Swiftech
Page 22 of 48 FirstFirst ... 121920212223242532 ... LastLast
Results 526 to 550 of 1198

Thread: AMD "Piledriver" refresh of Zambezi - info, speculations, test, fans

  1. #526
    Xtreme Mentor demonkevy666's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    cleveland ohio
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by Kristoferr View Post
    Must be some bug in those tests. I do not belive that it can take on 2600K on any of CPU tests.
    look again it not even close in the 2600K infact even the FX 4100 is faster then it 10% (I hope I'm not correct).... lack of L3 cache 10% slower seems kind of a high?
    HAVE NO FEAR!
    "AMD fallen angel"
    "Behold the gaseous stench of Skeletor's breakfast burrito!"
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamekiller View Post
    You didn't get the memo? 1 hour 'Fugger time' is equal to 12 hours of regular time.

  2. #527
    Xtreme Cruncher informal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,170
    Quote Originally Posted by demonkevy666 View Post
    look again it not even close in the 2600K infact even the FX 4100 is faster then it 10% (I hope I'm not correct).... lack of L3 cache 10% slower seems kind of a high?
    FX4100 scores ~4000 pts in passmark. The trinity ES that was listed in the link works at 2.3Ghz with 3.2Ghz maximum Turbo and scores 5390pts. If we take that Trinity almost always runs at max. Turbo and that FX4100 has average clock of 3.7Ghz this leaves us with 6230pts for similarly clocked Trinity APU. This is approx. 50% better which is a bit on a high side IMO. Unless the test hit some bottleneck in BDver1,Trinity shouldn't be performing so much better than current Bulldozer parts. For comparison, 8150 that has 2x more cores/threads than FX4100 scores ~2x more : 8246pts. If we go by this ,a Trinity FX 8C part with similar clocks as 8150 should score more than 10500 pts... I doubt this.

  3. #528
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by demonkevy666 View Post
    look again it not even close in the 2600K infact even the FX 4100 is faster then it 10% (I hope I'm not correct).... lack of L3 cache 10% slower seems kind of a high?

    Check integer math. Thats the bug i was talking about.


    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    FX4100 scores ~4000 pts in passmark. The trinity ES that was listed in the link works at 2.3Ghz with 3.2Ghz maximum Turbo and scores 5390pts. If we take that Trinity almost always runs at max. Turbo and that FX4100 has average clock of 3.7Ghz this leaves us with 6230pts for similarly clocked Trinity APU. This is approx. 50% better which is a bit on a high side IMO. Unless the test hit some bottleneck in BDver1,Trinity shouldn't be performing so much better than current Bulldozer parts. For comparison, 8150 that has 2x more cores/threads than FX4100 scores ~2x more : 8246pts. If we go by this ,a Trinity FX 8C part with similar clocks as 8150 should score more than 10500 pts... I doubt this.
    This.

  4. #529
    Xtreme Member ilkkahy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by xdan View Post

    So clear from cpu side a FAILDOZER.
    AMD in 9 months was not capable to make some tweaks to Llano sillicon to make it do 3.2-3.6ghz(like Phenom II) with overclock to 4-4.2ghz. It should have been a much better choice.
    Llano oc >= Trinity oc.


    FAIL !!!

    http://hwbot.org/submission/2193039_...50d_8027_marks
    A8-3850 @3.321Mhz - 4577.
    No wonder why Romania is such fail of a country if even smart people there express themselves with such idiotic manners. I dont necessarily disagree what you say but i think that the way you say things annoys a lot of people here. Do us all a favor and learn some manners please. But I guess you propably wont...
    "I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a guy nailed to two pieces of wood."

  5. #530
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    944
    Quote Originally Posted by Kristoferr View Post
    Check integer math. Thats the bug i was talking about.




    This.

    perhaps there is bug.
    But I don't understand why CPU Floating Math, Phenom II x4 965 is higher than i7?

  6. #531
    Xtreme Cruncher informal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,170
    Quote Originally Posted by haylui View Post

    perhaps there is bug.
    But I don't understand why CPU Floating Math, Phenom II x4 965 is higher than i7?
    Because Deneb has a very robust FPU. The problem is that it's not multithreaded so it loses to i7's SMT capabilities in MT aware software.
    Bulldozer remedies this somewhat since it has 4 FP units that are 2 way SMT capable. That's why "8 core"(integer core) Bulldozer has a ~SB level performance in FP intensive workloads. 4 FP units vs 4 FP units,both 8 threads capable.

  7. #532
    I am Xtreme BeepBeep2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,315
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    FX4100 scores ~4000 pts in passmark. The trinity ES that was listed in the link works at 2.3Ghz with 3.2Ghz maximum Turbo and scores 5390pts. If we take that Trinity almost always runs at max. Turbo and that FX4100 has average clock of 3.7Ghz this leaves us with 6230pts for similarly clocked Trinity APU. This is approx. 50% better which is a bit on a high side IMO. Unless the test hit some bottleneck in BDver1,Trinity shouldn't be performing so much better than current Bulldozer parts. For comparison, 8150 that has 2x more cores/threads than FX4100 scores ~2x more : 8246pts. If we go by this ,a Trinity FX 8C part with similar clocks as 8150 should score more than 10500 pts... I doubt this.
    First of all Passmark used to be considered a joke of a benchmark, and it really hasn't changed all that much...

    Also, are we talking about overall system score? Regardless, I think you're right...
    Intel all dey erry dey
    AMD all nite erry nite party party party

  8. #533
    Xtreme Mentor demonkevy666's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    cleveland ohio
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
    Because Deneb has a very robust FPU. The problem is that it's not multithreaded so it loses to i7's SMT capabilities in MT aware software.
    Bulldozer remedies this somewhat since it has 4 FP units that are 2 way SMT capable. That's why "8 core"(integer core) Bulldozer has a ~SB level performance in FP intensive workloads. 4 FP units vs 4 FP units,both 8 threads capable.
    I read that sandys where 4 256 bit but can do two at time because of the hyper threading
    while bulldozers are 128 bit for 8 and 256 for 4.
    HAVE NO FEAR!
    "AMD fallen angel"
    "Behold the gaseous stench of Skeletor's breakfast burrito!"
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamekiller View Post
    You didn't get the memo? 1 hour 'Fugger time' is equal to 12 hours of regular time.

  9. #534
    Xtreme Mentor tbone8ty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    West hartford, CT
    Posts
    2,658
    FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.6ghz 1.44v, lapped Nzxt Havik 140 push/pull
    Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
    G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-45-1T @ 1.65v
    MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1050/1450* Cat.13.9
    OCZ ZX 850w psu
    Lain-Li Lancool K62
    Samsung 830 128g
    2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3
    Win7 Home 64bit
    http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6042/6...39baeed6_b.jpg

  10. #535
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Kristoferr View Post
    Thats 11% or more CPU points with 3800/4200mz vs 2900mhz on 3850K.
    Faildozer all over again.
    Quote Originally Posted by xdan View Post
    Yes 12% with about 30% higher core frecuency. And if it ends like BD which meant major power consumption and TDP increase at a slight overclock, what then.
    A bad IPC is a bad IPC no mather you put it.
    Let say oc on Trinity from 3.8ghz to 4.5ghz, that's about 20% but on Llano performance it's like raising with 7% the frecuency.
    Let's compare again so A8 3850 at 3250Mhz(+12%) should equal Trinity at 3.8ghz(don't even count TURBO).
    Furthermore A8 3850 at 3500Mhz( 3250Mhz + about 7%) should be equal with Trinity Cpu at 4.5ghz .
    The IGP part it's irrelevant, it's clear a good path as in desktop Gpu's.

    So clear from cpu side a FAILDOZER.
    AMD in 9 months was not capable to make some tweaks to Llano sillicon to make it do 3.2-3.6ghz(like Phenom II) with overclock to 4-4.2ghz. It should have been a much better choice.
    Llano oc >= Trinity oc.


    FAIL !!!

    http://hwbot.org/submission/2193039_...50d_8027_marks
    A8-3850 @3.321Mhz - 4577.
    Some things are very simple to understand, but then, there are very simple people, and you need to explain those things that are very simple.

    So here we go,

    IPC means instructions per clock... PER CLOCK... one more time, PER CLOCK. So that means that clock is one important element.

    Whining about how trinity it's faster because it has more clock, it's stupidity at his best. I don't understand how people that think they are knowledgeable enough to participate in tech discussions, don't know that high frequencies were in fact AMD's goal.

    This is like some company that builds submarines, decides to start building planes, and then you have some moron customers going "Yeah those new planes, they don't travel underwater as good as their submarines"


    So Bulldozer need more frequency? No sherlock... and who cares?
    I guess if AMD made a 10GHZ CPU that had the absolutely worst IPC ever, but thanks to the high frequency was the best CPU around, you still would have some bright "tech engineers" going, "bu-bu-but at the same frequency it's slower than Lano."

    The only thing that matters is... for the same amount of money, buying price and electric bill, Trinity >>>> Lano, in everything, CPU and GPU.

  11. #536
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    377
    Everybody here knows that both things matter. The problem is, as you said, BD is a high frequency architecture that won't pass 4.6/4.7Ghz on average, the same as a Sandybridge, while having... idk, 45%? let's say, lower IPC, and consuming a lot more.

    They NEED to improve IPC, cause I don't see these airplanes hitting 8Ghz as they need to match the competition, but I actually see them sinking in water

    I'm talking mostly over the enthusiast part based on Piledriver, of course.
    Windows 7 x64 / VMware Workstation 8 / iSCSI Server Intel Core i7 4820K @ 4700Mhz, Corsair H100i, 16GB DDR3-2400, HD7950 3GB @ 1250/6200 Corsair H60, Crucial M4 128GB OS, Crucial C300 64GB Cache + Samsung 1TB F3, WD 1.5TB Green, Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3
    Windows 7 x64 / VMware Workstation 8 / vCenter Server 5 AMD Fusion A6 3500 @ 3200Mhz, 8GB DDR3-2000, HD6530D, 500GB, Biostar TA75M
    VMware ESXi Server 5.0 U1 AMD Athlon X3 455 @ 3800Mhz, 8GB DDR3-1600, HD4200, 500GB, Biostar A880GU3
    VMware ESXi Server 5.0 U1 Intel Core i3 530 @ 3800Mhz, 8GB DDR3-1600, Intel HD Graphics, 160GB, Biostar TH55B HD
    FreeNAS 9.1.1 x64 Intel Pentium G2030 @ 3000Mhz, 8GB DDR3-1333, Intel HD Graphics, 4x1TB WD Blue RAID-Z1, Asrock H61GM-VG3, Bitfenix Prodigy

  12. #537
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Andi64 View Post
    Everybody here knows that both things matter. The problem is, as you said, BD is a high frequency architecture that won't pass 4.6/4.7Ghz on average, the same as a Sandybridge, while having... idk, 45%? let's say, lower IPC, and consuming a lot more.

    They NEED to improve IPC, cause I don't see these airplanes hitting 8Ghz as they need to match the competition, but I actually see them sinking in water

    I'm talking mostly over the enthusiast part based on Piledriver, of course.
    Yes AMD and Intel goal it's to have the best\fastest combination of IPC and clock, and i'm pretty sure they both are always working around the clock to improve their CPU's. Now about the Lano vs Trinity, do you disagree that it's dumb, whining about a CPU being faster because it has more MHZ, when it was designed to be that way? How about bragging that it's faster despite the worse IPC? Works both ways i guess.
    Last edited by Piledriver; 04-18-2012 at 04:41 AM.

  13. #538
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Piledriver View Post
    Some things are very simple to understand, but then, there are very simple people, and you need to explain those things that are very simple.

    So here we go,

    IPC means instructions per clock... PER CLOCK... one more time, PER CLOCK. So that means that clock is one important element.

    Whining about how trinity it's faster because it has more clock, it's stupidity at his best. I don't understand how people that think they are knowledgeable enough to participate in tech discussions, don't know that high frequencies were in fact AMD's goal.

    This is like some company that builds submarines, decides to start building planes, and then you have some moron customers going "Yeah those new planes, they don't travel underwater as good as their submarines"


    So Bulldozer need more frequency? No sherlock... and who cares?
    I guess if AMD made a 10GHZ CPU that had the absolutely worst IPC ever, but thanks to the high frequency was the best CPU around, you still would have some bright "tech engineers" going, "bu-bu-but at the same frequency it's slower than Lano."

    The only thing that matters is... for the same amount of money, buying price and electric bill, Trinity >>>> Lano, in everything, CPU and GPU.

    Thats not kindergarden for you. But funny to read tho. Had a good laugh. Thank you for that.

    Its true that only thing what matters is perf per watt and perf per cost. No one ever disagreed in the first place. The problem is that Trinity has too low CPU increase over Llano and probably has less OC potencial as well, due higher stock speed.
    Im am however still hopeful that Vishera will have 20+% over bulldozer, which will definately be Sucsess with a big S.
    Last edited by Kristoferr; 04-18-2012 at 04:55 AM.

  14. #539
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    944
    Trinity got high score in Integer Math is because of enabling of working hardware divider?
    http://www.planet3dnow.de/vbulletin/...d.php?t=404354

  15. #540

  16. #541
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,154
    Wow, Im looking forward for this...Desktop Trinity will be fun Im thinking and later Vishera...Who knows next improvements
    AMD FX-8350@5 GHz 1.52V + H100 Corsair, Crosshair V Formula-Z, 2x 4GB GSKill TridentX 2400 MHz+ 10-12-12-25, EAH HD6870 DirectCU, Corsair TX850W
    CPUs:next 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, 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, 2x Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930K, i7-5960x coming this yearAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread

  17. #542
    Xtreme Mentor tbone8ty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    West hartford, CT
    Posts
    2,658
    Quote Originally Posted by haylui View Post
    Trinity got high score in Integer Math is because of enabling of working hardware divider?
    http://www.planet3dnow.de/vbulletin/...d.php?t=404354
    can someone explain this? hard to fallow since its in another language
    FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.6ghz 1.44v, lapped Nzxt Havik 140 push/pull
    Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
    G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-45-1T @ 1.65v
    MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1050/1450* Cat.13.9
    OCZ ZX 850w psu
    Lain-Li Lancool K62
    Samsung 830 128g
    2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3
    Win7 Home 64bit
    http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6042/6...39baeed6_b.jpg

  18. #543
    Xtreme Cruncher informal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,170
    The bug that was triggered by passmark's integer test in case of BD and K10 is not triggered in Piledriver's case. Trinity(PD based) scores much better since the HW divider is running the code. K10 and BD didn't run the code on the divider unit and that's why the score was lower.

  19. #544
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,154
    JUly in desktop is not possible...,maybe in August or September
    AMD FX-8350@5 GHz 1.52V + H100 Corsair, Crosshair V Formula-Z, 2x 4GB GSKill TridentX 2400 MHz+ 10-12-12-25, EAH HD6870 DirectCU, Corsair TX850W
    CPUs:next 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, 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, 2x Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930K, i7-5960x coming this yearAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread

  20. #545
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    157
    Never ending delaney

  21. #546
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,154
    its not delay, it was planned years ago...one year after new platform (APU Q2, desktop CPU Q3/Q4 - now will be maybe one-2 moth earlier than year before, its not bad)
    AMD FX-8350@5 GHz 1.52V + H100 Corsair, Crosshair V Formula-Z, 2x 4GB GSKill TridentX 2400 MHz+ 10-12-12-25, EAH HD6870 DirectCU, Corsair TX850W
    CPUs:next 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, 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, 2x Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930K, i7-5960x coming this yearAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread

  22. #547
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oak Ridge, TN
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by FlanK3r View Post
    its not delay, it was planned years ago...one year after new platform (APU Q2, desktop CPU Q3/Q4 - now will be maybe one-2 moth earlier than year before, its not bad)
    Does you have info on the rumored new chipsets (1090, 1070 and new southbridge) and their release date?
    I have noticed a lot of dropping prices on am3+ boards with many models being deactivated at different sites.
    ASUS M5A88-M
    FX-8320 cpu
    Thermalright XP-90 cooler
    12 GB 1333 MHz ECC RAM
    Antec Solo Case

  23. #548
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,154
    I dont know man...But I wish some Crosshair VI board with some BIOS features as Maximus V Gene (RAM profiles etc)
    AMD FX-8350@5 GHz 1.52V + H100 Corsair, Crosshair V Formula-Z, 2x 4GB GSKill TridentX 2400 MHz+ 10-12-12-25, EAH HD6870 DirectCU, Corsair TX850W
    CPUs:next 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, 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, 2x Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930K, i7-5960x coming this yearAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread

  24. #549
    Xtreme Addict Oese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,208
    http://amdfx.blogspot.de/2012/05/amd...a10-4655m.html

    dunno if it has been posted before somewhere.. looks good. 2m/4t trinity @ 2.0 ghz 2.3 turbo matches llano 4c @ 1.9 ghz 2.3 turbo (which doesnt work) at 10w less tdp..
    1. ASUS Sabertooth 990fx | FX 8320 || 2. DFI DK 790FXB-M3H5 | X4 810
    8GB Samsung 30nm DDR3-2000 9-10-10-28 || 4GB PSC DDR3-1333 6-7-6-21
    Corsair TX750W | Sapphire 6970 2GB || BeQuiet PurePower 450w | HD 4850
    EK Supreme | AC aquagratix | Laing Pro | MoRa 2 || Aircooled

  25. #550
    I am Xtreme BeepBeep2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,315
    2.3 GHz Trinity matches 1.9 GHz Llano at better TDP? No way!

    4.6 Ghz Trinity better match 3.8 GHz X4 then
    Intel all dey erry dey
    AMD all nite erry nite party party party

Page 22 of 48 FirstFirst ... 121920212223242532 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •