confusing and riddled. I'm leaving this labyrinth till September 11th. Adios. :)
09-03-2007, 04:31 PM
flesheatinvirus

Here is an old Opty 148 at 3100 for comparison.
09-03-2007, 04:36 PM
Zytek_Fan

The problem is SuperPi is really an irrelevant benchmark now. There's a wide range of CPUs that will score around the same.
09-03-2007, 04:50 PM
adamsleath

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monstru

I will believe any result when I see them posted on XS with an actual AMD K10 Cpu and with some screens with ram timings and all the stuff we usually use. Until than, I believe that that screen at the beginning of thje thread is just a hype or a teaser. as I am sure that the new K10 can't perform just like (or worst than) the old K8. Pretty soon will see what AMD's new arhitecture is all about....

uhuh. +1

when do HT 3.0 cpu's come out?...this is a future thing isnt it? or is ht 3.0 going to be utilised straight up my phenom/barcelona???:confused:

actually i dont know what ht is - it's a bus isnt it?
oh for cpu -> graphics...http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/19/3 - HT 3.0 - off topic:)

http://news.softpedia.com/images/new...the-Show-2.jpg
:spam:

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page