What to Expect From AMD at ISSCC 2011

[Manicdan]

^Llano should fill the market of the 730$ notebooks
but for someone who can afford HALF of that, a bobcat chip is great since it should handle all the NEEDs even though it might not handle the few WANTs, like detailed gaming. keep in mind i said "people shopping for sub 500$" not that everyone should be shopping for sub 500$ laptops.

[informal]

OK,after reading the latest AMD blogs and looking at the known rumored/disclosed data,I'm ready to state my performance expectations :
Server(16C):
Highest clocked part ~2.5Ghz with 3Ghz Turbo on all cores active while TDP is not reached;105W ACP/140W TDP. 50%-60% aggregate higher throughput performance than 2.5Ghz 12 core MagnyCours,which is an average of spec int and spec fp rate,STREAM etc.Spec fp rate should get a higher boost in performance,around 65% when compared to 2.5Ghz 12 core MagnyCours(this is just derived by looking at AMD's simulated gains from last analyst day which seemed 30% higher for fp Vs int rate) .
Standard edition part ~2.3Ghz with 2.8Ghz Turbo on all cores active while TDP is not reached;80W ACP/115W TDP. 50%-60% aggregate higher throughput performance than 2.3Ghz 12 core MagnyCours,which is an average of spec int and spec fp rate,STREAM etc.Spec fp rate should get a higher boost in performance,around 65% when compared to 2.3Ghz 12 core MagnyCours(this is just derived by looking at AMD's simulated gains from last analyst day which seemed 30% higher for fp Vs int rate) .
High Efficiency part ~2.1Ghz with 2.6Ghz Turbo;65W ACP/85W TDP.

Desktop(8C)
8C ~rumored branding~ FX series (3-3.5Ghz range). High(est) end part ~3.5Ghz with 4-4.2GHz Turbo on all cores;125W TDP rating (@ 4-4.2Ghz in Turbo mode,I'm now thinking in favor of Zambezi "Turboing" more than Interlagos' 500Mhz). 15%-20% higher IPC in single thread integer workloads,similar or a bit better(30-40%) should go for fp workloads.15% penalty due to shared front end in multithread workloads.Super low power in idle mode,on the level of SB and Llano cores.Single thread/up to 4 thread turbo @ 4.5Ghz with power gating 2 or 3 modules with power draw below the half the maximum TDP value.My estimated multithread performance with and without all core Turbo : ~4.2x1.15x1.33/1.15=1.7x or 70%T / 3.5x1.15x1.33/1.15=1.4x or 40% higher than Thuban @ 3.3Ghz .My estimated single thread/up to 4 thread performance with and without Turbo : ~4.5x1.15/3.7=1.4x or 40% faster than 3.7Ghz(Turbo) Thuban in single thread applications and 4.5x1.15=1.55x or 55% faster than 3.3Ghz Thuban in applications that scale to 4 threads(Thuban can't use Turbo on more than 3 cores).

6C Performance series(3.2-3.7Ghz range). Highest clock ~3.7Ghz with 4-4.2GHz Turbo on all cores;95W TDP rating.MT estimated performance : 12% w/o Turbo faster and 27% with Turbo faster than 3.3Ghz Thuban. Single thread/3 thread performance estimate : 40% faster than 3.3Ghz/3.7GhzTurbo Thuban.

4C Mainstream series(3.3-4Ghz). Highest clock ~4Ghz with 4-4.2GHz Turbo on all cores;65-95W TDP rating.MT estimated performance(apps scaling to 6 cores efficiently) : 25% slower w/o Turbo and 19% w/Turbo slower than 3.3Ghz Thuban. Single thread/2 thread performance estimate : 40% faster than 3.3Ghz/3.7GhzTurbo Thuban.

All is speculation on my part,but I'm pretty sure the numbers will be in the ballpark .

edit: all above estimates are for integer workloads. SSE/fp workloads should get additional boost but I have no idea if Turbo will engage in the case of vectorized fp intensive multithreaded workload.If it doesn't engage then above numbers should be corrected(divided by 1.2x and multiplied by the difference in IPC between integer and fp,which is totally unknown ).

[JF-AMD]

If AMD shows some GOOD numbers may stop a bit SB sells...

Yes, that would stop SB sales. It would also stop current product sales.

Why would this be good for any company?

I have been in this business for 20 years. It is generally never good to release benchmarks prior to launch.

[Shadov]

anyways I never once said I think it would be a good business move for AMD to release BD numbers ahead of release in fact if you would have read my whole post you would see that I said "I think they are keeping the lid on things because it the least risky move to make and gets consistent results. as much as we both wish they would leak results it's just not the way the industry works"

understand one thing. I could give a RATS @$$ how much money AMD make or what is good business practice for any of the large tech companies. I am a selfish person and I would like to see early BD numbers (as should any tech enthusiast) and really unless someone has shares in AMD I fail to see why they would care so much about there business practices... or "what is good for them as a company"

-The market would not even come close to stalling because of supply and demand. outside of the enthusiast community (less then 1% as I stated before) people don't know about or wait for new CPU's to be released. people and businesses need new computers and they buy them when they need them.

It seems JF-AMD confirms my point of view, but there is a difference that he is in the business opposite to you and me. That way please do some research next time and dont think that you know better, because apparently you dont.

But as you mentioned you're a ignorant, selfish person and that way I'll end my conversation with you right now.

[Sn0wm@n]

im pretty sure you totally missed out on everything I said.... I don't think it was rocket science to figure out.

anyways I never once said I think it would be a good business move for AMD to release BD numbers ahead of release in fact if you would have read my whole post you would see that I said "I think they are keeping the lid on things because it the least risky move to make and gets consistent results. as much as we both wish they would leak results it's just not the way the industry works"

understand one thing. I could give a RATS @$$ how much money AMD make or what is good business practice for any of the large tech companies. I am a selfish person and I would like to see early BD numbers (as should any tech enthusiast) and really unless someone has shares in AMD I fail to see why they would care so much about there business practices... or "what is good for them as a company"

and honestly some of the points you have while being semi-true are way over done.

-The market would not even come close to stalling because of supply and demand. outside of the enthusiast community (less then 1% as I stated before) people don't know about or wait for new CPU's to be released. people and businesses need new computers and they buy them when they need them.

-Distributors will adjust their orders but ONLY really close to launch because again people are still buying things.... and AMD can always sell off the extras to OEM's and the like (which both AMD and Intel do all the time)

-leaking some numbers (does not need to be officially, could be via some Chinese Site) is not the same as announcing the pricing and marketing tactics of your new confirmed CPU

-Intel is unlikely to change prices until a few days of BD launch anyways otherwise they will loss money. which they will do regardless of an early leak or not.

and really man no need to be "I am so much smarter then everyone on the internetz...." I made no attack on you or pretty much anyone for that matter so no need to attempt at insulting my intelligence....

its obvious youll miss the point we are making .. thus you wont see the bigger picture ...


how do you think amd would recuperate on the money lost by the lack of sales of current product if they announce something way better with pricing and performance graphs etc...


they would officialy stick it to us ... yes us as in the customer .... now think for us ... yes us .. the customer .... and wait a bit more ... be patient

[Olivon]

It is generally never good to release benchmarks prior to launch.

Intel dit it for years, no problem ...

[generics_user]

Intel dit it for years, no problem ...

now take a look at the leftover intel stock on the market

amd is going to clear their stock before BD launch

[eXceeded]

Intel dit it for years, no problem ...

But at the same time they weren't selling any CPU's to anyone who was in the know. I seem to remember everyone (including all my friends) saying that Pentium 4 was the best CPU and Intel was better. That's what you get with brilliant marketing and your hands down the OEM's trousers.

They don't tend to do it as much anymore and when they do it's usually because performance is orders of magnitude better than the previous gen, to them they've already sold all their CPU's anyway as they are sitting with the OEMs.

For example go into PC World/(whatever you call it in US/World) and count how many computers are there with Intel's in them, those are all SOLD from Intel.

That's what I believe anyway, not saying it's a good or bad thing...

[FlanK3r]

INF: heh, nice,I hope for this

[Aten-Ra]

Can anyone tell me why we dont have the BD presentations from ISSCC yet ?? I cant find a single link

[Oliverda]

Can anyone tell me why we dont have the BD presentations from ISSCC yet ?? I cant find a single link

NDA maybe?

[RPGWiZaRD]

Yea I'd love to get more info on BD (Zambezi especially). When would the info gathered on this meeting be revealed to public?

[JkS]

One way or another, I'm sure Dresdenboy will get hold of the information and give us some nice analysis .

[RaV666]

So the thesis to not release any performance numbers before the launch is that amd is going to lose the sales to big oems because when they know how much better the next chip is, they wont buy current ,right ?
But dont they know already ? I mean ES chips are already to some extent out there, or they will be shortly.So Dell/HP/Lenovo, they all know or pretty much will know shortly.
AMD is currently cornered into the value segment, and chips in this segment tend to sell even if much more capable solutions are available just becuase theyre somewhat cheaper.
And moreover this logic is double sided sword, there MAY be some lost sales due to some clients waiting,but on the other hand some clients will go Intel route because they offer much better chip and they dont have any info to think otherwise in the near future.
Only people that will be seriously affected by non disclosure of perf data are goin to be us, not even joe average.And JF said many times that we are to small to matter, so either way i dont see a problem

[Postmodum]

Big OEM's don't need public statements from AMD to have access to that kind of numbers. They do "background business" My guess is that they have X millions chips sold even before public launch

Rav, you must be patient ... no one is seriously affected other than people that can't have the patient to wait. They are not doing something out of extraordinary ...

Now, people that can't wait and are impatient will think 1000 things about AMD for not saying anything

[Oliverda]

http://www.computerbase.de/bildstrecke/33300/2/

[informal]

Also,CB has a die picture of a single module :

Summary on CB.

edit :
More in PCWatch article translated.

Summary from article:
-custom flip-flop design is used to achieve high(er) operating frequency and keep power consumption at bay.USes more silicon area as a trade-off
-used 8T memory cells for higher clock potential with lower operating voltage (uses a bit more die space as a trade-off)
-design is specially optimized for clock and low(er) power,3.5+Ghz clocks are achievable and around 20% higher clock potential than previous design(family 10h on 45nm?)

[cesariuth]

Waiting for Cebit

[FlanK3r]

Heh, for Cebit hope finally preview 900 AMD boards . ANd some demo with Zambezi system of course

[zalbard]

Summary from article:
-custom flip-flop design is used to achieve high(er) operating frequency and keep power consumption at bay.USes more silicon area as a trade-off
-used 8T memory cells for higher clock potential with lower operating voltage (uses a bit more die space as a trade-off)
-design is specially optimized for clock and low(er) power,3.5+Ghz clocks are achievable and around 20% higher clock potential than previous design(family 10h on 45nm?)

Looks like we can expect nice overclockability from the new AMD CPUs.

[Mats]

Also,CB has a die picture of a single module :

It seems like it matches the lower modules in the earlier die shot that was floating around.
The upper ones seems more PS'ed, the lower ones are just blurred.

[JF-AMD]

Don't get too fired up about CeBIT. That is being run by our EMEA team. The would not disclose anything that HQ has not already said.

As to the benchmarks and OEMs, stop for a moment and consider that OEMs and the retail channel (where 80%+ of client processors are sold) works on an inventory system with weeks of inventory built up and boxed in various stages of warehouses around the world. The last thing they want is anything that disrupts the flow of boxes out of the retail locations. And the fact that all of their SB systems were put on hld, they are already in a bit of pain from that, so a stall in AMD would make it doubly bad.

The problem with benchmarks is they make it REAL. Everyone knows BD is coming, it is not a secret. The guy who has to buy a new computer this week will buy one because he has to have one. But if he sees an official benchmark from AMD, he probably starts to think "hmmm, this is right around the corner, prices will come down on the old stuff when new stuff comes out, maybe I should wait a couple of weeks...." Play that out a few million times around the world and you see the impact it can have.

Anyone that is waiting for BD will wait. Nobody has come this far only to give up in the final stretch. And let's face it, SB might have been a big threat a month ago, but there are things that could have changed that equation....

Intel did not release an official benchmark on SB until launch. Yes, there were benchmarks floating around that may or may not have come from them, but they did not officially release anything because they have the same OEM problem.

[eXceeded]

Don't get too fired up about CeBIT. That is being run by our EMEA team. The would not disclose anything that HQ has not already said.

As to the benchmarks and OEMs, stop for a moment and consider that OEMs and the retail channel (where 80%+ of client processors are sold) works on an inventory system with weeks of inventory built up and boxed in various stages of warehouses around the world. The last thing they want is anything that disrupts the flow of boxes out of the retail locations. And the fact that all of their SB systems were put on hld, they are already in a bit of pain from that, so a stall in AMD would make it doubly bad.

The problem with benchmarks is they make it REAL. Everyone knows BD is coming, it is not a secret. The guy who has to buy a new computer this week will buy one because he has to have one. But if he sees an official benchmark from AMD, he probably starts to think "hmmm, this is right around the corner, prices will come down on the old stuff when new stuff comes out, maybe I should wait a couple of weeks...." Play that out a few million times around the world and you see the impact it can have.

Anyone that is waiting for BD will wait. Nobody has come this far only to give up in the final stretch. And let's face it, SB might have been a big threat a month ago, but there are things that could have changed that equation....

Intel did not release an official benchmark on SB until launch. Yes, there were benchmarks floating around that may or may not have come from them, but they did not officially release anything because they have the same OEM problem.

Yeah they only "accidentally" leaked information when Conroe was on it's way to get rid of the kettle boiler sorry P4

[RaV666]

Intel did not release an official benchmark on SB until launch. Yes, there were benchmarks floating around that may or may not have come from them, but they did not officially release anything because they have the same OEM problem.

Umm, no.Anandtech had a preview.Besides that, there was load of leaks going around .We pretty much knew what to expect few months before the launch.
Besides, with the information above you agree that DYI market is pretty big overall.
And the same logic works both ways, in example ,a user needs machine, so he can build something now with information he has already, and thats going to be intel for anything more than a cpu upgrade mostly :-/.2500k destroys any serious consideration of current x6 phenoms.And BD wont be a value chip for some time, so if he wants cheap he will go AMD one way or the other.Having information bout BD doesnt really change anything in the low margin level,and at the mid-high end it potentially disrupts intel sales.
Same goes for the chipset sales, you guys wait with AM3+ compatible solutions to clear the stock of older ones, but in exchange people buying now dont want to get stuck with unapgradable technology.
SB slip helped you alot in those regards i must admit tho.

[Sn0wm@n]

Intel dit it for years, no problem ...

yes and intel owns a larger portion of the total market .....