Originally Posted by os2wiz
You are not very astute my friend. The Kaveri steamroller product will have a 15-20% IPC improvement. It will be greater in Steamroller FX because AMD is tweaking the cache algorithms, branch prediction, and other features that are NOT in the Kaveri product but are in the FX product. AMD made no announcements at Computex related to the FX product so it would behoove you to retract your misinformed remarks.
People seem to forget that the chips on FM2 and AM3+ are not the same, even if they're both Piledriver, Steamroller, etc.
For example, Trinity was different to Vishera internally.
Originally Posted by Usario
Speaking of Charlie's article on Richland's secret, does anybody here actually have the $1000 subscription required to read it? I'm very interested in what it could be... minor process tweaks alone shouldn't account for such a huge (~600MHz) average OC increase.
Wasn't it confirmed that Vishera doesn't have RCM, but Trinity did? Maybe because Trinity was their first chip to use RCM, it had issues with it that they've now fixed with Richland and made it clock like crazy. That explains why Trinity clocks a bit worse than Vishera and Richland clocks much better.
Originally Posted by ebduncan
if steamroller actually boasts a 20% IPC increase, it would be a lot more competitive than you think. Remember we are talking about 8 cores, and a extra 20% added to each is a lot.
8350-4.2ghz 20% increase would be 5040mhz therefore if SR were to be clocked at 4.2ghz then it would be equal to the 8350 at 5040mhz. Single thread anyways, things would get funky muticore due to scaling differences perhaps.
20% ipc would really destroy the 4770k. I like you would have my doubts about being able to touch the Intel hex cores with hyper threading, but would definitely be a game changer.
IPC isn't single-threaded alone, though...20% IPC could easily mean 20% gain in IPC when all 8 cores are used or 1, or it could just be the average over all loads. (ie. Everything in between those two extremes)
Most likely, SR will be a lot closer to Intel than before and more like Phenom II was for most people here. Don't get ahead of yourself, people did that with Haswell and BD.
Originally Posted by os2wiz
My take on it will be AMD supremacy in multi-threaded against an I7-4770k and a respectably close 2nd in single threaded against I5-4570k. I think that is very close to how it plays out. It will be Excavator that fixes IMC and cache that will be the chip where AMD achieves total supremacy over Intel. But in every day use and gaming steamroller will be the better choice because the perfotmance in gaming will be better in many instances and competitive in others and the price will be lower.
Going by Anandtechs benches
in IPC alone for the Windows 8 encoding (average of 1st and 2nd pass' difference) AMD would need to increase IPC by around 33% or so to match a Haswell i7 in IPC. (Not taking into account that the 2nd pass is a lot longer than the 1st pass is and that Intels turbo core is a lot better than AMDs and may have been activated for at least some of that test, so it's probably
a bit lower but 25-30% isn't far off)
Expect AMD to be closer to Intel but still behind, depending on clocks. (Obviously Haswell has an average air OC of around 4.4Ghz on hwbot at the moment so SR can also probably outclock it)
Originally Posted by 2010rig
Quoted For Future Laughs
Yep, because the trend of using more cores over time is going to stop at quad cores...and most actually CPU intensive programs don't have the ability to use plenty of cores.
Originally Posted by Stay Puft
Why are you quoting the 3770K? Compare it to the 4770K
Haswell is 1.77 single-threaded and 8.56 multi-threaded at stock, so it looks like SR will match an i7 in multi-threaded and be closer to IB but behind Haswell in single-threaded performance if his predictions are right.
I actually can see AMD being very close to Haswell when you consider OCing, if SR clocks like Richland it'll outclock a typical Haswell by a good 600Mhz. Haswell's IPC increase wasn't that big, and it looks like it doesn't clock well compared to SB and IB on average.
Originally Posted by Stay Puft
Intel owns like 84% market share. You think huge percentages will flock to amd for one product that might put them close to intel?
Nope, but considering AMD is marketing much more now I could see AMD starting to slowly gain marketshare in a few years.
Originally Posted by DesertRat
bulldozer and it's derivatives are AMD's netburst. Poor performance per watt, high TDP, very high clock speeds, and inability to beat similarly positioned(read: not priced) processors from their competitor.
This will pass. I like AMD, and they still do thier damnedest to offer great price to performance ratios. Problem is, the savings might be made up for in the increase in your power bill
I have to be honest though, I kinda want one, if only for the novelty of a 5ghz+ 8-core CPU.
High TDP compared to mobile optimized architectures, yes. (Normal desktop CPUs from Intel and AMD have always been around the TDP of BD)
What? High clock speeds is something only that Netburst did? I didn't realize the highly clocked IBs and SBs were Netburst based.
Inability to beat similarly positioned CPUs in gaming, when you look at the vast majority of programs that put a load on a CPU they tend to max out the FXs 8 cores and it pulls ahead of its main competitor. (The i5)
Anyone who says this is AMDs Netburst seems to not know much about Netburst, not only was Northwood actually a good chip but BD and the like aren't even anywhere nearly as designed for high clocks as they were, either; they're closer to SB in pipeline length than the actual Netbursts everyone refers to iirc. (Prescott)