IBM published Barcelona SpecCPU results.

[dave_graham]

guys, again, there are significant performance deltas between the release stepping of the core and the B0/B1 steppings.

without much more information than that, you just need to keep your panties in check.

dave

[Hornet331]

guys, again, there are significant performance deltas between the release stepping of the core and the B0/B1 steppings.

without much more information than that, you just need to keep your panties in check.

dave

so ibm also uses b0/b1 stepping ?

[dave_graham]

so ibm also uses b0/b1 stepping ?

depends on when the benches were run.

dave

[gallag]

depends on when the benches were run.

dave

Dave. you have been pretty optimistic about k10 as of late, you have certainly been one of the more vocal members in defending any sign of weakness from k10 blaming it on steeping etc and pretty much hinting that k10 is going to wipe the floor with intel and I have been believing you but I must admit that it is a stretch not to think IBM has it right, No?

I suppose it is only a few hours till we find out if you are on the level

[dave_graham]

Dave. you have been pretty optimistic about k10 as of late, you have certainly been one of the more vocal members in defending any sign of weakness from k10 blaming it on steeping etc and pretty much hinting that k10 is going to wipe the floor with intel and I have been believing you but I must admit that it is a stretch not to think IBM has it right, No?

I suppose it is only a few hours till we find out if you are on the level

of course i've been vocal.

here's what i've been vocal about:

a.) people assuming that Cinebench 10 and SuperPi results as tested by coolater on a B0/B1 stepping processor are the presumptive indicator of performance for an entire range of processors.

b.) people making snap-assumptions that benchmarks that are published by Tier One vendors are the gospel even when, as we've seen with Dell and IBM, there are SIGNIFICANT VARIANCES IN PERFORMANCE.

c.) people using B0/B1 stepping performance claims to downplay AMD's ability to produce silicon that falls in line with the performance claims they've made in the past.

do I have a lot of experience on this platform? yes.
do I have a lot of background information covered under NDA from AMD and Tyan? yes

i don't drink the Kool-aid. I simply look for the people that do and try to correct it.

seriously. anything i've posted as of late has been to correct significantly incorrect perceptions on Barcelona and it's process to market.

if Intel would actually give me the time of day, I might be inclined to do the same there, but, i don't have the time, money, or anti-AMD attitude that they desire.

*shrug*

clear as mud to me.

in questioning these IBM results, i'm simply providing input that if IBM used B1 stepping processors (versus the BA/B2 stepping processors that will be present at launch), there's going to be significant notable impact on "scores" unless the proper workarounds are implemented.

waiting until tomorrow is somewhat laughable since outside of a very few talented individuals, i'm expecting a load of poorly done "thanks for the free chips, AMD...you rock!" reviews that have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the capabilities of the platform.

EDIT: at least i'm intelligent in my responses versus some of these asshat Intel/AMD fanboi's who believe without reason. again, knowledge is power.

dave

[Motiv]

EDIT: at least i'm intelligent in my responses versus some of these asshat Intel/AMD fanboi's who believe without reason. again, knowledge is power.

dave

I take it you'll be using the newer steppings for your review?

Just out of interest, is the final silicon significantly faster or are the boards hindering its performance?

[terrace215]

of course i've been vocal.



in questioning these IBM results, i'm simply providing input that if IBM used B1 stepping processors (versus the BA/B2 stepping processors that will be present at launch), there's going to be significant notable impact on "scores" unless the proper workarounds are implemented.

IBM says the results are current as of Sep 10, 2007. Sounds like they would be using the production stepping, if they bothered to put out a whitepaper on it, and why would IBM submit pre-prod stepping results to SPEC??? That just doesn't seem at all likely.

Notice the lame system availability date as well.

Barc is a paper launch from the big OEMs.

From the pdf:

Results are current as of September 10, 2007. The scores have been submitted to SPEC for review and will be posted on their Web site upon successful completion of the review. View all
published results at www.spec.org.
(1) Planned availability for the x3455 model using the AMD Opteron Model 2347 processor
(1.9GHz, 512KB L2 cache per core) is November 16, 2007.

[dave_graham]

IBM says the results are current as of Sep 10, 2007. Sounds like they would be using the production stepping, if they bothered to put out a whitepaper on it, and why would IBM submit pre-prod stepping results to SPEC??? That just doesn't seem at all likely.

Notice the lame system availability date as well.

Barc is a paper launch from the big OEMs.

From the pdf:

Results are current as of September 10, 2007. The scores have been submitted to SPEC for review and will be posted on their Web site upon successful completion of the review. View all
published results at www.spec.org.
(1) Planned availability for the x3455 model using the AMD Opteron Model 2347 processor
(1.9GHz, 512KB L2 cache per core) is November 16, 2007.

some manufacturers have been known to toss results into the ring early...won't name names, but...this is an OEM pissing match, remember.

dave

[lapdog]

guys, again, there are significant performance deltas between the release stepping of the core and the B0/B1 steppings.

without much more information than that, you just need to keep your panties in check.

dave

I guess I misunderstood; you certainly seem to suggest IBM used B0/B1 that had problems and have been fixed (were defective.)

[dave_graham]

I guess I misunderstood; you certainly seem to suggest IBM used B0/B1 that had problems and have been fixed (were defective.)

IF the identified CPUs were B1s, yes. don't know as that's not typically revealed.

dave

[lapdog]

IF the identified CPUs were B1s, yes. don't know as that's not typically revealed.

dave

You have lost all credibility in my book.

[THE JEW (RaVeN)]

You have lost all credibility in my book.

You seem to give and take said credibility quite easily

Dave's input, whether here or on 2cpu or any other forum, is valued. People may disagree with it, hold it highly, or merely lump it in with other voices, but he's one of the people giving actual input (ie. not regurgitating FUD's tabloid articles). That, in itself, gives him "cred" in my book.

Personally, I'm waiting at least a month or two after the release to form an opinion. Launch day presents too small a sample most likely tainted by brown-nosing. The industry itself will let us know whether they're a good product or not.