AMD: Volcanic Islands R1100/1200 (8***/9*** series) Speculation/ Rumour Thread
pMax
Regular
I highly doubt AMD would ever make such a rubbish diagram.
Also, if you just look it, you see the guy did not even know how to properly connect part... how to connect the DRAM controllers to what, and why.
It's not part of stock x86-64. I believe it is offered as an extension on x86-64. I haven't tried using it though.
People who know better avoid it like plague.
If you require 80 bit precision then not using it because you don't like the performance isn't an option.
All I'm saying is that there are applications that require 80 bits+ that aren't benfiting from GPGPU (or AVX and SSE for that matter)
Long term numerical integrations of the Solar System is one of them.
Google "EPHEMERIS 80 bit"
Returning to the original topic, the diagram could be for AMD's response to Intel's xeon phi and/or Nvidia putting ARM cpus on their compute GPU's
i.e. a high end compute chip.
It's no problem to use x87 in x64 code. It didn't got cut out of the spec and is still fully supported. The x87 stack is saved and restored on thread switches. Windows64 only forbids to use it in kernel mode and doesn't define how to pass values through the stack for function calls. But that is a decision of MS, it is not inherent to x64.
My understanding of the situation is that it's just an idea someone on a forum drew up a long time ago. There are some notable technical flaws and outdated terminology that AMD wouldn't be using for a GCN diagram.
Granted, given some of the bloopers we've seen in various white papers and ISA docs, folks could be forgiven for thinking it was business as usual.
It's also possible to debate if some of the decisions in that picture are not the best choices.
AVX registers will also be saved/restored on thread switches, but that doesnt mean they are part of base spec. They are an optional extension which is fully implemented.
That's true for AVX and there are plenty of x64 CPUs without AVX. But x87 is part of the x64 base spec. As I said, it didn't got cut. Every x64 CPU is required to support it. Even intel's Xeon Phi supports x87 (while deviating from the x64 spec in some other points).
It's use may not be encouraged anymore up to the point that some compilers refuse to generate code for it and Win64 forbids x87 in the kernel. But that is a different matter.
Edit: Looks like they loosened up on this in later incarnations. Strictly speaking, everything is optional besides integer processing. IIRC, in the beginning SSE2 support was required to claim x64 compatibility.
Last edited by a moderator:
That's true for AVX and there are plenty of x64 CPUs without AVX. But x87 is part of the x64 base spec. As I said, it didn't got cut. Every x64 CPU is required to support it. Even intel's Xeon Phi supports x87 (while deviating from the x64 spec in some other points).
It's use may not be encouraged anymore up to the point that some compilers refuse to generate code for it and Win64 forbids x87 in the kernel. But that is a different matter.
Edit: Looks like they loosened up on this in later incarnations. Strictly speaking, everything is optional besides integer processing. IIRC, in the beginning SSE2 support was required to claim x64 compatibility.
x87 use is deprecated in Windows 64 for 64 bit programs but still there for running 32 bit programs. Maybe that's where the misconception of no x87 in x64 comes from.
Cheers
As I said above, it can also be used in 64bit programs. The only real restriction exists for the Windows kernel mode (but this apparently also applies to the 32bit versions of the newer Windows versions). And you are right, this is a decision of Microsoft, nothing inherent to x64.
Anyway, we got quite a bit OT with this. But as there is no real information on VI...
Wait, even SSE2 is not required anymore?
Does Xeon phi have 15 integer scalar registers or not?
Sure yes it's "mostly" x64 it's got all the scalar regs. Still it doesn't really qualify as x64 - no SSE, no cmov, ... Definitely won't work with your generic x86_64 compiler target.
That's pretty much what was expected, now i just need them to launch the 8870 with 4GB GDDR5 + BF4 @ $299 and i'll be there day 1.
Am i asking for too much?
Lol I just mentioned this in the other thread. Makes sense but I think we'll see the 8800's before BF4 launches..
http://www.inpai.com.cn/doc/hard/196437.htm
They also mention an October launch. But they add informations, that the new cards won't be HD 8000. And AMD wants to repeat the 2004 sucess of Radeon 9550 (which was a cheap RV360 card which dominated NVs NV3x offers back in these days).
Particularly the last information make the informations look like to come from a company source.
They also mention an October launch. But they add informations, that the new cards won't be HD 8000. And AMD wants to repeat the 2004 sucess of Radeon 9550 (which was a cheap RV360 card which dominated NVs NV3x offers back in these days).
Particularly the last information make the informations look like to come from a company source.
What was so special about 9550...?
If HD9970 is between 780 and Titan..and sells for US$550, that is a turn off....? HD9970 is 3xBonaire....quite the power on paper, but disappointingly it will not beat nor compete with Titan...how come?
If so, AMD could also have named it HD8970...it just sounds more proper...but i think AMD wants to drop the 'HD' moniker once they moved to the next node.
If HD9970 is between 780 and Titan..and sells for US$550, that is a turn off....? HD9970 is 3xBonaire....quite the power on paper, but disappointingly it will not beat nor compete with Titan...how come?
If so, AMD could also have named it HD8970...it just sounds more proper...but i think AMD wants to drop the 'HD' moniker once they moved to the next node.
If it's faster than the 780, and sells for $550, how is that a turn off? The 780 sells for $650, and Titan sells for $1000.What was so special about 9550...?
If HD9970 is between 780 and Titan..and sells for US$550, that is a turn off....? HD9970 is 3xBonaire....quite the power on paper, but disappointingly it will not beat nor compete with Titan...how come?