AMD Beema/Mullins Performance Preview

[Darakian]

*snip*

You're making a lot of assumptions there.

Eh.Puma is the designation for just cores.This architecture is very flexible , amd can add or remove whatever they want, they even offer very large buyers opportunity to do so.Thats how Xbox one (dual DDR3) and PS4 (dual GDDR5) came to be, you can add edram cache (xbox one), amd has memory controllers ready for dual ddr3, dual lddr3, single channel or gddr5.They dont have to do anything from scratch.They have all the buliding blocks ready.

Well yes the ps4 and xbox1 are both semicustom designs with similar building blocks, but by the looks of it the ps4 has 3 memory controllers while the xbox1 has 2. See chip diagrams below.
xbone: http://www.chipworks.com/en/technica...-the-xbox-one/
ps4: http://www.chipworks.com/en/technica...ore-processor/

So yes the building blocks are there, but those are totally custom architectures. The OS on each device will have maybe 10 things going in the background while a normal windows/linux box could have 100 and that might be enough to hide whatever latencies are in there. I don't know as I am no micro architecture engineer, but I don't think you can claim that just because it works on a console that it will work on a general purpose computer.

L2 caches are pretty much what they need to be.L3 can be added or edram , the cpu has most of the chipset funtions integrated, the cpu cores+L2 are very small ,doubling them wont cause any havok (and lets remember pretty much the same cores are in consoles already in 2 different 8 core configurations).

How certain are you about that? More cache can increase the latency on storage and retrieval as there's just more to search for a given bit of data. Maybe the cores are tuned to expect a given latency and more cache would throw them out of wack (technical term).
Here's a good read on jaguar's memory and cache architecture if you'd like to read up on it.
http://www.realworldtech.com/jaguar/6/

Puma is basically fixed up jaguar with better turbo and power management.
Im not talking about revamping it for fully fledged desktops , that would require some major overhauls in both architecture and process used, not that it would be impossible...

Not sure where's you're getting that. Maybe, but I don't see the evidence one way or the other.

Entry level gaming laptops would be very interesting with this chip if amd would let it chew more power, games are becoming more and more threaded, mantle would also give this kind of a chip a big boost , dx12 will probably too.But thats just me, i think it would be a hit when properly configured, decent gaming on the cheap with low power consumption.Lets not forget intel makes an 8 core atom now, and they sell it for 178$, asrock recently made storage/home server centric mainboard with it and it goes for 350$, why not AMD ?Because AMD doesnt have such a a chip...

In order of bolded text:
Sure if it works well; Some are yes; Big is a vague term. 20% might be big but if 20% = 3 fps then... not so much; That's the ticket right there, we don't know what "properly configured" means or costs; Might not actually be on the cheap if development costs are huge; And they sell it as a server cpu where threads are usually the performance metric (as opposed to memory bandwidth, IPC, or whatever); You seem to be arguing that they do and that that it's in the xbox1/ps4

AMD sells MS an 8 core jaguar with 768shaders AND 32mb edram chip for 100$. Im pretty sure they could sell puma based 8 core with lets say 512 shaders and no edram for 100$ to notebook makers.

Actually MS paid AMD for the dev costs and AMD gets a cut on each chip made.