AMD's Bobcat and Bulldozer

[nn_step]

And AMD's ex-Chief Architect expects 5% in core level perf/clock LOSSES + 20-25% in clocks.

I wonder who will turn out to be closer?

Depends on if you are talking about integer or floating point.

[MAS]

AMD said 16-core Bulldozer has 33% more cores than Magny-Cours and 50% faster than Magny-Cours

Divide 2 parts of the statement by two and you'll get:

8-core Bulldozer has 33% more cores than Thuban and 50% faster than Thuban

Take cinebench result and approximate:

[terrace215]

Now realize that the octal-core, 16-thread LGA-2011 competition will also be about 50% faster than the current top end, and well... nothing will have changed, relatively speaking.

[terrace215]

Depends on if you are talking about integer or floating point.

Alsup was talking about the integer piece.

[MAS]

who did say 8-core bulldozer is a future AMD top? AMD will have 16-octal cpu, twice faster

[Mats]

AMD said 16-core Bulldozer has 33% more cores than Magny-Cours and 50% faster than Magny-Cours

Divide 2 parts of the statement by two and you'll get:

8-core Bulldozer has 33% more cores than Thuban and 50% faster than Thuban

Take cinebench result and approximate:

That's just way off, you forgot the difference in clock speed.
The Opteron 6176 SE runs at 2.3 GHz, and the 1090T runs at 3.2 GHz.

[Mats]

Now realize that the octal-core, 16-thread LGA-2011 competition will also be about 50% faster than the current top end, and well... nothing will have changed, relatively speaking.

You're posting in the wrong thread.

[Manicdan]

Now realize that the octal-core, 16-thread LGA-2011 competition will also be about 50% faster than the current top end, and well... nothing will have changed, relatively speaking.

thats blatant flame baiting there
it offers nothing useful to BD related stuff, and only taunts people into intel vs amd arguments

[MAS]

That's just way off, you forgot the difference in clock speed.
The Opteron 6176 SE runs at 2.3 GHz, and the 1090T runs at 3.2 GHz.

statement is for equal clockspeed

Marny-cour clock = 16-core B. clock

Thuban clock = 8-core B. clock

[Mats]

Yeah, you're right!

[blindbox]

As far as we know, the 33% more cores and 50% thing is on server loads (honestly, what server loads uses 100% all the time?). Conservative too, it's the bare minimum. I believe that's what JF-AMD said. Correct me if I'm wrong.

EDIT: Here it is.

Don't expect performance at hot chips - that is a discussion around architecture.

As for performance, the 50% gain is an aggregate estimation of major server workloads. Estimates tend to be conservative, there is little to be gained from being overly aggressive.

Oh, terrace215 was posting at that thread too.

Again, we are all asking this. Is there an 8-core SB for desktops? 8-core is the new 4-core for AMD. It seems like 6-cores and 4-cores SB are going up against 8-core BD, which probably replaces the 6-cores and the 4-cores of AMD today.

I'm expecting good things.

[informal]

And AMD's ex-Chief Architect expects 5% in core level perf/clock LOSSES + 20-25% in clocks.

I wonder who will turn out to be closer?

The guy left AMD when the core was half-canceled .
The 50% figure is just AMD being careful ,that's all.Nobody will criticize them if the over deliver,but not vice versa.

[ajaidev]

AMD's desktop BD will offer 4 module aka 8 core version
Intels desktop SB will offer 8 core as far as i know and was told in march dont know if the 10c will be for consumers.

[informal]

SB-EX for consumers?That's,IIRC, not even on the 2011 server roadmap.

[terrace215]

The guy left AMD when the core was half-canceled .
The 50% figure is just AMD being careful ,that's all.Nobody will criticize them if the over deliver,but not vice versa.

Did you stop to think about how Alsup's comments on comp.arch echo AMD's slide bullet point....

Alsup: 5% loss due to u-arch trimming to meet higher frequencies
AMD: "without significant loss in single-thread performance"


So... yeah, it's about the changes in the integer side of the "module" from K10.5 to BD. They hope for higher frequencies to get back to gains, but the net is 15-20% for single/low-threaded work. Not nearly enough to catch SB.

SB-EX for consumers?That's,IIRC, not even on the 2011 server roadmap.

It's down for Q4 2011.

[terrace215]

You're posting in the wrong thread.

Because responding to a post comparing BD to SB with a reminder about other SB models is off topic, right?

[Sparky]

And AMD's ex-Chief Architect expects 5% in core level perf/clock LOSSES + 20-25% in clocks.

I wonder who will turn out to be closer?

Why give an EX-chief architect so much credibility? He's not in charge anymore, hasn't been for quite a while (couple years if I understand correctly). A lot can happen in a couple years (good or bad).

I guess you just like to crap on every AMD thread that exists.

[JumpingJack]

SB-EX for consumers?That's,IIRC, not even on the 2011 server roadmap.

Rehtorical question ... no way, for the same reasons you will never see an AMD MCM 12 or 16 core for the client, it is just not economical.

[blindbox]

SO BD will be the only 8-core chip for desktops. Not to mention a whole range of product of them (not just one product, judging from AMD's track record).

BD definitely wants some encoding love.

[terrace215]

SO BD will be the only 8-core chip for desktops.

Sandy Bridge LGA-2011 will come in 8- and 6-core flavors for the desktop. (in Q3)

There's a table toward the bottom of the wiki entry that may help you keep track of all the variants:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_B...oarchitecture)

[terrace215]

Why give an EX-chief architect so much credibility? He's not in charge anymore, hasn't been for quite a while (couple years if I understand correctly). A lot can happen in a couple years (good or bad).

Because that is not enough time for major design changes in a new CPU architecture, and because what he describes matches up very nicely with what AMD disclosed at Hot Chips.

[Calmatory]

Sandy Bridge LGA-2011 will come in 8- and 6-core flavors for the desktop.

But at which price and when?

I doubt Intel will do any aggressive pricing with those parts, so AMD still makes great deal for perf/$, possibly better than Intel will offer with 2011.

If only these things came to mainstream laptops fast.

[radaja]

Sandy Bridge LGA-2011 will come in 8- and 6-core flavors for the desktop.

with HT too,8c/16t and 6c/12t.correct?ive been hearing so many different things
now that the 1155 preview was done,and i think the s2011 keeps getting lost in the mix.is there any definitive info on this?
and also ive heard that the second iteration of BD might have 8c/16 using cmt instead of smt.any truth to this?that would be very sweet if its true

[blindbox]

Sandy Bridge LGA-2011 will come in 8- and 6-core flavors for the desktop. (in Q3)

There's a table toward the bottom of the wiki entry that may help you keep track of all the variants:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_B...oarchitecture)

Something more official would be nice. Everything has been word of mouth lately. 8c without a doubt will come to servers but what about desktops?

Though I think we can trust ajaidev's words but yeah, it'd be nice to have an official word or slides, just to remove all doubts.

with HT too,8c/16t and 6c/12t.correct?ive been hearing so many different things
now that the 1155 preview was done,and i think the s2011 keeps getting lost in the mix.is there any definitive info on this?
and also ive heard that the second iteration of BD might have 8c/16 using cmt instead of smt.any truth to this?that would be very sweet if its true

Bulldozer is pretty much an optimized CMT. CMT's supposed to give you twice a core's performance for even greater die-size but AMD settled for greater die-saving but for 80% of a core's performance.. I'm just quoting the slides.

[JF-AMD]

Could you find out if the threads share a pick buffer or if it is shared.
and if so, what size(s)

That is not data that we would release; at least not before launch.