That's what I thought, and obviously that is what is indicated, but I think you both are talking about the performance numbers in the linked benchmark.Originally Posted by Macadamia
That's what I thought, and obviously that is what is indicated, but I think you both are talking about the performance numbers in the linked benchmark.
why so much confusion about the zdnet article... numbers just fit fine...
Queen:
Dunnington:
12core: 57432
1core: 5635
Scaling: 10,2
the only odd thing are the julia benches.
BTW, a Chinese website showed a 3.2Ghz QX9770 getting 24k while a 3.5Ghz Q9300 (6MB Cache) @ 3.5Ghz OC get 20k.Then its all about the cache so to say
That also explains the "unrealistic" 25% increase from Phenom to Phenom 2 in this test. Not even to talk about the 100% change to the 7000 series Xeons.
More food for thought?
Nah, that fits the cache theoryBTW, a Chinese website showed a 3.2Ghz QX9770 getting 24k while a 3.5Ghz Q9300 (6MB Cache) @ 3.5Ghz OC get 20k.
More food for thought?
Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.
Yes, the core has gone some optimizations such as fiing coldbug and allowing high clocks(dunno if it is due to 45nm or an actual march fix). IPC-wise there is not that much, except 3x bigger L3 and lower latencies(?).
Do you have some info to link on that? It would be nice to know more about the IPC changes.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Does anybody know if AMD still uses SOI in 45nm.? It wasn't mentioned in the press release. The lack of cold bug is pretty fishy
Yes it is still SOI.Does anybody know if AMD still uses SOI in 45nm.? It wasn't mentioned in the press release. The lack of cold bug is pretty fishy
The Cardboard Master Crunch with us, the XS WCG team
Intel Core i7 2600k @ 4.5GHz, 16GB DDR3-1600, Radeon 7950 @ 1000/1250, Win 10 Pro x64
Yes they do(use SOI).SOI is even planned for high perf.(read server/desktop) parts on 32nm while bulk and highK is for GPUs and low power CPU parts(mobile/netbooks).Does anybody know if AMD still uses SOI in 45nm.? It wasn't mentioned in the press release. The lack of cold bug is pretty fishy
i would really...but don't know if its worth the trouble if only 2 peoples are interested
Core i7 2700k@4,8ghz HT off- 1.41v / Gainward GTX580 GooD 850/1700/2200 / 2X4Gb G.Skill Ares 1833C9 / Z77 Sabertooth / Crucial M4 64 Gb / WD 320Gb and 640GB / Corsair H80 / Corsair 620 HX
I'm really interested,but those phenomII results from that blog are kinda fishy so it would be pointless for you to waste your time if we can't compare the results.Thanks anyway
You clearly misunderstood me.Bulk is for GPUs and highk is for low power CPU parts
<-respectively.while bulk and highK is for GPUs and low power CPU parts(mobile/netbooks).
Last edited by informal; 11-24-2008 at 07:19 AM.
Err... why can't 32nm SOI HP use HKMG too?
Weren't IBM-AMD working in that direction?
Whether the GPUs have HKMG is up to timeframe, since I think HKMG does not need a big transition in terms of design.
Nobody is trying to save you, I'm trying to save myself from clicking a thread and find just
So far nobody has talked about perfomance. Who cares if it can clock to 4GHz if perfomance is equivalent to a 400MHz less C2Q. I guess we won't have any proven info about that until we reach the launch day (that doesn't include Mark's blog and similar, just in case).
I think you need to calmly wait and see, like for all of us there is an NDA on any numbers being published.
Try to remain focused on the main context of the thread, which was Phenom2 is hitting well over 5GHZ chilled. When the numbers surface detailing performance we will start the debate all over gain.
Got a problem with your OCZ product....?
Have a look over here
Tony AKA BigToe
Tuning PC's for speed...Run whats fast, not what you think is fast
Nothing much, based on rumours AMD saying "up to 25 %" IPC improvements for Shanghai over Barcelona(NOT for Deneb over Agena, however!). Some leaked Deneb tests whow approx. 5-10 % increases over Agena(C1 AFAIK). It is hard to say how much it is faster "on average" because it is solely up to the tested apps. E.g. I could test only with programs which yield biggest gains and claim that "+15 % increases" whereas usual desktop apps(E.g. WinRAR, divx/video en/decoding, photo editing, audio en/decoding etc) show less than 5 % increases on average (NOTE: I am not claiming that those apps would show less than 5 % IPC improvement, that is just a simplified example! And I have no clue about the IPC improvements on different apps, other than that it should be from 5-10 %, quite average I'd say, sometimes less, sometimes more.).
I'd say that +7 % IPC improvement is slightly pessimistic one. I'd look forward to 8-10 %, but it varies between apps so much that it is impossible to prove/tell/check anyway.
Last edited by Calmatory; 11-24-2008 at 07:46 AM.
I have been seing this statement around the web quite a bit, not sure what its based on but it sounds way out there..........
Beyond that, from a clock-for-clock performance perspective, optimizations have been made to the CPU pipeline, including improvements to branch prediction, pre-fetch mechanisms and TLB (translation look-aside buffer) optimizations. In total, along with larger cache sizes (now 512KB L2 cache per core with a 6MB L3 cache) and higher clock speeds, AMD claims the new Phenom II X4 should offer a 30 – 40% performance increase over all.
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Branch prediction - now that was one of the things CPU Queens is supposed to be testing!
(But it ended up loving cache more than BP.
As much as I want to believe it, I'm thinking that is just a wet dream. Now, it would be nice if I was proven wrong in January but I'm not holding my breath.
The Cardboard Master Crunch with us, the XS WCG team
Intel Core i7 2600k @ 4.5GHz, 16GB DDR3-1600, Radeon 7950 @ 1000/1250, Win 10 Pro x64
Any clue on what has been done for the branch predictor? Core architecture as great BP, for example Core architecture can predict branches perfectly up to 64 loops, while K10 can only predict perfectly up to 9 loops.
I think that "AMD claims the new Phenom II X4 should offer a 30 – 40% performance increase over all." does mean that with higher clocks there can be up to(At least thats what they are saying when/if the claims don't meet with the reality, obviously
Last edited by Calmatory; 11-24-2008 at 08:11 AM.
WHY everybody respect the NDA from AMD and nobody respects NDA from Intel???????????
CPU Intel QX9650
Thermalright Ultra-120 + 12cm Panaflo Medium Speed
Asus Maximus Formula (Rampage BIOS 0403)
2x 1GB Geil Ultra PC-6400 CL4-4-4-12 2.1v
XFX GF 8800GTS 320MB DDR3 Extreme Edition
RAID-0: 4x Seagate 250GB NCQ 16MB
SB Audigy 2 ZS
OCZ EvoStream 600w
CPU-Z Validation
Screenshot!
BTW, for anyone having trouble with trolls or just someone who isn't exactly trolling but serially upsets you, this forum does sport Annoyance-Be-Gone Technology that is quite helpful for staying calm.
---
Yes, SOI and HKMG are not exclusive. I wonder if AMD would see even further benefits to their already spectacular 45nm process if they utilized HKMG in conjunction with their existing SOI goodness.
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
it seems AMD has rewrote the book when it comes to SOI.........they may end up having no use for HKMG on desktop CPU's.
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
How many people saw the results? How many enthusiast people care about AMD? People are after Nvidia and Intel everywhere.WHY everybody respect the NDA from AMD and nobody respects NDA from Intel???????????
Thats BS, SOI and HK/MG are solutions for totally different problems (channle leakage vs gate leakage).
I say we take it easy. We have had too much crap around.
An example: http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquir...30000-3dmark06
Is the source different?
Yes.
Is it good enough?
No.
So I say too little known yet.
Yes, indeed! I have had to use it a couple of times over the years. I really hate doing it because my belief is that almost everybody has something to share and are genuinely good people, but there are a few on the Internet who only exist to cause trouble. I now have a grand total of ONE such individual in my Ignore list. I'm not even sure he is still a member here, and I don't wanna know. I have been on forums for over 20 years. Actually longer...try "billboards" for those that know what those were. Rarely have I ever had to do something like that. Like I said, I hate being forced to use that function.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks