Core count doesn't really matter in terms of pricing. Performance has historically been used so long as they aren't cutting dangerously low to die cost.
Core count doesn't really matter in terms of pricing. Performance has historically been used so long as they aren't cutting dangerously low to die cost.
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.
Rule 1A:
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.
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.
FX6 has 3 modules and 6 threads, FX8 has 4 modules and 8 threads, while the i7 2600 has 4 cores and 8 threads. what are u trying to say?
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T@3.5GHz@Scythe Mugen 2 <-> ASRock 970 Extreme4 <-> 8GB DDR3-1333 <-> Sapphire HD7870@1100/1300 <-> Samsung F3 <-> Win8.1 x64 <-> Acer Slim Line S243HL <-> BQT E9-CM 480W
the high price for the 4110 suggests that it does very well with turbo to push the limits of the power envelope
basically for 95W you can get 6 fast cores or 4 really fast cores, otherwise we would have seen it priced way lower than the 6110
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
Last edited by liberato87; 05-18-2011 at 06:59 AM.
1.272v for full load with turbo on!!!!
btw you might want to be careful with that, we can measure the pixel count and see how long the extra ram was used to determine how long the test has been running,
and what % is left and get a pretty good estimate of the total time it would take to finish, then convert to a score
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
lolOriginally Posted by manicdan
Phenom Monsta - Gallery
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T | MSI 790FX-GD70 | Dominator 1600 C8 8GB | 4770 CF | 2xWD640GB Raid0 | 2xWD1.5TB Raid1 | Corsair HX850 |Lian-Li PC-7FW
Enzotech Luna Rev.A | 2 x MCW60 | MCP-350 | XSPC Dual DDC Res | TFC Monsta 420/360 Limited Edition
Canon EOS 7D | EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS | Nissin Di866 | D-Lite4 | 17" MiniSoft | 53" Midi-Octa | 7" Reflector + 20º Grid | Explorer XT SE | Crumpler 6MDH
@liberato87: that is a FAKE. and no, im not just thinking it could be, i KNOW it is.
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T@3.5GHz@Scythe Mugen 2 <-> ASRock 970 Extreme4 <-> 8GB DDR3-1333 <-> Sapphire HD7870@1100/1300 <-> Samsung F3 <-> Win8.1 x64 <-> Acer Slim Line S243HL <-> BQT E9-CM 480W
I never said it is official (nobody can say that). IMHO it is the screen nearest to the reality (other screens : vcore too high, frequency too low )
also in these days we ve seen some photos hosted on that site with crosshair V and AMD "strange" boxes. so I think it maybe true!
Tell us what do you know about that! thanks!
this is a complete photoshop, it was meant as a joke. i know the guy who faked it from a german forum.
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T@3.5GHz@Scythe Mugen 2 <-> ASRock 970 Extreme4 <-> 8GB DDR3-1333 <-> Sapphire HD7870@1100/1300 <-> Samsung F3 <-> Win8.1 x64 <-> Acer Slim Line S243HL <-> BQT E9-CM 480W
I was wonder How they got firefox before the start quick start icons.
by the way bulldozers has already been noted to have a 2.4ghz North bridge speed.
so I take it we all believe it has a 3.2ghz Hyper transport?
HAVE NO FEAR!
"AMD fallen angel"
You didn't get the memo? 1 hour 'Fugger time' is equal to 12 hours of regular time.
And 2600K is on average just ~4-5% slower than 980x while being 4x or more cheaper. Meaning cores do little on desktop,except in few select applications. Microacrhitecture,how it behaves in real world workloads and actual support in applications all play a major role.
source?
i dont know how to recognize a fake but
http://errorlevelanalysis.com/permalink/9440e01/
and this is my screen analyezed
http://errorlevelanalysis.com/permalink/e34fb4d/
i think the result is the same.. and I not need to do a fake for 7.12 cinebench lol
Last edited by liberato87; 05-18-2011 at 08:38 AM.
That's normal, they aren't quick start just pinned.
My pot is bigger than your pot
WHAU!!!!
Image posted by liberato87 is a 100% fake. Because it is already known that in CPU-Z string HT-Link/Rated FSB for Bulldozer must be EMPTY. Author of CPU-Z have posted the real CPU-Z image for Bulldozer in his article: http://www.hardware.fr/articles/833-...bulldozer.html
Also it was confirmed by one of the testers (who already received Bulldozer) in his blog. Unfortunately he already deleted the entry, which had some additional info about Bulldozer memory controller speed and power consumption.
Any screenshot that has CPU-Z showing some kind of HT-link frequency - is fake.
PS For the abovementioned screenshot - also please look at how the model's right hand can be seen through Windows Task Manager window. It's clearly shifted to add more cores.
Last edited by Daimler; 05-18-2011 at 08:49 AM.
i AM the source.
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T@3.5GHz@Scythe Mugen 2 <-> ASRock 970 Extreme4 <-> 8GB DDR3-1333 <-> Sapphire HD7870@1100/1300 <-> Samsung F3 <-> Win8.1 x64 <-> Acer Slim Line S243HL <-> BQT E9-CM 480W
On the server side shanghai cpu's already had an higher HT than NB speed. Where was this 2.4GHz NB speed mentioned? Must have missed that.
A module is not analogous to a core with hyperthreading.
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.
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.
If it has a 2.4 Ghz NB speed then it will have a 2.4 Ghz HT speed...
HT 3.0 as 890FX boards have currently is good for 5.2 Ghz or 2600 stock...
Smile
A module is exactly analogous to a core with hyperthreading; if they price it the chips in the same price range.
If they don't want a module to compete with a hyperthreaded core, then they will price their chips accordingly. Otherwise w0mbat was completely correct.
But then you were also correct in that performance and pricing is more paramount anyway. When people point to an Intel part that is 4x the price and 15% faster they are not looking at a real world solution.
I guess until we see actual performance AND prices we won't really know much. (I'd love to see the 2M/4T BD compete just fine against a 4C/8T Intel chip... but I would expect more to see the 2M/4T chip competing more with the Intel 4C/4T chip. I guess we'll all probably know in about a month.)
Last edited by keithlm; 05-18-2011 at 12:26 PM.
FX-8350, Powercolor ATI R9 290X LCS, OCZ Vertex 4, Crosshair V Forumula-Z, AMD Radeon DDR3-2133 2x8Gb, Corsair HX1000W, Thermaltake Xaser VI, Xonar D2X, Water Cooling 140.3
IPC is not the same between any generation or any company
back when cpus were all one core, the GHZ didnt matter since the time when AMD was ahead, they did it with lower clocks. (2500+ running at 1.8ghz for example)
prices are set 90% of the time, by performance relative to current offerings of the total chips features, which has now expanded to single threaded, few threads, and highly multi-threaded performance
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
No...
Module is just a term to explain how AMD shares parts between physical cores.
One module has TWO physical cores...HyperThreaded threads have nothing to do with TWO PHYSICAL CORES
Of course AMD can price an 8 core to SB's 4/8...but wombat wasnt talking about competing, he was stating that basically thats what AMD's modules are.
It's almost like buying a pack of batteries in twos instead of buying individual packs of batteries with just one battery inside...you save some space the packaging takes up. That's all a module does.
8 cores, 8 threads. There is no option to turn "HT" off, and single threaded workloads are not going to skyrocket in performance like they would if you were running 4 threads on a 4/8 SB chip rather than 8.
For example if you ran 4 threads of HyperPi on Bulldozer vs 8 for the most part all threads 4 or 8 will perform equally. If you ran 4 threads of HyperPi on SB it would be significantly faster than if you ran 8 threads of HyperPi.
Last edited by BeepBeep2; 05-18-2011 at 12:29 PM.
Smile
Actually the ONLY thing that needs to be considered when wondering if a module is analogous to a hyperthreaded core is the intentions of the architects for both companies.
If they were creating their design for basically the same purpose then the designs are exactly analogous.
The questions of whether one design is more elegant or performs better or costs more are actually secondary. (And your last example means absolutely nothing; although is does display the reason Hyperthreading is not an optimal solution.)
Last edited by keithlm; 05-18-2011 at 12:39 PM.
FX-8350, Powercolor ATI R9 290X LCS, OCZ Vertex 4, Crosshair V Forumula-Z, AMD Radeon DDR3-2133 2x8Gb, Corsair HX1000W, Thermaltake Xaser VI, Xonar D2X, Water Cooling 140.3
Module design intentions: Save die space vs conventional core layout
HT design intentions: Make use of unused CPU cycles, because of stupidly long instruction pipelines
Last edited by BeepBeep2; 05-18-2011 at 12:49 PM.
Smile
Two can play that game:
Module design intentions: Increase throughput for the amount of space used in the die.
HT design intentions: Increase throughput for the amount of space used in the die.
(And the use of stupidly long instruction pipelines has always been a bad way to increase performance anyway; if you accept your "intention" as being true you are also saying that hyperthreading was created to resolve a poor design.)
FX-8350, Powercolor ATI R9 290X LCS, OCZ Vertex 4, Crosshair V Forumula-Z, AMD Radeon DDR3-2133 2x8Gb, Corsair HX1000W, Thermaltake Xaser VI, Xonar D2X, Water Cooling 140.3
a module is not a dual-core. otherwise it would just be called dual-core and not module.
thats the problem here, we have something that hasnt been there before and we try to compare it to something that has been there before.
yes, a BD module has 2 int core. but other units, that a dual-core would have twice too, are shared. so a module is something between a single-core and a dual-core.
intels HTT isnt even near being a dual-core, but there are some units doubled compared to a "normal" single-core.
my problem is, that ppl are comparing 1 BD module to 2 SB cores and thats not right too. lets just say that its like comparing a cat to a dog. they both got 4 legs and a tail, but still they are different.
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T@3.5GHz@Scythe Mugen 2 <-> ASRock 970 Extreme4 <-> 8GB DDR3-1333 <-> Sapphire HD7870@1100/1300 <-> Samsung F3 <-> Win8.1 x64 <-> Acer Slim Line S243HL <-> BQT E9-CM 480W
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
MAXIMUS IV EXTREME-Z CPU INTEL 2600K @ 4700 Mhz @ 1,296v liquid cooling by EK supreme hf RAM A-DATA XPG+ V.2 2200 C8 elpida hyper SLI MSI GTX 560ti TWIN FROZRII OC liquid cooling by ek supreme hf vga bridge edition SSD CRUCIAL C300 128GB MONITOR SAMSUNG 2233RZ + NVIDIA 3D VISION KEYBOARD LOGITECH G110 MOUSE LOGITECH MX518
Bookmarks