AMD Bulldozer Core Patent Diagrams

mczak said:
I wonder how AMD expects to get 10% higher performance from Piledriver. According to that Software Optimization Guide, there's really not that many performance enhancing changes. Ok 10% more entries in load/store queue (44 instead of 40) is nice, as is the doubled l1 dtlb size (from 32 to 64). There's also a couple more supported instructions but otherwise it seems virtually unchanged - even keeping the very lame l1i associativity of Bulldozer for both Trinity and Vishera.
Of course you can't directly estimate performance by this guide but since everything seems to be so extremely similar I really don't expect much (except maybe higher clocks).
Click to expand...
Not really. It could happens on Latency as well as CR
I hope the 32nm of Piledriver will be a later version. Remark that the first version of 45nm of GF is not that good, while the latest of which is really great.
 
eastmen said:
Well they are saying a 17watt Trinity will be as fast as a 30w Llano. That should put it pretty close to Sandy bridge IMO.

The jury is still out on what increases if any we will see with Ivery bridge
Click to expand...

No, what they're cleverly saying is that perf/watt should be sortof equal...in a pretty specific setting. And the jury is far less out on what Ivy Bridge (please make an effort and at least use proper codenames and proper form in written communication, there's honest mistakes and just sloppiness) than it is on what Piledriver brings to BD. Let's not build up unrealistic expectations again only to have them go kaboom.
 
I.S.T. said:
The only way a Trinity at 17W could compare to a 30W Llano anyway would be solely in the GPU. The CPU will be slower.
Click to expand...

you know this based on what? bulldozer does very well at low power. quadcore llano at 35watt TDP is only 1.4 ghz. so a little bit of extra IPC over bulldozer and if they can hit 100-200mhz higher base clock and a better turbo then llano i can see it matching.

not saying that it will..... but you speak like its fact when reality is you have NFI.


the 35watt 8 core does have a base clock of 1.6 and a turbo of 2.8 so it could get close.
 
The analyst day slides are a bit inconsistent:
The score for the 2012 AMD A4-4355M (ULV-17w) on the "Pumori" reference design for PC Mark Vantage Overall benchmark is projected to score 3525
The score for the 2012 AMD A6-4455M (ULV-17w) on the "Pumori" reference design for PC Mark Vantage Overall benchmark is projected to score 4200
Click to expand...
The former is certainly much less impressive compared to the A6-3400M (35w) on the "Torpedo" reference design scoring 4545 and the E2-1800 (another slight boost to Zacate?) on the "Torpedo" reference design scoring 2757.
 
AMD-Piledriver-vs-Bulldozer.png


AMD Trinity (Piledriver) Outperforms Bulldozer in Integer and Floating-Point Benchmarks
 
Original source explains why:

Since we don't know the exact clock frequencies of the benchmark runs, it is difficult to find the correct value for calculating per GHz results. I estimated those based on turbo clocks, which might lead to skewed results. At least in the case of comparing Trinity with its Piledriver cores to the FX models, I hope that rather similar turbo mode behaviour should reduce the error margin.
OK, here comes the table comparing several values I filtered out of my collected BOINC results to have OS and client version the same. As you can see, Piledriver w/o L3 cache seems to perform a bit better than BDver1 based FX models:
6295945_8174fda20c_m.png

Note: I used "Trinity vs. Bulldozer" to denote the difference between a L3-less Piledriver core and a Bulldozer core, which always had L3 available.
Another note (as of 04/10): In the Piledriver vs. Bulldozer columns I divided the Trinity value by the maximum of all FX values. Further the FP benchmark likely run at base clock frequency. I'll add more on that in a follow up article.
Click to expand...

http://citavia.blog.de/2012/04/08/trinity-piledriver-performance-13460109/
 
I am considering FX-8150, it's like the same price as i5 3570k at the moment. It won't be my workstation, just a hobby rig of some sort. Going to run mainly Corel Painter 12 with Cintiq 24 HD and was hoping the brushes won't lag with the FX-8150. It's lagging pretty bad with my old Athlon X2. Corel Painter 12 seems to support up to 8 processors. Anyone here have FX and Painter 12 ? I can't find any impression between these two setup.

Should I get FX-8150 or just get i7 3770k ?
 
Rootax said:
Well...

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5831/amd-trinity-review-a10-4600m-a-new-hope

I don't understand why they put Piledriver in trinity first, and not release a "full" new cpu...
Click to expand...

Because this is where their bread and butter is for the time being, and they can have a bang (Trinity looks quite good given its neighbourhood!). Vishera or whatever won't look so good...no GPU superiority to talk of, no TDP headroom to boast about. They also probably want to get people considering back to school lappies and whatever to take Trinity into account for their purchase!
 
V3 said:
I am considering FX-8150, it's like the same price as i5 3570k at the moment. It won't be my workstation, just a hobby rig of some sort. Going to run mainly Corel Painter 12 with Cintiq 24 HD and was hoping the brushes won't lag with the FX-8150. It's lagging pretty bad with my old Athlon X2. Corel Painter 12 seems to support up to 8 processors. Anyone here have FX and Painter 12 ? I can't find any impression between these two setup.

Should I get FX-8150 or just get i7 3770k ?
Click to expand...

a 8120 with CPU cooler and overclock it is good value, else if you wish to not overclock a 8150 is fine.
but it depends, if you have a cold climate and/or no A/C in the summer then a FX is indeed fine, if you have 35°C weather and building cooled down with A/C an Intel CPU is better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top