Right, so by definition didn't ipc decrease? The question that people are having with this design is despite its modularity, wouldn't an 8 core k10.5 processor have been a better option on an immature 32nm process? Clearly power leakage, transistor density, and size are major issues right now.
Given that we know AMD is purposely sacrificing ipc in favor of more cores with cmt (JF himself said 180% of performance for 35% die space, now clearly those numbers are skewed, but that was the idea in mind) why not just wait for a node where its easy to slap on 8 modules? Now I can see BD becoming intriguing for servers once you hit 16 integer cores per die, but right now it just doesn't make sense imo to buy their product over an intel one. Sales are the final goal right? So you always put out your best line up, not what sounds best on paper imo.
Now the review here where the guy disabled all the secondary integer cores proves that ipc is taking a massive hit from CMT (and thus it has been inferred that the 2 ALUs just aren't enough). Once again, with a die shrink I'm sure AMD could go to 4 2-way ALUs instead over the 4 1-way design and that likely would fix all their ipc problems.
Originally Posted by Hans de Vries
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks