And who says and who can prove that BD will have single thread performance equal to SB or better?
Or even better than Thuban?
I don't think that you understood what i meant .
An improved Phenom II arhitecture should have interesting performance: reduced latency L2& L3 cachem better IMC, larger L3 cache -8MB). Just some tweaks as Nehalem -> SB.
And probably would have better yelds, because is something well known and so on.
Aggresive turbos without a much better performance per clock means nothing.nd its being designed for very aggressive turbos which the old stars cores were not built for.
why dont you think BD will be able to beat thuban thread/core vs core? the architecture is stronger and the frequency is higher. the only real issue is when it comes to having those extra threads running will it bring average perf down to be less than the old stuff, which i dont think would be a problem. an x8 BD should be much more than 33% faster than thuban with 33% more cores/threads. its also smaller than thuban by a pretty noticeable amount, around a whole cores worth. so a thuban x5 would have similar mm2 and give us a basic idea on perf/mm2 increase AMD was able to get.
X6 1100T has 400Mhz Turbo- enough, performance per clock it what lacks.
2 cores Phenom X2 against 1 module BD at same clock will be something interesting to compare.
You miss the point that Thuban is on 45nm and BD is on 32nm. As i sad probably Thuban X8 on 32nm shoud have same die size as BD.
All what you say was easy to believe in march- april, but not now, after 4-5 months of just patethic leaks, lies, delays, and so on.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks