I wouldn't expect a giveaway to include a CPU released publicly before the NDA is up. Having a random guy sign an NDA would be a bit strange as part of a prize, but maybe they will. I just wouldn't expect it.
I wouldn't expect a giveaway to include a CPU released publicly before the NDA is up. Having a random guy sign an NDA would be a bit strange as part of a prize, but maybe they will. I just wouldn't expect it.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
Originally Posted by informal
Well they had 2 projectors/systems for Dirt so they needed only 2 PCs to run them,logical eh?That's not FX PCs, I said that because FlanK3r pics + comment was misleading
hmmmm looks promising
better ready the 75" screen
how much cpu power is needed to play dirt 3 in eyefinity? i dont imaging much, so i think they could have done better demos
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
Ok, 2 PCs, but second photo is Think the right photo
ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread
Well, it's multithreaded, got decent FPS at extreme resolutions (something you need a good CPU for to reduce bottleneck of multi-GPU) and probably used a large amount of ram.
No, it's not a synthetic test, but perfect real-world gaming situation. (If you can call eyefinity real world)
Smile
AMD readies Bulldozers to ship next month
woot! if true
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07..._2011_numbers/
In your haste to post, you should of added this :p
El Reg discovered that AMD's top brass meant to say that these two chips would ship for revenue next month, but it is still not clear when they will be formally announced.
Dont know if thats any kind of news.But from the article:
Thats pretty much exactly increase in core count.12+35%=16.2.On the server front, Siefert said that the 16-core "Interlagos" Opteron 6200 processor, the first server chip to make use of the "Bulldozer" core and implemented in GlobalFoundries' 32 nanometer processes, would ship this quarter to OEM partners. He added that the chip would offer about a 35 per cent performance boost compared to the current 12-core Opteron 6100s.
If that is the case, then that would be horrific for AMD. They would need these things to clock like no tomorrow.
That is some pretty bad news if true... either clock well or low TDP.
Or he might be giving a realistic view of performance increase expecting software that his clients run to not scale linearly with core count. Amdahl's law and all that.
Unlikely, but hey.
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
at best one could interpret performance increase per core :p
Vishera 8320@ 5ghz | Gigabyte UD3 | 8gb TridentX 2400 c10| Powercolor 6850 | Thermalight Silver Arrow (bench Super KAZE 3k) | Samsung 830 128gbx2 Raid 0| Fractal case
In the CC Seifert talked about 35% more performance in the context of HPC.
Was that solely for software using AVX or in older HPC suits.
If heavy FP code can be up to 35% faster on Interlagos it's quite good actually.
RiG1: Ryzen 7 1700 @4.0GHz 1.39V, Asus X370 Prime, G.Skill RipJaws 2x8GB 3200MHz CL14 Samsung B-die, TuL Vega 56 Stock, Samsung SS805 100GB SLC SDD (OS Drive) + 512GB Evo 850 SSD (2nd OS Drive) + 3TB Seagate + 1TB Seagate, BeQuiet PowerZone 1000W
RiG2: HTPC AMD A10-7850K APU, 2x8GB Kingstone HyperX 2400C12, AsRock FM2A88M Extreme4+, 128GB SSD + 640GB Samsung 7200, LG Blu-ray Recorder, Thermaltake BACH, Hiper 4M880 880W PSU
SmartPhone Samsung Galaxy S7 EDGE
XBONE paired with 55''Samsung LED 3D TV
HPC suffered with memory bandwidth more than pure computing ability.
Correct! Still this is same G34 platform with 4 64bit channels and Interlagos officially supports up to DDR3 1600 which is 20% improvement from DDR3 1333.
RiG1: Ryzen 7 1700 @4.0GHz 1.39V, Asus X370 Prime, G.Skill RipJaws 2x8GB 3200MHz CL14 Samsung B-die, TuL Vega 56 Stock, Samsung SS805 100GB SLC SDD (OS Drive) + 512GB Evo 850 SSD (2nd OS Drive) + 3TB Seagate + 1TB Seagate, BeQuiet PowerZone 1000W
RiG2: HTPC AMD A10-7850K APU, 2x8GB Kingstone HyperX 2400C12, AsRock FM2A88M Extreme4+, 128GB SSD + 640GB Samsung 7200, LG Blu-ray Recorder, Thermaltake BACH, Hiper 4M880 880W PSU
SmartPhone Samsung Galaxy S7 EDGE
XBONE paired with 55''
Finally the performance of Bulldozer ES FX-8150 from OBRovsky:
Attachment 118100
Own AMD shares? Sell Sell Sell....
(but dont bite at that comment! I know it is ES and I also have a huge amount of hope and faith in bulldozer, I cant see that it can be as bad as in the graph above)
Edit:
At a second glance, that graph suggests that if that 8150 was clocked the same as the 1100T, the results would be even closer between Thuban and Zambezi clock for clock.
When will we have some actual figures of non crippled chips!?
Last edited by james333; 07-24-2011 at 01:39 PM.
Dont panic james.Thats OBR, he hates AMD.There are benchmarks in there purposefully put there to lower AMD scores, im sure of it.
We know for example that AES hardware acceleration in BD is much worse than in sandy, which will drown mean score.
Of course he could test more demanding encryption scheme like aes-twofish , but he most probably didnt
As long as he don't tell us what mb+bios (agesa microcode) and chipset drivers, memory speed + OS etc etc he testing on. + it's a ES cpu. And how did he calculate the end score? (i see SuperPi in there among others *ouch*)
You can safely just ignore it
Remember this post from JF-AMD
Last edited by nex_73; 07-24-2011 at 02:24 PM.
My stuff
PhII x6 1055T @ 4.2GHz | Corsair H50 + Scythe SL12SH PnP | Asus Crosshair IV F | 4GB Dominator 1600 CL8 | Corsair HX520W | CM HAF932 | Dell 2405FPW | Creative 5.1 THX |
OBR doesn't hate AMD, he just likes taking advantage of others and messing with people. It probably wouldn't make a difference if it were any particular company; an ass is an ass is an ass.
i see cpuz screen shot 4.2GHz @ 1.39xxx V
stablitiy unknown
Intel Core i5 6600K + ASRock Z170 OC Formula + Galax HOF 4000 (8GBx2) + Antec 1200W OC Version
EK SupremeHF + BlackIce GTX360 + Swiftech 655 + XSPC ResTop
Macbook Pro 15" Late 2011 (i7 2760QM + HD 6770M)
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 (2014) , Huawei Nexus 6P
[history system]80286 80386 80486 Cyrix K5 Pentium133 Pentium II Duron1G Athlon1G E2180 E3300 E5300 E7200 E8200 E8400 E8500 E8600 Q9550 QX6800 X3-720BE i7-920 i3-530 i5-750 Semp140@x2 955BE X4-B55 Q6600 i5-2500K i7-2600K X4-B60 X6-1055T FX-8120 i7-4790K
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
MAXIMUS IV EXTREME-Z CPU INTEL 2600K @ 4700 Mhz @ 1,296v liquid cooling by EK supreme hf RAM A-DATA XPG+ V.2 2200 C8 elpida hyper SLI MSI GTX 560ti TWIN FROZRII OC liquid cooling by ek supreme hf vga bridge edition SSD CRUCIAL C300 128GB MONITOR SAMSUNG 2233RZ + NVIDIA 3D VISION KEYBOARD LOGITECH G110 MOUSE LOGITECH MX518
Bookmarks