Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Bulldozer in desktops is here to stay.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bulldozer in desktops is here to stay. - Page 4

post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arni90 View Post
AMD moved backwards with bulldozer:
  1. Transistor count has doubled compared to Phenom II X6
  2. Core count has increased by two.
  3. Power usage has risen by 5-10%.
  4. IPC is down 15-20%.
  5. Overclockability is improved by about 15%
  6. Total performance is slightly better compared to Phenom II X6
Please tell me why AMD couldn't have sandwiched 2x Phenom II X4 for a Phenom II X8, added some more Cache, and still keep transistor count lower than the bulldozer die?
Bulldozer is more power efficient per transistor and core count rose by 33%.
post #32 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthElvis View Post
Funny how that works,eh? Nothing shady going on there, I'm sure. All that lawsuit non-sense is in the past. Whats a little optimized compiler or bribery/kickback between friends? A Leopard can change his spots.
i don't think it is a grand conspiracy like most would think , it has to do with marketshare, just like windows has a majority of the market and linux/bsd/mac os x often get ignored. its not always cause MS has conspired to pay off software developers, they are just going where the cash cow is, and that happens to be MS windows 85%+ marketshare on the desktop.

same goes for intel, intel has, honestly don't know, last time i saw any stats for it was a few years ago, i think it was a 80% marketshare on the desktop cpu, and comparable numbers for the server market. so it might take amd to innovate the design, intel to copy it or catch up to it, before software becomes optimized for it. its not about who got there first, its about who brought more with them

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagrant Storm View Post
The really sad thing is that AMD has come up with and produced most of the really good CPU ideas in the last ten years or so, but then Intel copies it and makes it better. I am betting the same will happen with bulldozer once we are closer to it being utilized. Once Intel starts doing something the software seems to follow suit faster too.




i am not condemning the architecture...just condemning the thought of a patch to current software is going to fix it. I am in the same boat as you. We will need entirely new operating systems and software to utilize it. Windows 8 won't do it since its foundation is already built and that foundation was built on current hardware. So as far as Windows goes we are many years out from gaining any benefit that the new FX line was hoping to give. By that time a FX8150 will be obsolete...even Piledriver based CPUs will be on the verge of being obsolete. Linux has already been making kernel changes for Bulldozer for a long time. So most newer version of Linux will already liekly use a bulldozer based CPU quite well. Though I guess the benches aren't really showing much difference from Linux to Windows.
the same problem exist in linux as it does in windows. these generic kernels that most distro's use, are optmized typically not for the architecture of the cpu, but the instruction set. there are patches for different schedulers as well as a unofficial patch for the kernel for bulldozer.

it will take some one who is familiar with their linux distro, having a bulldozer chip, that has the will to do a custom compile on it with the patches for Bulldozer. early test on Bulldozer in linux are somewhat promising, but bleak in comparison to their intel and phenom II brethen results.

so i still personally believe it is still a software issue to an extent with bulldozer, i know that can't account for all of its problems, but software can fix some of them for now.
Edited by Transhour - 10/19/11 at 7:07am
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #33 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by transhour View Post
i don't think it is a grand conspiracy like most would think , it has to do with marketshare, just like windows has a majority of the market and linux/bsd/mac os x often get ignored. its not always cause MS has conspired to pay off software developers, they are just going where the cash cow is, and that happens to be MS windows 85%+ marketshare on the desktop.

same goes for intel, intel has, honestly don't know, last time i saw any stats for it was a few years ago, i think it was a 80% marketshare on the desktop cpu, and comparable numbers for the server market. so it might take amd to innovate the design, intel to copy it or catch up to it, before software becomes optimized for it. its not about who got there first, its about who brought more with them
I somewhat agree, but intel was caught paying of Companies to only use there cpu's. i forgot how much they had to pay, i think it was around 1.3b
Main Rig
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800x ASUS Prime 370 Pro RX 480 Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 850 Pro  None Windows 10 Pro HP w19e: 1440x900 | Sony KDL40S-5100 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
CMStorm Quick Fire. CM 1050w  Cooler Master Cosmos II Roccat Kone XTD (Optical) 
  hide details  
Reply
Main Rig
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800x ASUS Prime 370 Pro RX 480 Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 850 Pro  None Windows 10 Pro HP w19e: 1440x900 | Sony KDL40S-5100 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
CMStorm Quick Fire. CM 1050w  Cooler Master Cosmos II Roccat Kone XTD (Optical) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #34 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagrant Storm View Post
i am not condemning the architecture...just condemning the thought of a patch to current software is going to fix it. I am in the same boat as you. We will need entirely new operating systems and software to utilize it. Windows 8 won't do it since its foundation is already built and that foundation was built on current hardware. So as far as Windows goes we are many years out from gaining any benefit that the new FX line was hoping to give. By that time a FX8150 will be obsolete...even Piledriver based CPUs will be on the verge of being obsolete. Linux has already been making kernel changes for Bulldozer for a long time. So most newer version of Linux will already liekly use a bulldozer based CPU quite well. Though I guess the benches aren't really showing much difference from Linux to Windows.
Perhaps I misunderstood. I was posting from m tablet, and text is sometimes harder to parse on the smaller screen.

Anyways; it's not as hopeless as you may think. If tom's hardware is to be believed, one of the problems with performance is that Windows is scheduling threads as if the cores were full cores so, given 4 threads it will run them on the first 4 cores, which means they have to share the resources of just 2 of the modules while the other two go un-utilized. The other problem is that parking onl one core in a module won't park the module, so the chip doesn't enter a low power state as often, and we don;t get half of the cores parked and the p-state of the other half boosted like AMD advertised. Supposedly, Windows 8 will alleviate those problems by detecting BD like it does with Hyperthreading.

I doubt the per-core performance can be fixed by software rewriting beyond making sure resources don;t get shared when they don;t need to be. Hopefully architectural revisions in followups fix that problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arni90 View Post
AMD moved backwards with bulldozer:
  1. Transistor count has doubled compared to Phenom II X6
  2. Core count has increased by two.
  3. Power usage has risen by 5-10%.
  4. IPC is down 15-20%.
  5. Overclockability is improved by about 15%
  6. Total performance is slightly better compared to Phenom II X6
Please tell me why AMD couldn't have sandwiched 2x Phenom II X4 for a Phenom II X8, added some more Cache, and still keep transistor count lower than the bulldozer die?
The problem is AMD lied in their marketing. They claim the FX chip is 8 cores, but it's not, the front and back ends are shared between pairs of 'cores', as is the FPU; they just duplicated the integer schedulers and pipelines. It's more like a beefier version of hyperthreading than it is adding cores.

Part of the power issue is due to modules not being parked properly, so the chip just runs full tilt even when some of the cores aren't fully utilized.

As for why they can;t just bond 2 chips together, the whole point of bulldozer is to pack more integer pipelines in the same die size. I would consider bonding 2 dies together to be something of a kludge. I roll my eyes when I think about the 12 core opterons.
Sierpinski
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-6500 Gigabyte H170-WiFi Radeon Nano 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000 Memory 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro Cryorig C7 Windows 10 Pro Silverstone Strider Gold 450W Fully Modular 
Case
Fractal Design Node 202 
  hide details  
Reply
Sierpinski
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-6500 Gigabyte H170-WiFi Radeon Nano 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000 Memory 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro Cryorig C7 Windows 10 Pro Silverstone Strider Gold 450W Fully Modular 
Case
Fractal Design Node 202 
  hide details  
Reply
post #35 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthElvis View Post
Funny how that works,eh? Nothing shady going on there, I'm sure. All that lawsuit non-sense is in the past. Whats a little optimized compiler or bribery/kickback between friends? A Leopard can change his spots.
I think it has more to do with how Intel is found in more prebuilt machines than AMD. So a change in Intel is just seen more rapidly. I don't think we really saw dual cores getting used well untill there were E6300's found in darn near every Dell out there. Even though AMD had made the A64 X2's years before.

Plus Intel tends to give out more information on their CPUs well a head of time. Software developers can plan for something better if they knoew it is comming. That is probalbly just a matter of marketing budgets though.
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
Reply
post #36 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagrant Storm View Post
I think it has more to do with how Intel is found in more prebuilt machines than AMD. So a change in Intel is just seen more rapidly. I don't think we really saw dual cores getting used well untill there were E6300's found in darn near every Dell out there. Even though AMD had made the A64 X2's years before.

Plus Intel tends to give out more information on their CPUs well a head of time. Software developers can plan for something better if they knoew it is comming. That is probalbly just a matter of marketing budgets though.
Yeah; the antitrust stuff has nothing to do with software; what happened was Intel was either bribing OEMs to not use AMD chips and threatening to hold back product to those that did sell AMD stuff.

Intel does have better PR, though. many of those same OEMs likes Intel better anyways because the guys from AMD were morons, and AMD doesn;t seems to make a concerted effort to actually convince OEMs to buy their chips. Similarly, Intel works more closely with software manufacturers when they are making a new product. Their engineers worked with Microsoft to get support for Hyperthreading.
Sierpinski
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-6500 Gigabyte H170-WiFi Radeon Nano 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000 Memory 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro Cryorig C7 Windows 10 Pro Silverstone Strider Gold 450W Fully Modular 
Case
Fractal Design Node 202 
  hide details  
Reply
Sierpinski
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-6500 Gigabyte H170-WiFi Radeon Nano 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000 Memory 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro Cryorig C7 Windows 10 Pro Silverstone Strider Gold 450W Fully Modular 
Case
Fractal Design Node 202 
  hide details  
Reply
post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by disturbed117 View Post
I somewhat agree, but intel was caught paying of Companies to only use there cpu's. i forgot how much they had to pay, i think it was around 1.3b
well sorta, you should read what happened, instead of taking "rumor". what actually happened is not as sensational as what was said to have happened.

was it shady? possibly, was it illegal? not really, what was illegal was how the companies that participated in it handled the "rebates" they received.
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #38 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by transhour View Post
well sorta, you should read what happened, instead of taking "rumor". what actually happened is not as sensational as what was said to have happened.

was it shady? possibly, was it illegal? not really, what was illegal was how the companies that participated in it handled the "rebates" they received.
Im not attacking intel, nor did i say it was illegal, the OEM's are more to blame then intel. anyways that's all in the past. im out, all these bd threads making my head hurt.
Main Rig
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800x ASUS Prime 370 Pro RX 480 Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 850 Pro  None Windows 10 Pro HP w19e: 1440x900 | Sony KDL40S-5100 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
CMStorm Quick Fire. CM 1050w  Cooler Master Cosmos II Roccat Kone XTD (Optical) 
  hide details  
Reply
Main Rig
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800x ASUS Prime 370 Pro RX 480 Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 850 Pro  None Windows 10 Pro HP w19e: 1440x900 | Sony KDL40S-5100 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
CMStorm Quick Fire. CM 1050w  Cooler Master Cosmos II Roccat Kone XTD (Optical) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #39 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by BirdofPrey View Post
Perhaps I misunderstood. I was posting from m tablet, and text is sometimes harder to parse on the smaller screen.

Anyways; it's not as hopeless as you may think. If tom's hardware is to be believed, one of the problems with performance is that Windows is scheduling threads as if the cores were full cores so, given 4 threads it will run them on the first 4 cores, which means they have to share the resources of just 2 of the modules while the other two go un-utilized. The other problem is that parking onl one core in a module won't park the module, so the chip doesn't enter a low power state as often, and we don;t get half of the cores parked and the p-state of the other half boosted like AMD advertised. Supposedly, Windows 8 will alleviate those problems by detecting BD like it does with Hyperthreading.

I doubt the per-core performance can be fixed by software rewriting beyond making sure resources don;t get shared when they don;t need to be. Hopefully architectural revisions in followups fix that problem.

The problem is AMD lied in their marketing. They claim the FX chip is 8 cores, but it's not, the front and back ends are shared between pairs of 'cores', as is the FPU; they just duplicated the integer schedulers and pipelines. It's more like a beefier version of hyperthreading than it is adding cores.

Part of the power issue is due to modules not being parked properly, so the chip just runs full tilt even when some of the cores aren't fully utilized.

As for why they can;t just bond 2 chips together, the whole point of bulldozer is to pack more integer pipelines in the same die size. I would consider bonding 2 dies together to be something of a kludge. I roll my eyes when I think about the 12 core opterons.
this is a huge problem with hyperthreading as well, i have this problem when compiling, when i just want it to use 2 threads, i have to manually set affinity with taskset so they will use 2 physical cores, over the 2 virtual cores.

if it wasn't for the 30% increase i get when compiling with all 8 threads of this cpu, i would just shut off HT.

which reminds me, i should probably not complain, and try out some of the other schedulers that linux offers
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #40 of 43
this is were thing will change when the new bios for bulldozer is out in a few months then we will see what happens.
Edited by INF Snipe - 10/19/11 at 7:49am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Bulldozer in desktops is here to stay.