The Zambezi CPU Performance Estimate... - Page 2 - Overclock.net

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #11 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 11:34 AM
 
beers's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 14,043
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 893
Secret benchmark released:

beers is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 11:39 AM - Thread Starter
News Fiend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kansas City (KC)
Posts: 4,836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Ok, I guess this thread will be trolled out, laters...

_GTech is offline  
post #13 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 11:40 AM
 
beers's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 14,043
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 893
Pointless thread.
Too many missing/unreleased variables to complete your theoretical 'performance equation'.

beers is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #14 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 11:44 AM
1.7ghz
 
Nikkopo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by beers View Post
Secret benchmark released:
You sure???

amagad!

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by vtecjunkie81 go_quote.gif
Maybe this is AMD's answer to Intel's Tick-Tock strategy. Flip-Flop...
Bulldozer turned out to be a Faildozer. What's next, AMD releasing SteamLOLer?
Nikkopo is offline  
post #15 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 11:45 AM
2.4ghz
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 524
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
The way I estimate from the information that came directly from JF's blog. That 12 core opterons to 16 interlagos will give 50% more performance with 33% more cores. It would roughly estimate (ROUGHLY!) that each core is about 7% more efficient. The calculation's that i base that off are to troubling to type. This is not taking into account the new turbo mode and stuff. Just pure architecture.
_GTech likes this.

Phantom123 is offline  
post #16 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 12:34 PM - Thread Starter
News Fiend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kansas City (KC)
Posts: 4,836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom123 View Post
The way I estimate from the information that came directly from JF's blog. That 12 core opterons to 16 interlagos will give 50% more performance with 33% more cores. It would roughly estimate (ROUGHLY!) that each core is about 7% more efficient. The calculation's that i base that off are to troubling to type. This is not taking into account the new turbo mode and stuff. Just pure architecture.
7% / Core X +4 Cores = 28% then? w/o Turbo Core that is...

Turbo Core would equal 14.28 % roughly (overall), so 42% combined?

Thanks for giving me a guesstimate of sorts, + Rep

_GTech is offline  
post #17 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 12:42 PM
733mhz
 
sbdblyss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by _GTech View Post
7% / Core X +4 Cores = 28% then? w/o Turbo Core that is...

Turbo Core would equal 14.28 % roughly (overall), so 42% combined?

Thanks for giving me a guesstimate of sorts, + Rep
Just because each core is 7%, doesn't mean that you can add them up and view them as an overall performance increase of 28%. It won't realistically be that high of an increase, you would actually be closer to only 7% overall performance increase.

sbdblyss is offline  
post #18 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 12:49 PM - Thread Starter
News Fiend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kansas City (KC)
Posts: 4,836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbdblyss View Post
Just because each core is 7%, doesn't mean that you can add them up and view them as an overall performance increase of 28%. It won't realistically be that high of an increase, you would actually be closer to only 7% overall performance increase.
Ouch! That would blow then, because the i7 2600k Sandy Bridge (w/o OC) has about an average of 14 % gain over the i7-950, that would be double Zambezi's guesstimated performance gain, based upon your calculations...

Therefore based upon the guesstimate, Zambezi will be between the i7-950 & i7-2600k (at stock) in performance... Not good enough.

============

However considering there will be a +500 MHz gain from Turbo Core across 8 cores, how much of a performance gain would that be overall?

+5%? (giving it an overall +12 % performance gain over the i7-950, hmmmm)

_GTech is offline  
post #19 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 12:57 PM
Low expectations = Exceptional results
 
PhilWrir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Murrican Southwest
Posts: 5,581
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 232
First off there is not enough information on Zambezi to even begin calculating how efficient it will be on its own, let alone comparing it to an established processor.
Secondly any information out right now is rumor or over analyzed AMD announcements. Announcements that don't have enough concrete information to really draw a conclusion from in the first place.

You are asking for a conclusion drawn from insufficient and/or flawed data.
That is not a conclusion at all. Its just more rumor mongering.

drunken.gif Please follow the TOS and the Professionalism Intiative to help make OCN a better place!drunken.gif

Bring on the Heatstroke!

1 Million+ Folding at Home points 

PhilWrir is offline  
post #20 of 354 Old 02-08-2011, 12:59 PM
AMD Overclocker
 
amd-dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Caribbean, Trinidad
Posts: 1,621
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 128
My only question is...why so many bulldozer haters...if it were not for competition between intel and amd we would be still be paying $1000+ for a entry level system. Obviously intel has performance card on amd, but anyone can buy a good amd chip lets say the 965BE and be able to play games relatively easy on their system.

Now don't get me wrong sandy bridge with the 2600k priced at $300 is a killer bargain...and thanks to its 5ghz+ ability this invites even more competition from amd...lets say that bulldozer is 50% faster than the i7 950...but what if they can offer that kind of performance for sub $200 prices...i would not mind that at all.

But back to the OP...i was looking at SIS soft sandra the other day and i saw how they rate cpus based on the GIPS i.e. 980x is 132GIPS if i'm not mistaken...now take into account that my sig rig specs get 62GIPS and i can run pretty much anything i want what does one do with an extra 70GIPS, benchmark all day? Honestly i think that everyone these days is talking wooo performance...but aren't you wasting money by having 70GIPS just waiting there for something to do? Is there anyone here who can say that they use 100% of their cpu all the time...my humble 555 only uses 50% while gaming and thats the hardest my system ever runs....but again to each his own...I just sayin'
purpleannex likes this.

The CPU Unlocking List by xd_1771 & amd-dude

Chimp Challenge Participant 

amd-dude is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off