if yes, it will be great! Finally superpi in xtremecooling under 10s
if yes, it will be great! Finally superpi in xtremecooling under 10s
http://www.techimo.com/photo/data/6180/facepalm.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
What does 3C 2012 translate to? Third quarter?
I think yes, so some between June and September
So this years Xmas most likely :) Damn i need at least leaks ASAP! ;)
source: http://techreport.com/articles.x/22452/2Quote:
Dr. Su offered some positive early indications for Trinity. She said design wins are "tracking ahead of Llano," and that chips are already shipping to PC makers, with products due by the middle of the year.
Looks like the chip already to be shipped at least.
Nice read line up looks great Question is the performance and time (release) as it looks after a quick read that 2013 is going to a good year for AMD. Still interested in seeing some results for PileDriver (increase frequency and IPC)Quote:
Originally Posted by haylui
Attachment 124089
http://www.donanimhaber.com/islemci/...slemcileri.htm
The source talk about SI graphics core next????
The GPU should be VLIW4 instead of VLIW5 that is in Llano. VLIW4 approx. has ~1.1-1.15x better performance than VLIW5 at similar stream proc. count and clock . So 384SP in Trinity should be equivalent to ~422-440SP in Llano(at same clock). Since top Llano's GPU runs at 600Mhz and Trinity's at 800MHz,it's obvious how much faster will Trinity based APU be in GPU tasks: 422/400x800/600=~1.40x or 40% faster.
How would you explain the dual graphics technology with VLIW 4 (two different arquitecture for discrete graphics) for Trinity?Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Because not all 7000 series are GCN based... But honestly I don't know how AMD plans to pair VLIW4 in Trinity with re-branded 7570 or lower models that are still VLIW5 based. Maybe parts can work in hybrid crossfire even though they are different.Quote:
Originally Posted by cesariuth
VLIW4 was confirmed for Trinity during AMD Fusion Developer Summit 2011. GCN won't make an appearance in Trinity, AMD even explicitly stated GCN for Kaveri during Analyst Day.Quote:
Originally Posted by cesariuth
then there is no dual technology grafics for Trinity?Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartidiot89
Of course there is... But we don't know with which models will it be able to pair up with.
Fudzilla
- Monday, 21 November 2011
Quote:
AMD claims a significant improvement in the "dual graphics" department as the new A8-, A6- and A4-series Trinity parts should benefit greatly when paired up with Turks Pro GPU, aka Radeon HD 6570.
Quote:
Although public details about Piledriver are scant, Cyclos has announced that AMD licensed its resonant clock mesh technology in order to reduce the chip's clock distribution power.
http://www.presence-pc.com/actualite...edriver-46763/
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...ant-clock-mesh
interesting, hopefully this is curb high power consumption at load for bulldozers
nice to see their modular design is starting to benefit from such things. hopefully it works out along with all the the other piledriver tweaks ;)
I hope even more so that Global Foundries gets its process in line. Tweaks are good and all but if the actual production process is terrible we still will have lower than hoped for clock speeds and higher than hoped for power consumption.
according to dobaher (rumors?) that BD 8140 (also other as 4, 6 cores) is coming.
new revision? I hope for improved OC
Well if it is called the 8140, Id guess it will OC about the same and have similar power draw, but launch at a slightly slower clock speed. If it was going to be better AMD would have called it the 8160.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomasis
you are right.. I want see new tech from piledriver (mesh) implement on BD early, maybe the hope is out anyway.
These are 95w instead of 125w so maybe glofo is getting better
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors
are these confirmed B3 steppings? for FX-4170 and FX-6200
hmm maybe not
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldo...70FRW4KGU.html
any reviews yet?
I think AMD are just milking B2 with the pointless FX-4170 and FX-8140 releases. The extra 100 MHz won't be worth a single $ over the 8120. We'll never see a B3 stepping out of Bulldozer IMO between how hard it failed (if not in performance to some, performance per watt is dismal...), production capacity with APU/CPU balance and available wafer slots @ GloFo.Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
We can blame the manufacturing process all we want but it's been 6 months since retail production began for FX-8100 series, 9 months since AMD Llano retail production and apparently it has only improved 3%. To be honest, AMD and GloFo need about 10x that.
One reason I am reluctant to blame the manufacturing process is Llano's performance per watt. At a high vcore (1.4v+ stock vcore) it can still beat Phenom II performance per watt, memory bandwidth and performance per clock and include a GPU with significantly less package pins (not sure how they pulled that off!)... Bulldozer couldn't, at all.
I think it's right for AMD to skip a new stepping here and get the already reworked and finished Piledriver core on the market ASAP. I'm sure they already have early engineering samples of 8-core FX-8300 CPUs, and Trinity will probably ramp up retail production before the end of March.
Beep: I think the same :)....
Never heard about Cyclos before, so had to look them up.
http://www.cyclos-semi.com/news/firs...mentation.html
Now I have no idea how much power the clock distribution part in BD use, but everything counts I guess :)Quote:
AMD’s 4+ GHz x86-64 core code-named “Piledriver” employs resonant clocking to reduce clock distribution power up to 24% while maintaining the low clock-skew target required by high-performance processors.
i am agree with you. AMD better make Piledriver out asap...Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Piledriver ready to buy under summer?
one never knows who plays with engineering sample 8300 :D
Chew?! ;)
yes, fake (bad making fake, look at clocks backround)
Maybe real information with bad image editing XD
Hopefully cyclos implementation won't inhibit Overclocking
Quote:
Originally Posted by wez
Cyclos said that it could be as much as 30% of the total power for a CPU and that they could shave 25% off of that but they weren't specifically talking about any CPU.
Then they said their tech had a 5 to 10% gain in power consumption for a Piledriver @ 4 GHz.
from where do you see the 5 to 10% power consumption increase @4GHz in Piledriver?Quote:
Originally Posted by LowRun
source:Quote:
MD’s 4+ GHz x86-64 core code-named “Piledriver” is the first high-volume processor core to deploy the Cyclos RCM technology to reduce clock power while maintaining an ultra-low clock-skew target. The Cyclos resonant clock mesh relies on fully-integrated inductors to reduce average power consumption by 5% to 10% and improve peak-power-constrained performance with minimal area impact.
http://www.cyclos-semi.com/technology/
I guess LowRun meant that PD @4Ghz sees 5-10% power consumption decrease ("gain" in his post). The tech's efficency lowers when you push the frequency very high. Best results are achieved at much lower clocks which bodes well for Trinity ULV.
4170, 6200 in the wild yet?
do you think transistor count will go down with piledriver as they refine the arch?
Well, since the 1.2B and 2B numbers are both false, we will never know...but I don't think it will go down or anything outside of the possibility that they will add more L2 and eliminate/reduce L3.Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
Hopefully they get at least a "Llano" type boost (with some extra clock speed), 5-10% IPC increase and the rest in frequency.
http://www.eecs.umich.edu/eecs/about...submission.pdf (page 11)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
from this document, the optimal frequency, efficiency falls at 3.3GHz which is ~25% and at 4GHz it gets 20% efficiency.
I'd really like to see ~4.2 GHz @ 1.2v retail chips on 32nm out of PD as stated in that document within 125w TDP...maybe up to 4.4?
AMD could potentially save themselves in the midrange / high end with PD FX, even though it's still half a year away. APUs have a place for sure, intel is moving this way as well with their HD2/3K but don't have the graphics to compete.
I intend to buy Trinity Desktop A10 whenever it becomes available...
I suppose i got lost in translation and yeah i did mean a decrease in power consumption.Quote:
Originally Posted by haylui
http://blogs.amd.com/fusion/2012/03/...9D-generation/
Quote:
The score for the 2012 AMD A10-4600M on the “Pumori” reference design for PC Mark Vantage Productivity benchmark shows an increase of up to 29% over the 2011 AMD A8-3500M on the “Torpedo” reference design. The AMD A10-4600M APU has a score of 6125 and the 2011 AMD A8-3500M APU scored 4764.
The score for the 2012 AMD A10-4600M APU on the “Pumori” reference design for 3D Mark Vantage Performance showed an increase of up to 56% over the 2011 AMD A8-3500M APU. The AMD A10-4600M APU has a score of 4352 and the 2011 A8-3500M has a score of 2788.
sergiojr who knows how credible it is.
edit: it looks credible, but I think something is contributing to the really good score, like the scheduling patch or something.
well they went from 1333 to 1600 memory so that helps.
if i was AMD id be testing with 1866 or higher all the time. lolQuote:
Projections assume A10-4600M with AMD Radeon™ HD 7660 Graphics, 4G DDR3-1600 (Dual Channel) Memory and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. The AMD reference design “Torpedo” consisted of the 2011 AMD A8-3500M with AMD Radeon™ HD 6620G Graphics, 4GB DDR3-1333 and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit.
cant wait for this the FX-8350 Vishera
http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/26...oduction-in-q3
Looks like Trinity will have up to 35 Voodoopower at the most, while Kaveri with its 512 GCN shader processor units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs will have a LOT more (only really being hurt by the bandwidth, compared to HD 7750)!!!
EDIT: For an explanation of Voodoopower ratings, just take a look at my awesome new list, linked at the bottom of my sig! The fastest Llano is rated at 25 VP.
Trinity APU A10-5800K early benchmarks leak?
http://www.chiphell.com/thread-387958-1-1.html
Hmm, that is interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by haylui
That puts Trinity 1M (assuming 4.2 GHz) @ 5 / 5.3 GHz around 19s /18s and 3DMark06 CPU score @ 3.8 GHz under stock Phenom II 955 BE levels. If true, I am not at all impressed D: but GPU improvement seems great.
L3....Vishera will be better and we dont know, how Turbo worked at A10-5800 (CPU could run superpi at 3800 MHz or so). I think Vishera could run superpi1M at FX8150 clocks around 19-19.5s (FX has 20.5s Im thinking)
we were told that L3 was not really usefull client side
and for superpi i dont know how much it would help anyway considering its single threaded.
and its just superpi, who cares anyway :)
I was talking about two different benchmarks...not just superpi.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
As far as it being "just superpi", a lot of overclockers/benchers would disagree :p:
That single threaded performance is still awful....Assuming Turbo is working on Single Threaded, 4.2GHz... :( . Even so , I suppose it does beat their 10% improvement vs Llano in CPU and much more on GPU. Multithreaded about 10% better as well according to the CPU score in 3DMark.
23.775s - Trinity @ 3.8 / 4.2GHz Turbo
26.039 - Llano @ 2.9GHz
For reference my 24/7 Llano @ 3.55GHz does about 21.1s on 1M. IMO Trinity on desktop needs Hybrid Crossfire tech that will allow it to be paired with any GPU (and not just a low end GPU part like the 76xx).
wonder how these overclock...5ghz possible ;)
hopefully trinity is unlocked, the gpu score is awesome!
But we dont know, how Turbo was worked, dont know RAM setings (it could be only 1333 MHz c9/10), jumping between threads in superpi or downclocks (seems, C1E,C6 was active)
http://www.nordichardware.com/news/6...n-folding.html
pretty good since its compared to the A8-3500m and theres still the A10Quote:
The two cores in a Piledriver module shares one floating point unit which can be split into two smaller, so the boost there is relatively marginal. When it comes to integer performance the boost is nearly 40 percent, this is even thought the new processors are specified to the same TDP. AMD told us we can expect up to 25 percent better processor performance with the same energy consumption over last geenration, which matches the results above. The exact frequency of A8-4500M is uncertain at this time, but should be higher than 1,5 GHz found with A8-3500M.
I believe AMD prefers the term 'Dual Graphics' ... :D ... Hybrid Crossfire is so IGP (and meh).Quote:
Originally Posted by Miwo
With alternate-frame sequencing such pairings are unlikely, and the rumahs on the internets have the Radeon HD 6570 Turks Pro discreet being the card of choice in dual graphics with Trinity.
AMD propaganda says "up to 50% greater performance" than Hybrid Cros ...errr.... Dual Graphics on Llano.
With a little more grunt from the Piledriver cores, improved dual graphics performance and better use of faster RAMs, AMD might have a little something going on.
Time to unleash the fury
http://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/152...pps-den-15-maj
Trinity launch for 15 of may
wonder if blizzard is gonna be a launch partner...
Free Diablo 3 with Trinity based machines :D
I donw know guys...I expected launch one month later...If will be this new true then is good new :)
So trinity in May and full AM3+ piledriver in June? Assuming the sweeds have it right.
Hmm,
I have noticed a lot of manufacturer "refurbished" am3+ boards showing up on various sites that seem to be the complete box and accessories. I also noticed prices starting to drop after many months of relatively little change on some of the more popular am3+ boards.
I wonder if this is due to the rumored new chipset coming soon for AM3+ ? A June releases would be about right to clear inventory and introduce new boards in late May-early June.
I doubt there will be much difference between PD in Trinity and PD in Vishera. Same core just with additional L3 cache on Vishera platform.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darakian
That can mean up to ~5% performance per clock...Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I would like to see Vishera core(PD with L3) has 5% more IPC than Bulldozer,let alone Trinity.
Then we will have to see what Trinity can do :)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Of course, if AMD made OC headroom similar to C2 AM2+ X4 to C3 AM3 X4 (200-500+ MHz) we will certainly have an interesting product on our hands. I can see people being happy with 5.0-5.2 stable and benching up around 5.4-5.5 on normal ambient cooling as well as a 5% IPC increase.
...and reasonable power consumption when overclocked.
Trinity will contain Piledriver v1 x86 cores (10h - 1fh). Vishera will have Piledriver v2 cores (Viperfish - 20h - 2fh).
maybe....My tip is, example in old x87 benchmark superpi will be this comparsion:
3.6/4.2 GHz Zambezi = superpi 1M in 20.5s
3.6/4.2 GHz Vishera= superpi 1M in 19.00-19.5s (this is my tip)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
Superpi is one of the most useless benchmark in the world. It's a piece of s**t. You should run supermario.exe with fraps instead.:ROTF:
Just because it doesn't run well on AMD it doesn't mean it's useless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
It still scales well with architectural improvements from both camps.
You're wrong. Superpi's code was written in the 90'ties. It's fully x87 based which area is totally irrelevant nowadays. Neither Intel or AMD develop this part of the microarchitecture. What you could see as a so called "architectural improvements" is just the speed of the cache or the memory access.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Superpi is useless because you can't even get a realistic comparison between different families from the same company. It's just a cheap toy for boring kids. Nothing else.
Okay, PD and BD are similar cores so if we see an improvement, I'm sure you know that is probably a good thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
If you think SuperPi is a cheap toy for boring kids, I'm sorry but I disagree. This is XtremeSystems.org, not Super Mario Bros. Win 7 Fan Site...SuperPi is completely irrelevant as far as comparison between different families/brands of CPU but creates great competition for HWBOT or people running similar processors with few variables in the way you can run it.
And the speed of the cache or the memory access it's useless for you.Quote:
What you could see as a so called "architectural improvements" is just the speed of the cache or the memory access.
Superpi is useless because you can't even get a realistic comparison between different families from the same company. It's just a cheap toy for boring kids. Nothing else.
Different families, what you can't compare core i3 with i5 or i7? Scoket 1155 with 2011?
It's a funny thing that Intel Cpu's during last years just improved over and over in Super Pi, with generations and arhitectures, and IPC and overall performance also just over and over improved.
And yet comes BD, with a big hit in Super Pi compared with Phenom.
And what a surprize, single thread is down to earth and multithread almost a fail.
Don't writte of x87, do you think that it's used only in Super Pi.
OLiverda, OK, so diferent comparsion...Cinebench R11.5 multi
Zambezi 3.6GHz/4.2GHZ 6.01p
Vishera 3.6GHZ/4.2 GHz 6.5-6.7p is my estimate
Some A10 Trinity info (including Vids)... :up:
http://tbreak.com/tech/2012/04/amd-a...st-impression/
Not alot of details, but the DIRT3 demo is pretty impressive for a laptop!
If the desktop version comes out around the same time (as suggested) I may be updating my HTPC in the next few months... :D
The "Steady Video" thing looks promising too!
No modern code runs on x87. SuperPi is useless (but fun) for any performance comparisons. Much of the performance increases we see comes from the new/improved instruction sets, so SuperPi is not worth one thing when comparing a new architecture really. There are already SuperPi results out for Trinity, extrapolating them towards a direct comparison for Llano isn't even an option imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
There isn't much time left until Trinity is released, so all these speculations and trying to use SuperPi as a metric should be history shortly... ;)
Anyway you put it if BD would have been better in Super Pi than Phenom instead of worse it would have been the cpu which all people expected. :yepp:
Exactly,
The benchmark is not useless, sorry. Its completely informative. Too me, AMD can't produce a processor that can touch INTCs. Untill AMD makes a processor that execute x87 code as well as INTCs, they wont have the performance of INTCs and be the red-headed bastard child that gets kicked to the curb. Sorry. This benchmark tells me alot.
RussC
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
If BD performed better in SuperPi I wouldn't have been any less disappointed with it. x87 executions meens absolutely nothing today. AMD doesn't need to be able to execute SuperPi (sorry I meen the "all-important" x87) well. Sandy Bridge (2600K) is about twice as fast than Bulldozer (FX-8150) in SuperPi, the difference i single-threaded performance isn't that huge. SuperPi is a useless metric, which is very entertaining for overclockers and benchers but that's just what it is.
Stock vs stock, 2600K has 37% lower single thread runtime in THG benchmark suite that measures single thread efficiency. These are hard facts.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...0x,3075-8.html
2600K , 8:11
8150, 11:13
673s/491=1.37 or 37% lower runtime. So approx. on average intel 2600K is 37% faster in single threaded tasks. In MT the runtime is just 12% better for 2600K (again stock vs stock).
If we look at the 3960X and normalize for clockspeed,intel achieves 1.5x lower single thread runtime than AMD with FX. Some may think this gap cannot be overcome with any soon to come core but it's not quite the case. What AMD needs to achieve parity with SB-E in single thread runtime? They need a 2 successive IPC jumps of approx 10% each(BD->PD 10%, PD->SR 10%) and they need a clock speed uplift with SR core @28nm to 4.5Ghz/5Ghz stock/Turbo. This would push AMD's single core performance right in the league of SB-E,again stock vs stock: 1.1 x 1.1 x 5Ghz/4.2Ghz~=1.44x. Runtime of SR core in the same same suite THG used would land around 7:48 .
Now to achieve 2 successive IPC jumps of ~10% is very hard and although SR may do it over PD,I doubt PD will be 10% faster than BD. Clock speed uplift on the other hand is possible since not only FX launched on sucky 32nm process from GloFo, both PD and SR will incorporate new technological solutions that will push the clock speed higher. PD (and SR) will have resonant clock mesh,while SR will be done on smaller node (28nm) so there will be some natural power draw reduction,die area reduction and clock speed gain.Pipeline itself is designed for higher clockspeeds so I think AMD knows how high can they clock this thing,provided power is under control.
http://i1183.photobucket.com/albums/...y/a8-4500m.jpg
http://www.nordichardware.com/news/6...n-folding.html
so what folding benchmark did they use? my girlfriend has an A8-3500m HP laptop wanna see if they are similar scores...
Need to know 4500M clock speed, to be able to make any sort of perfomance predicions :(
4500M is supposedly 1.6Ghz/2.2Ghz ,def/turbo.
http://www.sibvez.ru/shop/UID_13697.html
Well, this is very good then! Looks promising for Piledriver to be a lot better than Bullzoder too.
Well, trinity could be in higher turbo state for longer time than llano. So that doesn not really tell much.
:shocked::shocked::shocked:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
well if it does in the same thermal , its still good!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
what kind of programs make use of increased Integer speed?
Educate me :D
Video/Still image editing and a number of server apps (web servers, ftp servers, etc...)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomasis
FP throughput is still worryingly problematic... but good to hear that Turbo's actually working now! (gasp!)
In Llano desktop/NB it was hyper-conservative and felt like a scam- most OEMs sold the CPUs at turbo speed marketed but the chips themselves almost never, ever reached them (unless you did some tweaking)
It might have to do with the architecture...I'm just guessing around though. Phenom II X6 turbo never really worked either while BD turbo worked very well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
It certainly made BD look better than it was compared to Phenom II...
A6-4400m will run at 2,6 / 3,2 GHz (source), so A8-4500m should be clocked higher (maybe 2,8 / 3,4 GHz?)...Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
Not too bad but i expected more from CPU side.
http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/26...enches-are-outQuote:
The new Trinity based quad-core runs at 3.8GHz, but it overclocks to 4.2GHz on Turbo Core. It features 4MB of L3 cache and powerful HD 7660D graphics, all packed in a 100W TDP envelope.
So can we predict that ICP of desktop chip will be around 20-25% slower than i5? Looks like with Ivy, the cap between them widens some more.
http://www.legitreviews.com/news/12666/
finally I can buy slim case pc with good GPU! 4 3d programs and some games:-)
Thats 11% or more CPU points with 3800/4200mz vs 2900mhz on 3850K.
Faildozer all over again. :shakes:
that's funny trinity was support to have 25% high cpu vs bulldozer. but bulldozer was 15% slow then phenom II and abuot 35-45% slower then sandybridge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
It's an APU.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
So same processQuote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
same TDP
resulted in:
better cpu performance
better idle power consumption
better gpu performance
clearly a fail... :shakes:
Trinity is a major step forward compared to llano.
GPU is pretty much the only thing whats improved. Not CPU which is actually performing worse per mhz than Llano is. Yes, TDP is the same, but that due better GPU and perhaps little better optimized base voltage of CPU and GPU.
Yes overall perfomance is fine. I am more thinking about Vishera than Trinity here. Hopefully L3 will make desktop Piledriver cores perform better, but i doubt it will make big enough difference.