http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=735
George Ou has happened upon some slides that are (were?) to be presented on September 10th.
For 4P, 2GHz K10 scores 160, losing to 8MB 1.86GHz Tigerton score of 166 though it bests the crippled 4MB 2.13GHz Tigerton.
For 2P, 2GHz K10 loses to 2GHz Clover by 4.2 points (88 vs 92.2)
Last edited by red; 09-08-2007 at 06:59 AM.
What a disaster. Once the Seaburg chipset launches in Q4, Intel's 2P specINT score will also beat Barcelona clock/clock.
Tigerton runs on Clarksboro, which already has the updated snoop filter designed for quad core.
Seaburg will add this feature (vs. current Blackford).
reply to linked Ou blog:
Some interesting points.Hi George,
The 4-processor SPECint_rate2006 slides you posted are actually GOOD news for AMD !
They show the Opteron 8350 platform ($1004/proc) being faster, or as fast as, the Xeon L7345 and E7320 platforms (respectively $2301 and $1177/proc) ! Then, the Xeon X7340 score is indeed higher than the Opteron 8350, but this Xeon costs twice as much: $1980. (It would have been interesting to see the score for the intermediate Xeon X7330 by the way.)
Everybody is so focused on absolute performance, but, in the end, all what matters is how much bang you get for your buck. So unless you stricly buy the highest-end processors ($2000+ proc representing the top 20% of the 4P market), these slides prove that Barcelona is faster & cheaper for everything else (the remaining 80% of the 4P market) !
naked X2 3800+ Toledo LCBIE 0618EPMW ]3020mhz@1.554v]
TT BigTyphoon
DFI LP UT NF4 Sli-D - 4/06 BT mod
PCP&C Silencer 750w
2x1GB Mushkin XP4000 Samsung C-UCCC @253mhz 3,4,3,8 1T @ 2.65v
eVGA 8800GT 512MB@ 787/1944/2244
I don't even pay attention to Ou, because all he seems to do is bash AMD.
"To exist in this vast universe for a speck of time is the great gift of life. Our tiny sliver of time is our gift of life. It is our only life. The universe will go on, indifferent to our brief existence, but while we are here we touch not just part of that vastness, but also the lives around us. Life is the gift each of us has been given. Each life is our own and no one else's. It is precious beyond all counting. It is the greatest value we have. Cherish it for what it truly is."
Yep,Gearge Ou is like an intel-Sharikou version,only at the larger scale(since he writes for the "famous" ZDnet)
QFTOriginally Posted by informal
Seems we made our greatest error when we named it at the start
for though we called it "Human Nature" - it was cancer of the heart
CPU: AMD X3 720BE@ 3,4Ghz
Cooler: Xigmatek S1283(Terrible mounting system for AM2/3)
Motherboard: Gigabyte 790FXT-UD5P(F4) RAM: 2x 2GB OCZ DDR3 1600Mhz Gold 8-8-8-24
GPU:HD5850 1GB
PSU: Seasonic M12D 750W Case: Coolermaster HAF932(aka Dusty)
Yeah , too bad AMD changed their policy wrt to benchmark scores based on his input ; OTOH who gives a ***ss about Sharikou ?
This , if anything , shows your level of fanboyism , even when AMD gives credit you still beat the dead horse...
Yeah whatever,i couldn't expect more from you,the same story all over again.
If your this pi ssy now, it's going to be entertaining to see how you act come Monday.
Can we keep flame baiting out of this one?
"To exist in this vast universe for a speck of time is the great gift of life. Our tiny sliver of time is our gift of life. It is our only life. The universe will go on, indifferent to our brief existence, but while we are here we touch not just part of that vastness, but also the lives around us. Life is the gift each of us has been given. Each life is our own and no one else's. It is precious beyond all counting. It is the greatest value we have. Cherish it for what it truly is."
You do realize that these scores came directly from AMD, right?
well, didnt you know everything that has no amd in the link = bad ?
assuming george ou's numbers are accurate:
Intel can change the pricing sooner than later, but AMD NEED to recover R&D and their huge losses, Barcelona die is huge (it equals the clovertown die, but don't forget that Intels 65nm is more mature and that they just take two conroes and put them on one die - increasing yields. and penryn is launching very soon), they will have no chance when tigerton's 45nm successor arrives (when is this going to happen anyway? I don't think it's as early as Q1'08) or when Intel decides to lower their margins a little to hurt AMD. Besides we need to know performance/watt, oh and the E7330 (2,4ghz, 6mb cache) at $1391 should be a worthier competitor against the 2ghz Barcelona on price/performance.
The int numbers are really discouraging..
I thought HPC is a niche market?
How are they going to charge a price premium for HPC? Doesn't the HPC crowd use off the shelf opterons with some exotic chipsets and interconnects?
Then they can't even charge a premium for the SUPERIOR floatingpoint+bandwidth performance, because then no one will buy the opterons for normal servers (cause they are really weak on int) and if they price them according to their int performance, well...
btw
µopt was prolly right on the int performance beeing closer/worse than conroe. gj
Not only does AMD's 4P CPU has better price/performance ratio, it sits in the same mobo that customer has! For Xeon series 7300 you need new mobo. Also for Barcelona you need RDRAM and for Xeon 7300 series you need much more expensive FB-DIMM's.
All in all 4P Barcelona is far more superior product.
Regarding the "niche" market... if you call auto, space, oil, mining, financial… niche (aka not worthy) markets, then OK, but targeting these market is the smartest thing that AMD could have done. Those guys have money, and they buy a lot
And for the reference pricing of new Xeons, and new Opterons:
XEON
• X7350 @ 2.93GHz, 8MB L2 cache, 130W TDP at $2310
• E7340 @ 2.40GHz, 8MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $1980
• E7330 @ 2.40GHz, 6MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $1391
• E7320 @ 2.13GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $1177
• E7310 @ 1.60GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $856
OPTERON
• 8350 @ 2.0GHz, 95W TDP at $1004
• 8347 @ 1.9GHz, 95W TDP at $774
• 8346 HE @ 1.8 GHz, 68W TDP at $688
Pricing can change in a matter of days - performance on the other hand..
It's only the same if the customer has Socket F based systems. What about those who have Socket 940 systems? FB-DIMMs are essentially the same price as registered memory, while IBM's X4 based servers will use registered DDR2.
But they haven't been buying much of AMD lately, given AMD's significant loss of market share in servers.Regarding the "niche" market... if you call auto, space, oil, mining, financial… niche (aka not worthy) markets, then OK, but targeting these market is the smartest thing that AMD could have done. Those guys have money, and they buy a lot
Performance dictates pricing.And for the reference pricing of new Xeons, and new Opterons:
XEON
• X7350 @ 2.93GHz, 8MB L2 cache, 130W TDP at $2310
• E7340 @ 2.40GHz, 8MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $1980
• E7330 @ 2.40GHz, 6MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $1391
• E7320 @ 2.13GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $1177
• E7310 @ 1.60GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $856
OPTERON
• 8350 @ 2.0GHz, 95W TDP at $1004
• 8347 @ 1.9GHz, 95W TDP at $774
• 8346 HE @ 1.8 GHz, 68W TDP at $688
Not only does AMD's 4P CPU has better price/performance ratio, it sits in the same mobo that customer has! For Xeon series 7300 you need new mobo. Also for Barcelona you need RDRAM and for Xeon 7300 series you need much more expensive FB-DIMM's.
All in all 4P Barcelona is far more superior product.
Regarding the "niche" market... if you call auto, space, oil, mining, financial… niche (aka not worthy) markets, then OK, but targeting these market is the smartest thing that AMD could have done. Those guys have money, and they buy a lot
And for the reference pricing of new Xeons, and new Opterons:
XEON
• X7350 @ 2.93GHz, 8MB L2 cache, 130W TDP at $2310
• E7340 @ 2.40GHz, 8MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $1980
• E7330 @ 2.40GHz, 6MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $1391
• E7320 @ 2.13GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $1177
• E7310 @ 1.60GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 80W TDP at $856
OPTERON
• 8350 @ 2.0GHz, 95W TDP at $1004
• 8347 @ 1.9GHz, 95W TDP at $774
• 8346 HE @ 1.8 GHz, 68W TDP at $688
AMD's pricing only makes it very clear with which Intel parts they are competing ; that is 2GHz K10 is more or less equal to the E7320 in apps that customers care about.
If anything , that's worrying.You know why ? Because in that segment you're overlapping with DP , for that money you can buy a 5365 3GHz QC Xeon that would cream the K10.Few apps scale well to 16 cores , instead of 16 cores you're better off with 8 faster ones.
I'm pretty sure an 8 core 3GHz Xeon system will be cheaper and perform close enough to a 16 core 2Ghz K10 system in most commercial apps.
I am afraid it isn't.
Can we agree that product that cost 1004 USD wipes the floor with product that costs 1177 USD is superior?
Can we agree that product that does not require new expensive motherboard, and saves to server manufacturers big buck 'cos it uses mature and each day cheaper platform is superior?
Can we agree that product that uses far less expensive RDRAM in comparison with hot FB-DIMM is superior?
Can we agree that CPU that can independently clock its cores and logic inside of them is superior?
Can we agree that CPU that is not bottlenecked with antique FSB is superior?
Since you probably backing this claim with insight to the performance of the apps that customers care about, could you be so kind and share those with us?
But it doesn't, otherwise it wouldn't be priced at $1004.
But it does require a new expensive motherboard. It's just that customers would have had to purchase it last year. But a lot didn't bother to go to Socket F and went with Intel's 2S quad-core solution instead which offered comparable performance to 4S Socket F at the time at less than half the power consumption.Can we agree that product that does not require new expensive motherboard, and saves to server manufacturers big buck 'cos it uses mature and each day cheaper platform is superior?
They're roughly the same price. But IBM will offer registered DDR2 on its servers.Can we agree that product that uses far less expensive RDRAM in comparison with hot FB-DIMM is superior?
No, since it's probably necessary for AMD to use every trick they can to match up with the spectacular performance/watt of the Core uarch.Can we agree that CPU that can independently clock its cores and logic inside of them is superior?
Too bad it's bottlenecked by its lack of clockspeed, slower cache sub-system and just being slower in general.Can we agree that CPU that is not bottlenecked with antique FSB is superior?
I'm talking TPC-C , SpecJBB , that kind of benchmarks.
SpecFP_rate is nice , but nobody except HPC folks give a damn about it.
Oh yes it does:
If we talk about 4P customers, we need to talk about HP, IBM, SUN, DELL, and they 4P AMD offering is SocketF, and they are very, very happy 'cos of backward compatibility.But it does require a new expensive motherboard. It's just that customers would have had to purchase it last year. But a lot didn't bother to go to Socket F and went with Intel's 2S quad-core solution instead which offered comparable performance to 4S Socket F at the time at less than half the power consumption.
RDRAM (DDR-667): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820134329They're roughly the same price. But IBM will offer registered DDR2 on its servers.
FB-DIMM (DDR2-667): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820134327
So, $50 price diference for one 4 GB kit. And since you need at least two of them that's 100 USD pricce diference. if you can call that "roughly same price" then its fine with me!
pff with all that spectacularity that you talk about, AMD still leads when it comes to perf/wat on server market: http://www.worlds-fastest.com/wfz991.htmlNo, since it's probably necessary for AMD to use every trick they can to match up with the spectacular performance/watt of the Core uarch.
if this is slower, then there is no point to this discusion:Too bad it's bottlenecked by its lack of clockspeed, slower cache sub-system and just being slower in general.
Nedjo..for a 4way server...100$ is nothing. And your worldfastest link is heavily biased. Look on all their previous stuff.
Also i´m getting somewhat bored of these rates benches.
Rates=throughput, non rates=speed.
Is K8 faster than Core 2? I´m just curious because its faster in rates...
And backwards compability is a joke. I can also throw in harpertowns in my servers...so what? By the time there is a new CPU I would much rather get a new server. Because the I/O and such is old! And you would need new memorya swell to maximize the gain wouldn´t you? Not to talk about HT3 later on when they fix that.
Marketing FUD ftl.
Now try to post the non rates benchmarks..just to compare!
Last edited by Shintai; 09-08-2007 at 03:41 AM.
Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.
ffs it's not superior, ffs AMD would price it higher if it was superior and they COULD (they NEED higher margins ASAP), but it seems that they can't... (don't forget gaining marketshare is useless if you go bankrupt)
if this pricing won't change, it look's like their margins will take another dive... because Intel can change prices whenever they want.
btw is someone willing to answer my question?
"does the HPC crowd use off the shelf cpus with custom interconnects, chipsets, etc" - if yes, how is AMD going to differentiate their products. if they price them high (for the HPC people) no one is going to buy AMD for normal servers (which would be a HUGE loss), so do they have to price barcelona low (cause of its sucky int/general use performance..)?
Can someone explain what is so bad here to me. On a 2p system the AMD opteron is 4% slower in SPECint_rate.
While in the SPECfp_rate the AMD is 40%+ quicker. Surely this just shows it's a competative processor across the board.
Granted, the clockspeeds are low and until they speed up I will stick with the Xeons but it doesn't look too bad to me.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks