Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 256

Thread: Bulldoze that Sandy Bridge

  1. #51
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    1,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Ket View Post
    Actually, thats not true of power usage for the 1000 core CPU. Heres a little copy/paste jobby from the article in my link ;

    Although multi-core processors have made long strides in the last few years it appears that there is quite a long way to go until the technology reaches its full potential as one researcher form the University of Glasgow demonstrated when it built an 1,000 core chip that is 20 times faster than current desktop computers.

    Furthermore, the resulting computer was greener than most present-day machines as its processor used far less power than most dual and quad-core CPUs available on the market.

    In order to achieve this feat scientists relied on an FPGA chip (Field Programmable Gate Array), this type of processors being used for medical imaging, computer vision, speech recognition or cryptography applications as well as in aerospace and defense systems.

    Compared to regular computer processors, FPGA chips can be configured into specific circuits by the user, enabling the team led by Dr Wim Vanderbauwhede, of the University of Glasgow, to divide the transistors in groups each performing a special task.

    By creating more than 1000 mini-circuits, the developers were able to turn the chip into an 1,000 core CPU capable of processing around 5GB of data per second.

    This makes it approximately 20 times faster than modern computers.

    “FPGAs are not used within standard computers because they are fairly difficult to program but their processing power is huge while their energy consumption is very small because they are so much quicker - so they are also a greener option,” said Dr. Wim Vanderbauwhede to DailyMail.

    Although this is only a very early proof-of-concept, Dr. Vanderbauwhede thinks these type of chips are to become more common in the future, speeding up computers even further over the next few years.

    If everything goes well, the 1,000-core chip developed will be showcased at the International Symposium on Applied Reconfigurable Computing in March next year.


    Thats what I call Epic win

    i doubt that desktops would embed fpga's soon


    Quote Originally Posted by ScottALot View Post
    Kinda late for the whole IGP-talk: How much would an IGP influence heat? It'd be a minor part of the die, but GPUs in general output a lot of heat... which they can deal with, but CPUs can't.

    but gpus have more then the compute part of the gpu on their die ... those fusion cpus will have the basic compute shaders ... and nothing else ...

    so i dont see it as a bad thing especially if everything seems to be moving towards more integration ... + opencl will get a boost especially since intel is moving an igp on die with sandy bridge and ivy bridge and god only knows what haswell will have too ...
    Last edited by Sn0wm@n; 01-02-2011 at 09:55 PM.
    WILL CUDDLE FOR FOOD

    Quote Originally Posted by JF-AMD View Post
    Dual proc client systems are like sex in high school. Everyone talks about it but nobody is really doing it.

  2. #52
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sweden, Linköping
    Posts
    2,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n View Post
    but gpus have more then the compute part of the gpu on their die ... those fusion cpus will have the basic compute shaders ... and nothing else ...

    so i dont see it as a bad thing especially if everything seems to be moving towards more integration ... + opencl will get a boost especially since intel is moving an igp on die with sandy bridge and ivy bridge and god only knows what haswell will have too ...
    The problem with Intel's GPU is that it's not programmable and can't be used for GPGPU applications.
    SweClockers.com

    CPU: Phenom II X4 955BE
    Clock: 4200MHz 1.4375v
    Memory: Dominator GT 2x2GB 1600MHz 6-6-6-20 1.65v
    Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair IV Formula
    GPU: HD 5770

  3. #53
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In the Land down -under-
    Posts
    4,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Ket View Post
    +1. My thoughts exactly. I don't want to pay for something I'm never going to use. The only time I would accept a IGP in my CPU is if it did something useful.. like being able to set it to do physics through a driver or something.
    Would be good for a htpc though.. Gaming NO!

    Another thing I find funny is AMD/Intel would snipe any of our Moms on a grocery run if it meant good quarterly results, and you are forever whining about what feser did?

  4. #54
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,823
    for me will be great some Zambezi FX chip , Im looking forward too ! And then Komodo chips etc etc :-D
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  5. #55
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Aubrey, Texas
    Posts
    104
    This all sounds pretty promising, I just hope the chips work on current AM3 boards out there with a bios flash. (at least three of the four I got... ) It sounds back and forth as to where it will be socket AM3 at all in some of the reading I have done on Bulldozer so far.
    i5 2500K@ 4.5ghz turbo
    TT Spin-Q
    ASUS P8P67 EVOs
    4GB (2 x 2) Ocz Platinums @ 1600mhz
    Diamond 6970 2gb Catalyst 11.1
    2 X 1.5tb WD Drives
    LG DVD burner
    Win7 64 bit Home Premium
    Corsair HX 850w
    In a slightly modified Antec 1200

  6. #56
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,823
    no, Zambezi CPU is AM3+ only, its because AMD and we want better performance...And I agree, right choice. But u can buy board first and some time will be at older AM3 CPU and later buy Zambezi chip.
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  7. #57
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    529
    If they're reintroducing the FX label, maybe that means they're confident in how much performance they have.

    With "Black Edition" being enthusiast chips at mid-range prices

  8. #58
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    cleveland ohio
    Posts
    2,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Ket View Post
    The hype is all around in threads like this, articles looking at the BD architecture and drawing presumptious conclusions before the tech is even launched, etc. Seems to be people expect BD to perform very similar to SB for much less. I'll get excited whn theres real numbers to back those predictions and assumptions up.
    BS sir.
    I'm sure sandy-bridge hype was much higher.
    and I'm just going by all the disappointed people comments.
    HAVE NO FEAR!
    "AMD fallen angel"
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamekiller View Post
    You didn't get the memo? 1 hour 'Fugger time' is equal to 12 hours of regular time.

  9. #59
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,084
    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalipse View Post
    If they're reintroducing the FX label, maybe that means they're confident in how much performance they have.
    Yeah, just like last time. .




    oh wait.


    I'm more interested in BD than Candy Midge tho.
    Last edited by Mats; 01-04-2011 at 05:09 PM.

  10. #60
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,634
    Quote Originally Posted by FlanK3r View Post
    no, Zambezi CPU is AM3+ only, its because AMD and we want better performance...And I agree, right choice. But u can buy board first and some time will be at older AM3 CPU and later buy Zambezi chip.
    Yeah I'd rather have some AMD records broken rather than some wallets left unmolested.
    Signatures make my posts look huge... but I'm not humble enough to completely remove my signature, so I kept this note explaining it.

  11. #61
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In the Land down -under-
    Posts
    4,452
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottALot View Post
    Yeah I'd rather have some AMD records broken rather than some wallets left unmolested.

    Another thing I find funny is AMD/Intel would snipe any of our Moms on a grocery run if it meant good quarterly results, and you are forever whining about what feser did?

  12. #62
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    AB, Canada
    Posts
    347
    I'd be more worried about cold bug more than anything

  13. #63
    Xtreme 3D Team
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,499
    IMO, if anyone's got a problem with AMD switching to AM3+ and Bulldozer being AM3+ only...they have some personal issues to work out.

    We've been on the same socket for 5 years now with some small patches and updates, heck, even 939 was similar to AM2...

    It's like Ivy Bridge and Westmere-EX running on Socket 775...
    Smile

  14. #64
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by Slappa View Post
    I'd be more worried about cold bug more than anything
    What this guy said. IIRC, didn't Amd switch over to High-K Gates like intel uses with bulldozer, or am I just losing it?

  15. #65
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
    Posts
    464
    Is there anything to be said for Bulldozer and power efficiency? I've noticed how bad my 1090T is compared against Sandy Bridge (at least according to Tom's Hardware charts).

    That's what would give me the (barely) justified reason to upgrade.

    Clearly 32nm will be more efficient. But are there any architecture changes that promise lower consumption on the platform or the CPU itself?

  16. #66
    Xtreme 3D Team
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,499
    I'd bet so...

    8 cores, supposed to compete with the 32nm Westmere CPU's...probably 125w TDP...
    Last edited by BeepBeep2; 01-05-2011 at 06:02 PM.
    Smile

  17. #67
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Nor*cal
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by Halk View Post
    Is there anything to be said for Bulldozer and power efficiency? I've noticed how bad my 1090T is compared against Sandy Bridge (at least according to Tom's Hardware charts).

    That's what would give me the (barely) justified reason to upgrade.

    Clearly 32nm will be more efficient. But are there any architecture changes that promise lower consumption on the platform or the CPU itself?
    If the bobcat preview meant anything, is that AMD is working on more effective powergating. Whether this moves over the desktop/server platforms is yet to be seen.


    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBeep2 View Post
    I'd bet so...

    8 cores, supposed to compete with the 32nm Westmere CPU's...probably 125w TDP...
    JF-AMD stated they would deliver 8 cores on Bulldozer in less die space than 6 cores in Thuban/Istanbul. No word on power consumption or transistor count, though.

  18. #68
    Xtreme 3D Team
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,499
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremyshaw View Post
    If the bobcat preview meant anything, is that AMD is working on more effective powergating. Whether this moves over the desktop/server platforms is yet to be seen.




    JF-AMD stated they would deliver 8 cores on Bulldozer in less die space than 6 cores in Thuban/Istanbul. No word on power consumption or transistor count, though.
    Well common sense told me that AMD wouldn't release another 140w chip, otherwise we'd have 3.6 Ghz Thubans with 4 Ghz Turbo and 3.7 Ghz Deneb chips on the market already...
    Smile

  19. #69
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Nor*cal
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBeep2 View Post
    Well common sense told me that AMD wouldn't release another 140w chip, otherwise we'd have 3.6 Ghz Thubans with 4 Ghz Turbo and 3.7 Ghz Deneb chips on the market already...
    lol... or the Architecture is simply maxed at ~4GHz on this process node

  20. #70
    Xtreme 3D Team
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,499
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremyshaw View Post
    lol... or the Architecture is simply maxed at ~4GHz on this process node
    Well, I can see why the Thuban chip would fail since 4 Ghz is a high number to hit on the stock cooler and to make sure its stable in all environments...

    But seriously, 3.7 Ghz Deneb wouldn't be out of the question, my 565BE did 3.8 Ghz at 1.31v
    Smile

  21. #71
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Nor*cal
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by BeepBeep2 View Post
    Well, I can see why the Thuban chip would fail since 4 Ghz is a high number to hit on the stock cooler and to make sure its stable in all environments...

    But seriously, 3.7 Ghz Deneb wouldn't be out of the question, my 565BE did 3.8 Ghz at 1.31v
    Yay, AMD just launched a 3.6GHz Deneb, the 975BE

    One step closer :p No, seriously, the reason why I say so is because of Phenom I--> Phenom II. Sure, some tweaks may of helped, but I'm willing to bet 65nm-->45nm was the bigger difference for why Phenom I CPU failed to clock very high - even with insane voltage bumps, yet Phenom II was able to at least match Conroe/Wolfdare (and their MCM combos) SKUs by sheer clock speed advantage.

  22. #72
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    9,060
    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalipse View Post
    If they're reintroducing the FX label, maybe that means they're confident in how much performance they have.

    With "Black Edition" being enthusiast chips at mid-range prices
    Unfortunately, it can also possibly mean the same story as with Gulftown. Want many unlocked cores? Pay (let's say) $1000. Get an FX chip. Don't want to pay that much? Get either locked chips, or unlocked, but with two times less cores.
    Hopefully this isn't going to happen, though, AMD's been very nice to consumers recently.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  23. #73
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    cleveland ohio
    Posts
    2,879
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremyshaw View Post
    Yay, AMD just launched a 3.6GHz Deneb, the 975BE

    One step closer :p No, seriously, the reason why I say so is because of Phenom I--> Phenom II. Sure, some tweaks may of helped, but I'm willing to bet 65nm-->45nm was the bigger difference for why Phenom I CPU failed to clock very high - even with insane voltage bumps, yet Phenom II was able to at least match Conroe/Wolfdare (and their MCM combos) SKUs by sheer clock speed advantage.
    not really 45nm got immersion lithography 65nm didn't.

    TLB bug was over blown, as was not clocking on HTT sandy bridge can't clock their FSB/QPI or what ever it is now either.
    HAVE NO FEAR!
    "AMD fallen angel"
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamekiller View Post
    You didn't get the memo? 1 hour 'Fugger time' is equal to 12 hours of regular time.

  24. #74
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Nor*cal
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by demonkevy666 View Post
    not really 45nm got immersion lithography 65nm didn't.

    TLB bug was over blown, as was not clocking on HTT sandy bridge can't clock their FSB/QPI or what ever it is now either.
    Immersion only has to do with the fab quality, I thought.... Intel didn't bother until 32nm!! I still think back to AMD's briefs on how Phenom was supposed to be a 7GHz or whatever architecture. 65nm was simply to power hungry and too large to pull off high clocks. Heck, the on chip power grid might not of been up for the task, or the clocking grid might of been too large, lol


    TLB bug was overblown, but AMD wasn't willing to give in PR over potential system instability, and I think it was the right thing to do.

  25. #75
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    846
    Quote Originally Posted by Halk View Post
    Is there anything to be said for Bulldozer and power efficiency?
    For server, same power and thermals, if not lower. New power management will mean very good power efficiency. I won't say anything else.

    Quote Originally Posted by jeremyshaw View Post
    If the bobcat preview meant anything, is that AMD is working on more effective powergating. Whether this moves over the desktop/server platforms is yet to be seen.

    JF-AMD stated they would deliver 8 cores on Bulldozer in less die space than 6 cores in Thuban/Istanbul. No word on power consumption or transistor count, though.
    Bobcat is a different core, different process and different technology node.

    See above for the power comment.
    While I work for AMD, my posts are my own opinions.

    http://blogs.amd.com/work/author/jfruehe/

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •