Official AMD Barcelona Thread

[mstp2009]

This is misleading since FP/SSE performance gains are going to be much much bigger than 15%...

And Integer gains are going to be much smaller.

It's an average. What isn't to understand? (besides simple math)

[Periander6]

Are you paid by Intel or do you know absolutely nothing about electronics?

A 15% IPC improvement over k8 would indicate that they need a 2.5-2.6GHz Phenom, which they are nowhere near atm, to match a Q6600 that is going to be selling for $266 in 2 weeks. Nevermind Penryn coming out in the same timeframe as Phenom. 60% of AMD's CPU revenues come from the desktop segment, and without a miracle stepping they sure look like they are going to be toast in this segment.

Servers are nowhere near a large enough segement to carry AMD, and anyway AMD is and will be facing much much tougher competition with Seaburg/Harpertown and Tigerton, not to mention Gainestown on the horizon.

So, please explain your position as to why all this is just rubbish instead of hurling personal insults, or are insults all that you've got?

[nn_step]

A 15% IPC improvement over k8 would indicate that they need a 2.5-2.6GHz Phenom, which they are nowhere near atm, to match a Q6600 that is going to be selling for $266 in 2 weeks. Nevermind Penryn coming out in the same timeframe as Phenom. 60% of AMD's CPU revenues come from the desktop segment, and without a miracle stepping they sure look like they are going to be toast in this segment.

Servers are nowhere near a large enough segement to carry AMD, and anyway AMD is and will be facing much much tougher competition with Seaburg/Harpertown and Tigerton, not to mention Gainestown on the horizon.

So, please explain your position as to why all this is just rubbish instead of hurling personal insults, or are insults all that you've got?

umm I would hate to burst your bubble but the performance difference between Conroe and K8 isn't that large, infact in a few places K8 does out perform conroe. So logically a 2.3Ghz Barcelona should directly compete against a 2.66Ghz Kentsfield.
On a side note the server market has carried Sun for the majority of their history and I do doubt that AMD could possibly be forced off the desktop market, where a 386 is sufficient for some people to browse the web and read their email.

[mstp2009]

So, please explain your position as to why all this is just rubbish instead of hurling personal insults, or are insults all that you've got?

This thread is the last bastion for AMD fanboi's. Why on earth would they want to embrace logic after all this time?



I really hope Phenom turns into a true competitor, if solely for sake of having a choice besides Intel.

But as others have pointed out here - if you have the goods, and your competition is doing nothing but repeatedly packing your lunch in terms of sales and revenue, you don't keep tight-lipped about it.

Unless, of course, you are sitting on a dud.

[mstp2009]

umm I would hate to burst your bubble but the performance difference between Conroe and K8 isn't that large, infact in a few places K8 does out perform conroe. So logically a 2.3Ghz Barcelona should directly compete against a 2.66Ghz Kentsfield.
On a side note the server market has carried Sun for the majority of their history and I do doubt that AMD could possibly be forced off the desktop market, where a 386 is sufficient for some people to browse the web and read their email.

BS. On average, C2D is 20% faster than K8 in 32-bit code and 14% faster in 64-bit code.

And the corollary is also true. In some things C2D is far more than 20% faster than K8. I know that in Folding@Home it is about 70-80% faster because of the SSE optimizations to that program.

[nn_step]

This thread is the last bastion for AMD fanboi's. Why on earth would they want to embrace logic after all this time?



I really hope Phenom turns into a true competitor, if solely for sake of having a choice besides Intel.

But as others have pointed out here - if you have the goods, and your competition is doing nothing but repeatedly packing your lunch in terms of sales and revenue, you don't keep tight-lipped about it.

Unless, of course, you are sitting on a dud.

I don't know about you but AMD is telling a few things but is keeping the details close. As for people with samples talking... The Current AMD NDA involves ritual suicide in event of breach. So those that know don't talk much if at all about it.

[Periander6]

umm I would hate to burst your bubble but the performance difference between Conroe and K8 isn't that large, infact in a few places K8 does out perform conroe. So logically a 2.3Ghz Barcelona should directly compete against a 2.66Ghz Kentsfield.
On a side note the server market has carried Sun for the majority of their history and I do doubt that AMD could possibly be forced off the desktop market, where a 386 is sufficient for some people to browse the web and read their email.

You aren't bursting any bubbles.

You want to pretend that C2 doesn't have a 20% IPC advantage over K8, suit youself. The rest of the world gets results like the ones Xbit, Techreport, Anand and every other competent testing outfit gets, 20% or so, if anything that is being generous to the K8.

Sun is a seller of complete systems, and are still struggling. If they tried to make it just as maker of Sparc chips, they would be out of business in weeks. Absurd to compare them to AMD.

Yes, people can browse the web and read e-mail with inferior CPUs. The problem is that AMD has to make enough of a profit to make payments on their 5+ billions in debt, fund chip development, equip their fabs ect.. Slower, inferior chips don't fetch much of a price. Not nearly enough to keep AMD from sinking.

[informal]

Slow(er) and inferior?K10? Are you joking?

[Mav451]

I've actually READ the K10 NDA (probably unlike you). The breach of NDA is a $10 million fine for an individual and up to a $1 billion for a corporation.

Well at least they went for a nice round number.

[generics_user]

You aren't bursting any bubbles.

You want to pretend that C2 doesn't have a 20% IPC advantage over K8, suit youself. The rest of the world gets results like the ones Xbit, Techreport, Anand and every other competent testing outfit gets, 20% or so, if anything that is being generous to the K8.

Sun is a seller of complete systems, and are still struggling. If they tried to make it just as maker of Sparc chips, they would be out of business in weeks. Absurd to compare them to AMD.

Yes, people can browse the web and read e-mail with inferior CPUs. The problem is that AMD has to make enough of a profit to make payments on their 5+ billions in debt, fund chip development, equip their fabs ect.. Slower, inferior chips don't fetch much of a price. Not nearly enough to keep AMD from sinking.

i'm with nn_step on this one, yes C2D got an 20% IPC advantage but they still WIN in SOME apps (I DO NOT TALK ABOUT THE MAJORITY APPS, but in some apps amd can keep up with C2D, and in 64bit the disadvantage is less significant )

for gaming: i doubt that you see much of a difference when using mid range graphics cards in systems for up to 1000$ , but in the higher and amd got no chance against intel

[red]

I've actually READ the K10 NDA (probably unlike you). The breach of NDA is a $10 million fine for an individual and up to a $1 billion for a corporation.

Um, I didn't sign anything and I just found it off Google so I'm fine right

[red]

He did kinda skip Slide 42, which effectively means double Virtualization performance. Which would relatively put a single 1Ghz Barcelona on even performance with a Quad core Kentsfield running at 8Ghz (virtualization applications and Operating systems only)

No one bothered with this one? For some reason , I'm inclined to think that these numbers are poo, but if K10 is double performance, a 1 core 1GHz K10 matches a 4 core 8GHz Kent, by deduction, a 1 core 2GHz K8 matches a 4 core 8GHz Kent, therefore, increasing AMD's advantage from 16x to 32x. If a current 16x advantage isn't compelling enough to save AMD, what makes you think a 32x one will

[savantu]

BS. On average, C2D is 20% faster than K8 in 32-bit code and 14% faster in 64-bit code.

And the corollary is also true. In some things C2D is far more than 20% faster than K8. I know that in Folding@Home it is about 70-80% faster because of the SSE optimizations to that program.

Based on what ?

[mstp2009]

Based on what ?

Have you been under a rock for the last 15 months?

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...w_9.html#sect0
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...review_11.html
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum...d.php?id=39379
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/...out_athlon_64/
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2014685,00.asp
http://blogs.msdn.com/rickbrew/archi...13/664890.aspx
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/20...s/index.x?pg=1

EDIT - 64-bit analysis here:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...duo-64bit.html

Google 101: Core 2 Duo vs. AMD Athlon X2

[savantu]

Have you been under a rock for the last 15 months?


EDIT - 64-bit analysis here:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...duo-64bit.html

Google 101: Core 2 Duo vs. AMD Athlon X2

The 64bit part interested me.I knew you would point out the Xbit test.Then why did I bother to ask ?

Because the conclusion is flawed IMO.

When you average results , you need to eliminate anomalies , like the one provided by ScienceMark , because they skew your results.

ScienceMark is a test where K8 does abnormaly well ; in the same way SuperPI is a test where C2D does abnormaly well.Including them has a profound effect on the average.

Once you eliminate ScienceMark , the results are damn close.The graphic at the end shows this best.

[informal]

Savantu,then you need to check the techreport x64 testing,where 6000+ gets really close on many occasions to e6700.

[madcho]

The big advantage of the C2D is the SSE. K10 have better SSE ( full 128bits, C2D not all ).

if you disable the SSE on a C2D and a K8, K8 would be faster.

64bits mode use SSE, AMD don't loos too much here with the lot of GPRs in the K8. K10 will perform more fast in 64bits mode, with 8 more GPRs and double SSE.

K10 is a bit more fast in integer, but not a big improvement. about 15%.

Phenom will be a bit faster than barcelona clock for clock 8-10% i think, with 1066 non registered memory ( barcelona 800 registered ), and HT3 could be usefull for 4 cores.

[mstp2009]

The big advantage of the C2D is the SSE. K10 have better SSE ( full 128bits, C2D not all ).

Wrong. C2D is fully 128bit SSE (on all 3 SSE decoders).

if you disable the SSE on a C2D and a K8, K8 would be faster.

Wrong. The integer unit in C2D is MUCH better than that in K8.

Phenom will be a bit faster than barcelona clock for clock 8-10% i think, with 1066 non registered memory ( barcelona 800 registered ), and HT3 could be usefull for 4 cores.

Do you have a clue what you are talking about? Phenom IS BARCELONA (same core, just different sockets - desktop vs. server).

[BrowncoatGR]

Wrong. C2D is fully 128bit SSE (on all 3 SSE decoders).



Wrong. The integer unit in C2D is MUCH better than that in K8.



Do you have a clue what you are talking about? Phenom IS BARCELONA (same core, just different sockets - desktop vs. server).

While i dont think a 10% IPC for Phenom over Barcelona is reasonable these are not the same processors for different sockets. Barcelona is a HT2 cpu using up to DDR2 5300 registered memory whereas Phenom is a HT3 cpu using up to DDR2 8500, which gives Phenoma huge advantage in Memory bandwidth. Whether Phenom can use the increased memory bandwidth to get improved performance remains anyone's guess right now but id say it will at least give it a slight advantage clock for clock.

[mstp2009]

While i dont think a 10% IPC for Phenom over Barcelona is reasonable these are not the same processors for different sockets. Barcelona is a HT2 cpu using up to DDR2 5300 registered memory whereas Phenom is a HT3 cpu using up to DDR2 8500, which gives Phenoma huge advantage in Memory bandwidth. Whether Phenom can use the increased memory bandwidth to get improved performance remains anyone's guess right now but id say it will at least give it a slight advantage clock for clock.

It's all a moot point for the desktop.

What can fully take up that memory bandwith NOW on a desktop app?

Nothing.

It isn't until you get to 4P systems in a server environment with HEAVY database transaction loads that you see any difference.

This is exactly why we see no performance gain going from Socket 939 (DDR1) to Socket AM2. The CPU core didn't change except for the memory controller. Bench identically clocked systems and you will see that all that extra memory bandwidth is going to waste.

It will be the same thing in Phenom w/ HT2 vs. HT3. This is pointless for desktop apps.

[Jacky]

While i dont think a 10% IPC for Phenom over Barcelona is reasonable these are not the same processors for different sockets. Barcelona is a HT2 cpu using up to DDR2 5300 registered memory whereas Phenom is a HT3 cpu using up to DDR2 8500, which gives Phenoma huge advantage in Memory bandwidth. Whether Phenom can use the increased memory bandwidth to get improved performance remains anyone's guess right now but id say it will at least give it a slight advantage clock for clock.

there won't be any surprise. it will be about equal to the advantage core 2 gets when the fsb is upped from 1066mhz->1333mhz.. 2-3%, maybe 5% (core 2 isn't really memory starved at all)

Phenom will be a bit faster than barcelona clock for clock 8-10% i think, with 1066 non registered memory ( barcelona 800 registered ), and HT3 could be usefull for 4 cores.

if you disable the SSE on a C2D and a K8, K8 would be faster.

please stop the FUD and write decent english

[BrowncoatGR]

Jacky well id say that is both application dependent and really difficult to predict right now. K8 benefits quite a bit from PC6400 memory in some applications and my guess is so will K10 from both PC8500 memory and the increased HT speed. Although in some applications the advantage will be close to zero. I expect the biggest impact to be in games where consumer apps are concerned. BTW imo Core2 could use additional memory bandwidth, in particular quadcore parts, but increasing the fsb does not have that much of an impact because of the limitations of the FSB bus. Im also guessing Core2 prefetching and cache structure was also optimized with a 1066 FSB bus in mind. Penryn will probably change this though.

Madcho C2D clearly hasa faster integer unit than K8, there is really no discussion here. But K8 is multitudes faster at x87 fp code but that is not really relevant for desktop apps. What allows K8 to somewhat keep up is its memory bandwidth mostly. And in 64bit macro-ops fusion does not work.

[Zytek_Fan]

K10 won't be slower or inferior to K8. It seems a lot like Core, so it should at least be on par. The extra bandwidth should help AMD a bit.

[BrowncoatGR]

K10 won't be slower or inferior to K8. It seems a lot like Core, so it should at least be on par. The extra bandwidth should help AMD a bit.

If that was at me, I was referring at the impact increased memory bandwidth could have for K10. I was not comparing K8 to K10

[accord99]

Savantu,then you need to check the techreport x64 testing,where 6000+ gets really close on many occasions to e6700.

And the many times where it loses to the E6600.

EDIT - 64-bit analysis here:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...duo-64bit.html

Google 101: Core 2 Duo vs. AMD Athlon X2

Xbitlabs made a mistake in their simple average. Going to 64-bit, the X6800 ends up having the same % advantage as in 32-bit.

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/32/...4bitrunol4.jpg