• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

x-bit, techarp and amd

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
savageseb

savageseb

Member
​
Joined
Nov 12, 2005
Location
argentina
hahah

Harlam beat me to it, but i would like to make it its own thread.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-k10.html

so there are a lot of changes....
EDIT: and yet not a K8 with L3, but a k10 core baby.

FPU enhancements, Virtualization enhancements, New instructions for the FPU(bit population count, and leading zero count, remember? 1*10^n?) and SSE4 handling,

Side band stack optimizer for sequencing
"This way instructions working directly with the stack can be reordered without any limitations."
"So, faster stack operations decoding, Sideband Stack Optimizer unit, deeper return-address stack and successful prediction of indirect alternating branches make K10 much more efficient for processing of function-rich codes."

A better Branch prediction table....( i could go off mathematically here, hehe). A bigger cache for the TLB, etcetc...

Thank you L3, NUMA, and Floating point pipeline!

So intel faboys, read it and weep.
AMD fanboys rejoice.
if you dont care for the why or the how, go straight off to the conclusion.


"Substitute the words "Barcelona" or even "Phenom" for "Athlon 64 X2 6400+."
Amd 6400+ a phenom?
sure thing ed, sure thing. hehe


and as a bonus:
http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=429&pgno=0
techarp is warning us to mark the calendar for announcements.

techarp talks with john Freude
http://techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=434&pgno=0

Yaaaay!
 
Last edited:
Very nice thank you.
What i like the most is the power and frequency management.
Even if the K10's performance is equal (if not better) to Intel's, the power and frequency management should put AMD on top and make it very attractive to server market and even us regulars. Hope to see some for sale soon.
 
*yawn*

FPU enhancements you say? Every new processor comes out with "enhancements". Just saying that it is an improvement does not help us any. Now if you would say something like "The new FPU enhancement will make 3D application run twice as fast", that would be impressive. Can you say that?

Virtualization enhancements? I don't run VMware, so it helps me not.

SSE4? Intel was the one who came up with the SSE idea, and they are the ones implementing it first.
------
The thing that I am waiting for is the Fusion. The unitization of CPU and GPU. It might work, or it might flop.

As for all the "Intel's quad core designs suck", here is my answer: The whole Processor design is flawed. Not just Intel, not just AMD. The idea behind the CPU is that it does a lot of operations (mostly) one at a time in a short period of time. For example, if I tell my CPU to add 2 and 2 together, then it will take a certain number of operations. If I add a second,third, fourth CPU, it helps it not. The whole idea from the moment the CPU was born is that it will just be faster and faster to do more and more data per cycle. So now when we are trying to program for a Dual or a Quad processor, it is completely different. Each CPU has its own register set and its own stack. Any attempt to distribute the data will fail until l we think around that obstacle. No amount of L3 or L2 cache will fix this. Any attempt currently has to come from the developer, and let me tell you this... It is darn hard to program, debug and maintain a multi-core application. The reason that Intel/AMD go for Dual/Quad core is that they can't make single core much faster. The reason programmers prefer single core to Dual/Quad core is that it is much easier to use.

Thus, all the talk of "Poor Intel's Quad core setup" and "superior AMD design" helps the poor programmer not. They are the same thing. If the application is designed with 8 cores in mind, then the design of AMD will serve the same as AMD. If the application was not designed with 8 cores in mind, then it doesn't matter a thing that the AMD CPU has 128GB of L3 cache.
 
ShadowPho said:
*yawn*

FPU enhancements you say? Every new processor comes out with "enhancements". Just saying that it is an improvement does not help us any. Now if you would say something like "The new FPU enhancement will make 3D application run twice as fast", that would be impressive. Can you say that?

Virtualization enhancements? I don't run VMware, so it helps me not.

SSE4? Intel was the one who came up with the SSE idea, and they are the ones implementing it first.
------
The thing that I am waiting for is the Fusion. The unitization of CPU and GPU. It might work, or it might flop.

As for all the "Intel's quad core designs suck", here is my answer: The whole Processor design is flawed. Not just Intel, not just AMD. The idea behind the CPU is that it does a lot of operations (mostly) one at a time in a short period of time. For example, if I tell my CPU to add 2 and 2 together, then it will take a certain number of operations. If I add a second,third, fourth CPU, it helps it not. The whole idea from the moment the CPU was born is that it will just be faster and faster to do more and more data per cycle. So now when we are trying to program for a Dual or a Quad processor, it is completely different. Each CPU has its own register set and its own stack. Any attempt to distribute the data will fail until l we think around that obstacle. No amount of L3 or L2 cache will fix this. Any attempt currently has to come from the developer, and let me tell you this... It is darn hard to program, debug and maintain a multi-core application. The reason that Intel/AMD go for Dual/Quad core is that they can't make single core much faster. The reason programmers prefer single core to Dual/Quad core is that it is much easier to use.

Thus, all the talk of "Poor Intel's Quad core setup" and "superior AMD design" helps the poor programmer not. They are the same thing. If the application is designed with 8 cores in mind, then the design of AMD will serve the same as AMD. If the application was not designed with 8 cores in mind, then it doesn't matter a thing that the AMD CPU has 128GB of L3 cache.
Click to expand...

nono shadow pho, i dont say.

a 5,000,000,000,000 dollar company says so, the reviewer says so.
and good ole mathematical savage agrees...
there are no "or´s" in a 5billion dollar gamble.
further more AMD is just setting the stage , so that fusion can begin working through new instructions and pipelining on 2009.
edit:

i see it, why dont you? you keep pulling the straw in my statements, and you fail to see the overall picture...

Are you a nanotech engineer working for Intel or amd, no!
Neither am i, so my claims are based on logical mathematical deductions...
and each day that passes by my points get proven...

oh wait, you are going to attack my credibility AGAIN, GOD HELP ME!
haha, lmao
 
Last edited:
lets not get uptight here. everyone is entitled to his/her opinion.
All is matter (for me at least) for amd to produce the damn thing and get back into the ball game. As said, just the power/freq management is a selling point here.
I rather have a quad core that is a few mhz slower but much cooler and energy conscious. I mean, my x2 4400 s939 does pretty good job already, and I would be very happy w/ a quad core that requires little effort cooling it.
 
wooo, i just delved into the dark again, and came out victorious one more time. Damn hyper computations can drive you insane,

lmao insanely....
 
savageseb said:
Are you a nanotech engineer working for Intel or amd, no!
Neither am i, so my claims are based on logical mathematical deductions...

oh wait, you are going to attack my credibility AGAIN, GOD HELP ME!
haha, lmao
Click to expand...
So, instead of trying to prove your point you are trying to attack my credibility instead?

My dad was a hardware engineer at Motorola, and now he is working for a car company designing the central processioning unit for electronic assisted steering. He was able to get me on the job a year ago and I learned quite a lot there.

As for my deductions, they are based on my knowledge of computer hardware and software, which is IMHO, much closer to the point of the thread than broad unbacked mathematical statements.
 
savageseb said:
a 5,000,000,000,000 dollar company says so, the reviewer says so.
and good ole mathematical savage agrees...
there are no "or´s" in a 5billion dollar gamble.
further more AMD is just setting the stage , so that fusion can begin working through new instructions and pipelining on 2009.
Click to expand...

Could you name that 5,000,000,000,000 dollar company ? :santa:
 
ShadowPho said:
So, instead of trying to prove your point you are trying to attack my credibility instead?

My dad was a hardware engineer at Motorola, and now he is working for a car company designing the central processioning unit for electronic assisted steering. He was able to get me on the job a year ago and I learned quite a lot there.

As for my deductions, they are based on my knowledge of computer hardware and software, which is IMHO, much closer to the point of the thread than broad unbacked mathematical statements.
Click to expand...


I find the linked articles more informative than a kid who had a job at motorola for a bit that wasnt even a project engineer.

go crap another thread. this is the amd section to discuss amd cpu's. if we need your vast experience in amd , you will get a pm. untill then, contribute something to the thread instead of just being an intel fanboy.


Spare me on the hard to program bs. Programmers hid behind their mistakes in the single core days. Code could be sloppy, as long as it ran ok, it was accepted. Dual core came out..... OMGZ We have to actually plan and implement out code in a more strategic and efficient way than before! OMGZ we will have to work hard for the money we make...

Most games now run off of engines that are made to use multiple cores. U3 engine for example... Developers will be jumping on it for it's scalability, multi core efficiency, and physics ability. They didnt do the work..... The U3 team did. They program the actions and make the models based off of the code that is already there for them....

Sorry, I have no sympathy for programmers who do not want to implement code efficiently for new games and apps.
 
Last edited:
Kuroimaho said:
Could you name that 5,000,000,000,000 dollar company ? :santa:
Click to expand...
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

gain: per quarter 1.5 billion
Losses: 430 million

dunno if they are net gains and losses, but still pretty damn good. :santa:.
 
After reading this thread some quotes come to mind:

"Someone either beat you retarded or needs to beat the retard out of you."

"Have you ever tried to reason with a retard? It's not happening."

"I can describe a tree in a million words. In reality it is just a tree."

All this has been posted before. We will not know for sure if barcelona is a better buy than penryn. We cant compare things we never experienced. They can say barcelona will take us to the moon and back. But it really only means you can see the moon up close in a picture on the desktop.

But my favorite quote of all times for a thread like this is:

"thread closed"
 
FlahsMemory said:
After reading this thread some quotes come to mind:

"Someone either beat you retarded or needs to beat the retard out of you."

"Have you ever tried to reason with a retard? It's not happening."

"I can describe a tree in a million words. In reality it is just a tree."

All this has been posted before. We will not know for sure if barcelona is a better buy than penryn. We cant compare things we never experienced. They can say barcelona will take us to the moon and back. But it really only means you can see the moon up close in a picture on the desktop.

But my favorite quote of all times for a thread like this is:

"thread closed"
Click to expand...
and for you what comes in mind?
"3 days vacation"
 
ryanmartini said:
Spare me on the hard to program bs. Programmers hid behind their mistakes in the single core days. Code could be sloppy, as long as it ran ok, it was accepted. Dual core came out..... OMGZ We have to actually plan and implement out code in a more strategic and efficient way than before! OMGZ we will have to work hard for the money we make...

Most games now run off of engines that are made to use multiple cores. U3 engine for example... Developers will be jumping on it for it's scalability, multi core efficiency, and physics ability. They didnt do the work..... The U3 team did. They program the actions and make the models based off of the code that is already there for them....

Sorry, I have no sympathy for programmers who do not want to implement code efficiently for new games and apps.
Click to expand...

You are 18 years old. I do not expect you to understand the programmers. I do not expect you to understand the fact that EA forced some of their programmers to work crazy overtime. I do not think that you know how it is to program for 12 hours straight. Especially when you are trying to find a bug in someone's code. It is not a question of programmers who do not implement code efficiently for new games. It is a question of telling your project manager (often times he has no experience in programming) that you need to completely remake the application.
As for U3, I am really sad to disappoint you. Their "physics ability" is basically Ageia PhysX. As for the multi core, they only have the "Multi-threaded rendering system. And the U3 team are the developers....

Which still doesn't mean that making a multi core application is extremely hard and error prone, especially in games. There are a multitude of problems that can arise specifically from using multiple cores and multiple programmers. One little mistake may plague the whole game.

But FlahsMemory is right. I shouldn't get this thread closed. I should let people sing happily that AMD is not releasing Barcelona because it does not want to kill Intel. After all, this is the "AMD good news forum" and not the "AMD CPUs forum".
(so, feel free to ignore this thread. I won't post here again.)
 
ShadowPho said:
You are 18 years old. I do not expect you to understand the programmers. I do not expect you to understand the fact that EA forced some of their programmers to work crazy overtime. I do not think that you know how it is to program for 12 hours straight. Especially when you are trying to find a bug in someone's code. It is not a question of programmers who do not implement code efficiently for new games. It is a question of telling your project manager (often times he has no experience in programming) that you need to completely remake the application.
As for U3, I am really sad to disappoint you. Their "physics ability" is basically Ageia PhysX. As for the multi core, they only have the "Multi-threaded rendering system. And the U3 team are the developers....

Which still doesn't mean that making a multi core application is extremely hard and error prone, especially in games. There are a multitude of problems that can arise specifically from using multiple cores and multiple programmers. One little mistake may plague the whole game.

But FlahsMemory is right. I shouldn't get this thread closed. I should let people sing happily that AMD is not releasing Barcelona because it does not want to kill Intel. After all, this is the "AMD good news forum" and not the "AMD CPUs forum".
(so, feel free to ignore this thread. I won't post here again.)
Click to expand...


all the same, we need to be finding new method of programming. maybe different programming methods are to come in the future allowing accurate execution of both cores.

i do know what its like to program for 12 hours or more. i have worked on c++ emulator projects for ultima online for a loong time.

you go back to its hard for programmers to make dual core apps. tough freakin cookies. you want the check, you have to earn it.

the only message you are conveying is that it is hard to innovate. no ****. thats why programmers get paid good. they sign up to innovate computers and how they run. if they do not want the task of innovating on technology that is here to stay, then maybe a career change is in need.
 
ryanmartini said:
all the same, we need to be finding new method of programming. maybe different programming methods are to come in the future allowing accurate execution of both cores.

i do know what its like to program for 12 hours or more. i have worked on c++ emulator projects for ultima online for a loong time.

you go back to its hard for programmers to make dual core apps. tough freakin cookies. you want the check, you have to earn it.

the only message you are conveying is that it is hard to innovate. no ****. thats why programmers get paid good. they sign up to innovate computers and how they run. if they do not want the task of innovating on technology that is here to stay, then maybe a career change is in need.
Click to expand...

true true, but remember that to innovate you need strict goals, and strict mathematical arguments that are able to reach those goals. when the mathematical argument allows for the increase in efficiency and thus , reaching the goal(or even surpassing it), then and only then can you begin diagramming strict architectures and parameters that follow up on the mathematical argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
x264 video encoding benchmark
2 3
Replies
49
Views
2K
Sorin
Sorin
jdrake90
  • Locked
The OCF Podcast, Episode 8: "Cooling with Dihydrogen Monoxide"
Replies
9
Views
7K
4od
4od
Super Nade
Athlon64 and General CPU Technology mini-refrence
2
Replies
30
Views
15K
jonspd
jonspd
Back