Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › 65nm AMDs coming this year
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

65nm AMDs coming this year - Page 3

post #21 of 27
I am an Intel fan, was an Intel fan and always will be.
I am curious though, what will AMD do to try to regain it's ex-king position up against the Conroe. Imagine they beat Intel now...Everyone would be pissed off and want to switch back lol
Monstar Bawls
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Asus P5W DH Deluxe EVGA GeForce GTX 260 896MB G.Skill 4GB DDR2 1000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 x Wester Digital Caviar Black 750 GB RAID 0 LITE-ON DVD±RW/DVD-RAM w/ Lightscribe Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64-bit Acer AL2216W 22" Widescreen 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 OCZ GameXStream 700W Antec Nine Hundred Logitech G9 
Mouse Pad
Razer eXactMat 
  hide details  
Reply
Monstar Bawls
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Asus P5W DH Deluxe EVGA GeForce GTX 260 896MB G.Skill 4GB DDR2 1000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 x Wester Digital Caviar Black 750 GB RAID 0 LITE-ON DVD±RW/DVD-RAM w/ Lightscribe Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64-bit Acer AL2216W 22" Widescreen 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 OCZ GameXStream 700W Antec Nine Hundred Logitech G9 
Mouse Pad
Razer eXactMat 
  hide details  
Reply
post #22 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by dannyyboii
I am an Intel fan, was an Intel fan and always will be.
I am curious though, what will AMD do to try to regain it's ex-king position up against the Conroe. Imagine they beat Intel now...Everyone would be pissed off and want to switch back lol
One can only hope
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X4 965 ASUS M4A79 Deluxe 9800GTx2 2x2G OCZ Reapers 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500G WD Black LiteOn CD/DVD R/W Win7 64 22'' ws Acer AL2223W 
KeyboardPowerMouse
MS KU462 Natural SS DA750 MS 5 button 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X4 965 ASUS M4A79 Deluxe 9800GTx2 2x2G OCZ Reapers 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500G WD Black LiteOn CD/DVD R/W Win7 64 22'' ws Acer AL2223W 
KeyboardPowerMouse
MS KU462 Natural SS DA750 MS 5 button 
  hide details  
Reply
post #23 of 27
Thread Starter 
As a side note, it seems some sk939 optys are being discontinued. I found the LINK on the Dailytech. The end of an era, wouldn't you say? Let's hope the new 65nm would gracefuly repleace them optys in our superclocked rigs.
Centurion
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 940 @3.3GHz 1.25V Gigabyte 790X-DS4 XFX 5850 8GB OCZ DDR2-800 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Corsair Force 3 TRUE Win 7 Pro x64 ACER 23" TN  
PowerCase
400W Silverstone Strider Antec P182 
  hide details  
Reply
Centurion
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 940 @3.3GHz 1.25V Gigabyte 790X-DS4 XFX 5850 8GB OCZ DDR2-800 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Corsair Force 3 TRUE Win 7 Pro x64 ACER 23" TN  
PowerCase
400W Silverstone Strider Antec P182 
  hide details  
Reply
post #24 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murlocke

I heard conroes suck at 64-bit
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i5 2500k Biostar TZ77XE4 6950 6950 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
8gb - DDR3 main: 120gb SSD 830 + 3 1tb drives Air Win7 
MonitorPowerCase
3 x DELL ST242OL  OCZ 900W Lian-Li Custom 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i5 2500k Biostar TZ77XE4 6950 6950 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
8gb - DDR3 main: 120gb SSD 830 + 3 1tb drives Air Win7 
MonitorPowerCase
3 x DELL ST242OL  OCZ 900W Lian-Li Custom 
  hide details  
Reply
post #25 of 27
Thread Starter 
The Conroe certainly doesn't suck in 64 BIT mode, but in theory it is not as fast in 64 bit mode as in 32 bit mode. The thing is some features of the Conroe are disabled when running 64 bit code, as explained very well in this article on the Xbitlabs.com, link here.

I'll quote what seem to be the most important aspects:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xbitlabs.com
At first glance it looks like the only drawback of the new processor family from Intel is their high price. Especially, since excellent performance is not the only advantage of the Core 2 Duo processors: they also boast comparatively low heat dissipation and power consumption as well as significant overclocking potential. However, in the choir praising the newcomer, there are a few voices that try to pinpoint the drawbacks of the new processor family that may theoretically slightly spoil its triumph in the market. One of the most insistent claims is the fact that the new Intel processors that have totally defeated all their competitors in the today’s most widely spread benchmarks will not be able to repeat their success in 64-bit work mode.
Note that from the micro-architectural standpoint, it is not that hard to implement 64bit extensions of the classical x86 architecture. x86-64 requires more general-purpose registers (16) with higher capacity (64bit), more 128-bit SSE registers (16) and linear 64-bit addressing. Of course, CPU developers need to apply some effort to implement the x86-64 support properly. However, they do not need to radically change the architecture, which is an indisputable advantage of the x86-64 compared with IA64, for instance, which has been introduced in Intel Itanium solutions.
All the claims of relatively low Core 2 Duo performance in 64-bit modes are based on two facts. According to some info confirmed by Intel representatives, there are two limitations imposed over the EM64T support in Core microarchitecture. Firstly, Core 2 Duo processors do not support Macrofusion technology in 64-bit mode. Secondly, the processor code decoding may slow down because of the instructions working with additional registers available only with EM64T enabled. Let’s try and get to the roots of these two problems.

Thanks to Intel’s marketing people, Macrofusion is known as one of the key peculiarities of the new Core microarchitecture. This technology serves to increase the number of instructions processed per clock cycle. Namely, the processor recognizes some pairs of sequential x86 instructions as a single microinstruction. A good example of a pair like that is a comparison followed by conditional branch, for instance. The scheduler and the execution units see this microinstruction as a single command and process it accordingly. This way the code is processed faster allowing the CPU to execute up to 5 instructions per clock cycle at best.
However, non-operational Macrofusion technology in 64-bit mode can hardly affect the CPU performance that dramatically. Ideally, when there is a branch per every five x86 instructions and when all these five instructions fall into the 16-byte sample processed within a single clock cycle, the theoretical acceleration will make 25%. However in reality, this technology will ensure steady performance improvement only if the whole bunch of conditions are fulfilled. At least because the above describe frequency of conditional branches is not realistic at all. Moreover, Macrofusion technology is really efficient only if the average instruction length equals less than 4 bytes. As a result, the engineers estimate the possible improvement to be 3%-5% at the most. In other words, the absence of Macrofusion support in EM64T should be no reason for panic, because it doesn’t really affect the performance that much.
As for the overall performance slowdown caused by instructions working with additional registers, it results from the single-byte REX prefix that is added for all 64-bit operations. This prefix probably affects the average length of instructions processed by the CPU in 64-bit modes. As a result, there may be fewer instructions within the 16-byte code sample from the L1 cache that is decoded in a single clock cycle. In other words, the average instruction length in x86 code is about 2.5-3.5 bytes, while in 64-bit mode it increases because of the REX prefix. When the average instruction length exceed 4 bytes, the CPU may lose its ability to process 4 instructions per clock.
To be fair we should say that the increasing instruction length caused by the REX prefix is typical not only of the CPUs from Intel on the new Core microarchitecture, but also of the competitor’s K8 processors. The only difference is that K8 can handle maximum 3 instructions from this 16-byte sample to load the execution units to the full extent, while Core 2 Duo from Intel can process 4 instructions per clock cycle thanks to Intel Wide Dynamic Execution technology.
This way, we don’t think that the EM64T implementation issues discussed above are that dead serious for Core based Intel processors. The code is fully similar to the regular 32-bit code and it is processed just a little bit slower on Core 2 Duo processors because of the non-operational Macrofusion technology. As for the performance drop caused by the 64-bit operations, the ability of the CPU to work with more registers with higher capacity will definitely make up for the slowdown.

And some benches:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xbitlabs.com
A very well-known utility that contains both: 32-bit and 64-bit code, is SiSoft Sandra 2007. Depending on the OS version, this program uses either 32-bit or 64-bit core. As a result, we could use a few small synthetic tests from the SiSoft Sandra 2007 suite to compare the performance of Core 2 Extreme X6800, Athlon 64 FX-62 and Pentium Extreme Edition 965 in 64-bit modes against their performance in 32-bit modes.



The results we obtained are very diverse, so we cannot really make any definite conclusions. Namely, the CPU with Core microarchitecture loses a lot of its speed when switching to 64-bit mode in ALU test, while Pentium Extreme Edition 965 and Athlon 64 FX-62 get slightly faster. In the arithmetic SSE3 test all CPUs work faster in the 32-bit version of the application. The only subtest showing the advantages of the 64-bit mode is Multimedia Floating Point. This is where Core 2 Extreme X6800 wins most in 64-bit mode speeding up by well over good 40%.




See the whole article for a better view of the whole picture.
Centurion
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 940 @3.3GHz 1.25V Gigabyte 790X-DS4 XFX 5850 8GB OCZ DDR2-800 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Corsair Force 3 TRUE Win 7 Pro x64 ACER 23" TN  
PowerCase
400W Silverstone Strider Antec P182 
  hide details  
Reply
Centurion
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 940 @3.3GHz 1.25V Gigabyte 790X-DS4 XFX 5850 8GB OCZ DDR2-800 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Corsair Force 3 TRUE Win 7 Pro x64 ACER 23" TN  
PowerCase
400W Silverstone Strider Antec P182 
  hide details  
Reply
post #26 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragosmp
As a side note, it seems some sk939 optys are being discontinued. I found the LINK on the Dailytech. The end of an era, wouldn't you say? Let's hope the new 65nm would gracefuly repleace them optys in our superclocked rigs.
yes... the end of an era
If only the AM2 opty's were cheaper...
 
Optiplex 790
(6 items)
 
Some shit.
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E7200 3.6GHZ 9*400 1.25v Gigabyte P35-DS3R BFG 9800GTX OC 2*1GB Kingston HyperX D9GKX 1200MHZ C5, 2.0V 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
80GB WD SATAII NEC 3550A DL DVD+/-RW Win XP Home HP W2007 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Digital Media Pro XClio Goodpower 500W Cooler Master Centurion 5 Logitech G5 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5 2400 Sapphire HD6670 LP 4GB DDR3 500GB 7200RPM 
OSMonitor
Windows 7 Professional 2 x Dell 2408WFP 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5 3317U HD4000 4GB DDR3 128GB SSD 
Optical DriveOSMonitor
Who needs one? OSX 10.8 11" 1366x768 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Optiplex 790
(6 items)
 
Some shit.
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E7200 3.6GHZ 9*400 1.25v Gigabyte P35-DS3R BFG 9800GTX OC 2*1GB Kingston HyperX D9GKX 1200MHZ C5, 2.0V 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
80GB WD SATAII NEC 3550A DL DVD+/-RW Win XP Home HP W2007 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Digital Media Pro XClio Goodpower 500W Cooler Master Centurion 5 Logitech G5 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5 2400 Sapphire HD6670 LP 4GB DDR3 500GB 7200RPM 
OSMonitor
Windows 7 Professional 2 x Dell 2408WFP 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i5 3317U HD4000 4GB DDR3 128GB SSD 
Optical DriveOSMonitor
Who needs one? OSX 10.8 11" 1366x768 
  hide details  
Reply
post #27 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragosmp
The Conroe certainly doesn't suck in 64 BIT mode, but in theory it is not as fast in 64 bit mode as in 32 bit mode. The thing is some features of the Conroe are disabled when running 64 bit code, as explained very well in this article on the Xbitlabs.com, link here.

I'll quote what seem to be the most important aspects:



And some benches:



See the whole article for a better view of the whole picture.
Looks like all three architectures have some issues with 64-bit mode, and any increase in performance is usaually pretty small. Seems like they need to go back to the drawing board on 64-bit implementation.
Desktop
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core 2 E2140 @2.67GHz Abit IP35 Pro Radeon X1900XT 512MB 2x1GB GSkill HZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x500GB Samsung HD501LJ + 2x80GB (1.16TB total) 2 X NEC ND-3550A Windows XP Home 24" Acer LCD (AL2324W) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Executive PC P&C Silencer 610W AeroCool AeroEngine II w/ 2x140mm intake fans Logitech MX518 
Mouse Pad
Generic foam rubber pad 
  hide details  
Reply
Desktop
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core 2 E2140 @2.67GHz Abit IP35 Pro Radeon X1900XT 512MB 2x1GB GSkill HZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x500GB Samsung HD501LJ + 2x80GB (1.16TB total) 2 X NEC ND-3550A Windows XP Home 24" Acer LCD (AL2324W) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Executive PC P&C Silencer 610W AeroCool AeroEngine II w/ 2x140mm intake fans Logitech MX518 
Mouse Pad
Generic foam rubber pad 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › 65nm AMDs coming this year