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

[TESKATLIPOKA]

undone

but IIRC performance difference between B0 and B2 is larger than the clock difference, maybe there's either some problem of clocking abnormally in B0.

what is your source, I don't remember any comparison made between B0 a B2.

Yields could be improve, we need to wait.

that's true, we will see.

[BeepBeep2]

B0 performance was pretty close to B2 performance according to OBR's results.

I like how threads got cleaned up because of his "bull" rumors, results...talking down of AMD, but after release, everyone here is perfectly fine with the amount of performance given by these chips.

[Nintendork]

AFAIK FX-4000's are not native dual modules. Trinity comes with a real dual-module design.

[undone]

undone what is your source, I don't remember any comparison made between B0 a B2.

Seems my bad again... fx8130p score around 9xxx in fritz and fx8150 around 11xxx, it could be just frequency difference. I remembered incorrectly that fx8150 score around 13xxx.

AFAIK FX-4000's are not native dual modules. Trinity comes with a real dual-module design.

yes, native design should have somewhat lower tdp.

(btw ES Zambezi frequency is 15% lower than fx8150, so we could expect turbo up to near 4.7Ghz with retail Trinity.)

[TESKATLIPOKA]

undone

(btw ES Zambezi frequency is 15% lower than fx8150, so we could expect turbo up to near 4.7Ghz with retail Trinity.)

ES 3100mhz, turbo 4.1Ghz
Fx8150 3600Mhz, turbo 4.2Ghz
default clocks increased +500Mhz but turbo just +100Mhz.
and now here we have an ES Trinity 3.8Ghz, turbo 4.1Ghz
I think the best case is we will see a model with default 3.9-4.1Ghz, turbo 4.2-4.3Ghz, basically Trinity with FX4170 clocks but TDP 100W instead of 125W.
I am pretty sure turbo 4.6-4.7Ghz won't happen even if they released a 125W model, too much voltage needed, I don't think they are willing to set ~1.5V for max turbo even if they stayed in TDP.

[informal]

When it comes to piledriver,we can expect good news since:
1)AMD lists IPC and power improvements(~10-15%;uncertainty probably comes from process node ability at the moment of starting the production). This can imply around 5% IPC boost and 10% clock boost. If process allows they can boost clock further.
2)AMD stated they are working with MS on Win7 scheduler update.Win8 already supports optimal thread scheduling for BD. This can lead to another ~5% more performance over current level of Zambezi.

All summed up: from 15% to 20% improvement is quite possible with top end PD(8270?) vs FX8150. This would be roughly enough to put new PD model at around 2600K or 2700K level. This probably won't be enough to beat 8T IB @3.5/3.9Ghz but should be pretty close overall. Remember that 2600K/2700K level ,on desktop workloads, is overall very close to 980x/990x Westmere(which is still number two desktop chip out there).

[BeepBeep2]

When it comes to piledriver,we can expect good news since:
1)AMD lists IPC and power improvements(~10-15%;uncertainty probably comes from process node ability at the moment of starting the production). This can imply around 5% IPC boost and 10% clock boost. If process allows they can boost clock further.
2)AMD stated they are working with MS on Win7 scheduler update.Win8 already supports optimal thread scheduling for BD. This can lead to another ~5% more performance over current level of Zambezi.

All summed up: from 15% to 20% improvement is quite possible with top end PD(8270?) vs FX8150. This would be roughly enough to put new PD model at around 2600K or 2700K level. This probably won't be enough to beat 8T IB @3.5/3.9Ghz but should be pretty close overall. Remember that 2600K/2700K level ,on desktop workloads, is overall very close to 980x/990x Westmere(which is still number two desktop chip out there).

What about SB-E? You failed to even mention it

[muzz]

Informal- I'll believe it when I see it, and I honestly hope we do....
But I have my doubts.

We'll see.

[tbone8ty]

remind me/us when desktop Piledriver will be released? this is called "Vishera" correct?

Edit: dang looks like Sept 2012 time frame. i dont think i cant wait that long. lol gotta take advantage of this Crosshair 5 investment....

hopefully Amd and MS are working on a nice patch for win7, fix steam game hiccups/BSOD's, and maybe a better stepping for FX-8170

here's to hoping :/

[informal]

What about SB-E? You failed to even mention it

Yes I didn't mention it since 6C SB-E is 550-900$ product. There is 4C variant also,but it's not faster than 2600K and cost the same or more(+ the additional cost of s2011 board).
So looking at 6C SB-E models,you will be looking at 2x-3x the price difference(CPU only;board prices difference adds on top of that) and 15-20% more performance on desktop. Just doesn't make any sense.

[mav2000]

Best of luck to all of us who are waiting.....

[informal]

It can only be faster than current 8150.It should have at least SOME IPC improvement. It should get at least SOME boost from Win7 scheduler patch or Win8's new scheduler. It SHOULD at least has SOME clock advantage over 8150 or even 8170. All summed up: it will be faster than 8150 we have today,without any shadow of a doubt. How much faster? Its anybody's guess,but if you ask me it can be between 15% and 25% faster than 8150 level we have today. Bottom of this range is close enough to put it in 2600K zone(overall) while top of this range is enough to put it in 3770K(IvyBridge) overall performance zone. Single thread performance is intel's territory for the time being(and will remain to be for some foreseeable future). Good news is that single thread performance of PD core,with Turbo, will be good enough for 99.9% of desktop users,even those who consider themselves "enthusiasts".

[BeepBeep2]

Yes I didn't mention it since 6C SB-E is 550-900$ product. There is 4C variant also,but it's not faster than 2600K and cost the same or more(+ the additional cost of s2011 board).
So looking at 6C SB-E models,you will be looking at 2x-3x the price difference(CPU only;board prices difference adds on top of that) and 15-20% more performance on desktop. Just doesn't make any sense.

They have absolutely no competition

[dirtyd]

They have absolutely no competition

In an exceedingly tiny, albeit high-margin part of the market

[BeepBeep2]

In an exceedingly tiny, albeit high-margin part of the market

You realize, if they had good competition...that would be mainstream

That tiny high margin part of the market is rather quite large when you consider that Intel owns 100% of it and 80% of the overall market.

(That was after Phenom II caught AMD up in market share, I'm sure it will slip back a few percent)

[dirtyd]

You realize, if they had good competition...that would be mainstream

Not necessarily. Intel's high end has always been expensive, even when they were getting beaten by the original FX their high-end chips were still expensive, and people still bought them.

That tiny high margin part of the market is rather quite large when you consider that Intel owns 100% of it and 80% of the overall market.

What do you think matters more to AMD: OEM's who order in the thousands, or a tiny sliver of enthusiasts who moan about 10% in a benchmark? The only OEM's ordering high-end parts are specialist custom builders who would be lucky to sell 1,000 units a year. It's not "rather quite large", it absolutely pales in comparison.

[BeepBeep2]

Not necessarily. Intel's high end has always been expensive, even when they were getting beaten by the original FX their high-end chips were still expensive, and people still bought them.



What do you think matters more to AMD: OEM's who order in the thousands, or a tiny sliver of enthusiasts who moan about 10% in a benchmark? The only OEM's ordering high-end parts are specialist custom builders who would be lucky to sell 1,000 units a year. It's not "rather quite large", it absolutely pales in comparison.

You really don't think OEMs like Dell (Alienware as well) won't offer these CPUs as options for upgrades?

[charged3800z24]

Not necessarily. Intel's high end has always been expensive, even when they were getting beaten by the original FX their high-end chips were still expensive, and people still bought them.

True that!, this was do to Brand recognition ... Think BOSE audio... BaH, Man my BOSE home theater sounds best in the world...Sorry for the little rant there.

What do you think matters more to AMD: OEM's who order in the thousands, or a tiny sliver of enthusiasts who moan about 10% in a benchmark? The only OEM's ordering high-end parts are specialist custom builders who would be lucky to sell 1,000 units a year. It's not "rather quite large", it absolutely pales in comparison.

Intel has always had the majority Due to the facts I mentioned before, Companies like mine buy primarily Intel based HP units, well because that all our sales reps know. Who's AMD, they ask. Regardless of what Chip is better at what price etc, companies will mostly Buy Intel because everyone know's who they are.

[BeepBeep2]

True that!, this was do to Brand recognition ... Think BOSE audio... BaH, Man my BOSE home theater sounds best in the world...Sorry for the little rant there.


Intel has always had the majority Due to the facts I mentioned before, Companies like mine buy primarily Intel based HP units, well because that all our sales reps know. Who's AMD, they ask. Regardless of what Chip is better at what price etc, companies will mostly Buy Intel because everyone know's who they are.

Sennheiser!

To be honest, I've been recommending intel chips to consumers after BD's launch...of course, it depends on what you use your machine for and I explain all of that. I tell them that I even own a BD chip myself...but 2500K is much more responsive in all ST apps and much better for gaming (a lot of my friends are gamers like me) despite being a little slower in MT than Bulldozer. I built a Phenom II X4 840 (Propus) machine with 5670 for my girlfriend's father a few months ago, (it was $40 cheaper than comparative Llano route) that machine will likely last them several more years than the Pentium 4 HT machine it replaced. It would have been pointless to build an FX-4100 for that type of build, though.

I hope PD can bring improvements over BD, process should be much improved and hopefully the architecture is worked on considerably.

[Smartidiot89]

You realize, if they had good competition...that would be mainstream

No, it wouldn't in a million years. The platform is crazy expensive to develop manufacture, SB-E also isn't even a desktop chip to begin with. It's a server platform ported over to desktop to satisfy the hunger of the tiny few. Simply put, no matter what competition Intel wouldn't want to (or be able to in all honesty) to price it in mainstream.

[dirtyd]

You really don't think OEMs like Dell (Alienware as well) won't offer these CPUs as options for upgrades?

More than likely they won't. CPU's are at the point now where they can do everything the average Joe needs. Most people look at say a 2700K for $300 and a 3930K for $700 (rough prices just for example) and would rather spend the $400 on an iProduct so they can check Friendface 20 times more per day. OEM's know this, so they won't even bother putting the option there. Alienware fits into the specialist custom builders, they just happen to be owned by a large company now. It's a niche market, not where the big bucks are.

[BeepBeep2]

Alright, I understand now

[mongoled]

Hope this turns out to be true

Wait until Trinity comes out before you reach any conclusions. It is likely to be what Bulldozer should have been, just like Phenom vs Phenom 2. The numbers I am hearing (To preemptively answer your next questio, NO.) are encouraging.

-Charlie

[FlanK3r]

wow, I really hope, it can be true. I wish .

[Smartidiot89]

Hope this turns out to be true

Wait until Trinity comes out before you reach any conclusions. It is likely to be what Bulldozer should have been, just like Phenom vs Phenom 2. The numbers I am hearing (To preemptively answer your next questio, NO.) are encouraging.

-Charlie

I am not going to pretend like I have any insight on how Trinity performs or it's power consumption, but this is what I've said since Bulldozer launched... It was an architecture built with power efficiency in mind so obviously something had to go wrong along the way. Looking forward to Trinity and Piledriver