First look at Piledriver, how does it compare.

[Frakk]

That is the burning question for me and i'm sure a lot of others

So how does the 2 Module Piledriver compare to Bulldozer and the i3.

I have pulled together some reviews which might answer that.

If we pull up AnandBench to compare it with Phenom II;
The 3.8Ghz 2M 4C Piledriver is on a Parr with the 3.4Ghz 4C 965 BE.
sadly AnandBench don't have the Bulldozer FX-4 listed.

So from other reviews;

In this one and this one it's consistently behind the Intel i3, but consistently ahead of the higher clocked FX-4170

in This one it seems to be on a parr with the Intel i3.

Tom's Hardware also have it stacking up against the i3 very well.

What i would like to take away from that is the Piledriver core is a definite improvement over Bulldozer, it would have to be to beat a higher clocked Bulldozer with the same number of module and cores while also not having L3 cache.

Depending on whose review your looking at, and what they chose to use to benchmark it; it can be slower, faster or on a parr with the i3.

More often than not in real life apps it is a match for it, or it beats it.
I think the 2 Module AMD has caught up with the 2 core Intel.

The question for me is is the coming FX-8350 an upgrade path from my trusty old 1090T which is getting very long in the tooth.

I know Trinity is not Vishera, but it is Piledriver, as is Vishera.

Based on this information, nothing stands out, other than it definitely is better than Bulldozer, and reviewers have been able to overclock it ranging from 4.4Ghz to 4.6Ghz (on the stock cooler) which is good.

For me they are still on my list, but not underlined.

 

[TimoneX]

Thanks for the collection, I hadn't seen a couple of those. Nice to see some signs of life from AMD. This could prove a good option for budget builds.

 

[EarthDog]

iGPU performance is off the carts while IPC performance doesn't get the blood flowing at all for me. It does show incremental improvements however, which is good (just not enough IMO). I'm certain it wont swing Intel users that way unless there are budget limitations and they need that iGPU vs discrete.

Overall grade: MEH. A step in the right direction, but I (and others I'm sure) have been wanting AMD to skip steps, not take one by one.

 

[TimoneX]

I'm anxious to see AMD server chips based on piledriver. These could prove compelling in 2 & 4way systems if power consumption can be controlled.

I think AMD will continue to cede the upper mid and high end desktop space to Intel, but may become more competitive in the low end/HTPC, mobile, and server areas. Good stuff for increased competition.

For me, I haven't found a compelling reason to leave s1366. I swapped an early 920 to a D0 930, and then the current 970. The thing is a blistering fast encoder/renderer. I find 1155/IB to be a sideways move, and x79/2011 to be nerfed to the point of making me disinterested. A reasonably priced 8c/16t Intel option or a 2/4 way opteron system based on piledriver may be my future path. Either way a stronger AMD showing is good for everyone.

 

[hokiealumnus]

iGPU performance is off the carts while IPC or CPC performance doesnt get the blood flowing at all. It does show incremental improvements however, which is good (just not enough IMO). I'm certain it wont swing Intel users that way unless there are budget limitations and they need that iGPU vs discrete.

Overall grade: MEH. A step in the right direction, but I (and others Im sure) have been wanting AMD to skip steps, not take one by one.

Agreed.

We'll see more when we look at the full blown Piledriver CPU. There is no way it will beat Ivy Bridge; AMD is way too far behind on single-threaded x86 performance. That said, with clockspeed increases, great multi-threaded performance (at least on the integer side) and -most importantly- price, I can see it being competitive. Heck, I saw Bulldozer as competitive, but then they jacked the price and threw that right out the window.

If the price is right, I can see a win in performance-per-dollar. If the price isn't right, they might end up ceding the complete mainstream performance market to Intel along with the high-end performance they already ceded.

 

[LiquidHard]

Im confused

1) Is Llano based on Bulldozer architecture? Excluding the IGP functions, the procs perform on par with the Bulldozer FX?

2) That means Trinity is Piledriver architecture, which will also be the same archi the next FX procs are built one?

 

[TimoneX]

You're less confused than you think.

 

[hokiealumnus]

LiquidHard - Llano was equipped with Phenom II cores. That's why you see a decrease in multi-threaded FPU performance with Trinity, because it has two less FPU cores. Each module is two integer cores and one FPU core, so a "quad core" Trinity means a two-module CPU, with only two FPU cores.

 

[wagex]

LiquidHard - Llano was equipped with Phenom II cores. That's why you see a decrease in multi-threaded FPU performance with Trinity, because it has two less FPU cores. Each module is two integer cores and one FPU core, so a "quad core" Trinity means a two-module CPU, with only two FPU cores.

thats what i thought cept i thought that llano was athlon x4 not phenom but i could very well be wrong im not too keen on AMD offerings

 

[hokiealumnus]

thats what i thought cept i thought that llano was athlon x4 not phenom but i could very well be wrong im not too keen on AMD offerings

They were never actually compared one-for-one to my knowledge. They did overclock and perform similar to Athlon cores...until under LN2, then they clocked like Phenom IIRC. They were "stars" cores, which is the umbrella codename for the K10 architecture.

 

[LiquidHard]

LiquidHard - Llano was equipped with Phenom II cores. That's why you see a decrease in multi-threaded FPU performance with Trinity, because it has two less FPU cores. Each module is two integer cores and one FPU core, so a "quad core" Trinity means a two-module CPU, with only two FPU cores.

Im surprised on the phenom2 core for LLano. Thanks for the info

So that makes Llano not Bulldozer right?

Trying to understand AMDs family tree classification...wiki-ed it but so far its more confusing than my grandpa's mumbled explanation on my own family tree..

 

[bmwbaxter]

Im surprised on the phenom2 core for LLano. Thanks for the info

So that makes Llano not Bulldozer right?

Trying to understand AMDs family tree classification...wiki-ed it but so far its more confusing than my grandpa's mumbled explanation on my own family tree..

Correct, Llano is not based on bulldozer. It was based on the K10 family of cores, and trinity is based on the piledriver, which is a progression on bulldozer.

@op
I think trinity if priced correctly is gonna be smashing success. As was already said, iGPU is a beast, but the x86 still needs work. (A lot of it actually)

 

[TimoneX]

Price chart on FP article looks pretty aggressive. I think AMD will have a winner on their hands.

http://www.overclockers.com/amd-trinity-a10-5800k-apu-review

...and at the egg.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...00007671 600372025&IsNodeId=1&name=Socket FM2

 

[LiquidHard]

Correct, Llano is not based on bulldozer. It was based on the K10 family of cores, and trinity is based on the piledriver, which is a progression on bulldozer.

Thank you, clearer now.

 

[Frakk]

Taking about Real life Single core performance....

Lets look at it again.

Here is an old FX-8150 review. In that they had all the CPU's running at 3.3Ghz to compare the IPC,

Now if you look at iTunes here As you can see Ivy Bridge is slightly faster that Sandy Bridge.

But what we are looking at is Bulldozer, @ 3.3Ghz it's 2.03.
A massive yawning gap to Intel
Piledriver @ 3.8Ghz is 1.26, that is a massive leap ahead from Bulldozer, and significantly faster than my Thuban.
Granted if you down clock the Piledriver core to clock for clock it's on parr for Thuban at best, and probably not quite that, but still way ahead of Bulldozer.

But crucially the gap to Intel's (Ivy Bridge) has been cut in half clock for clock.

If we take that a step further and imagine the FX-43## Piledriver running @ 4 or 4.2ghz stock it will be even closer to the i3.

I agree ED, it's not going to be an Ivy Bridge beater, probably not even a dead match.

But it should get significantly closer, and provide an upgrade path for those who have socket AM3+ Motherboards.

With a bit of luck it might even get close enough to look pretty reasonable full stop.

 

[EarthDog]

Your glass is always half full, no matter what.

Like I said, for me, it needs more, a lot more than catching up to 4 year old architecture which was/is 50% slower than IB in that test. Im just at a point where performance rules and 'in the ballpark' but $100 cheaper isnt what Im looking for. Others are, and this fine and a nice jump. Just not enough for a lot of people.

With a bit of luck it might even get close enough to look pretty reasonable full stop.

Is this wasnt so subjective, I would bet you on that statement... as it is.. Let's just quote it for future reference.

 

[bmwbaxter]

At this point in time, anyone except professionals (people who do rendering and the like) will be completely happy buy from Intel or AMD. HW is more than 90% of software calls for, even budget builds are easily capable of playable frame rates at 1080p since it isn't all that demanding anymore.

 

[dkizzy]

Remember that these chips do not utilize L3 Cache so hopefully the FX variants will show the incremental improvement some enthusiasts seek. Initial benchmarks out there seem to have the FX 8350 comparing to a 2600k in more than just a couple of benchmarks. If I understand correctly the piledriver modifications had to be finalized around the time BD launched, so AMD has a chance to address some other gripes such as making the FPU instructions go to each core instead of the module with steamroller. As many of you know with OpenCL applications Trinity compares with the i7 series with some tasks but not enough programs harness this ability yet.

 

[Hicksimus]

I had to think for a while before I made this post....

This processor offers very solid value in its price range and if I'm likely to buy any of the latest AMD offerings it will be the 5800k. The FM2 mobos look nice, and if the 5800k can overclock to a single-core score of 1.2 in cinebench(without doing the bulldozer power draw spike) I'd be a happy customer.

I don't have anything nice to say about the 8350 being $260 though.

 

[TimoneX]

I dunno, $253 puts the 8350 between the IB 3570k and 3770 vanilla. That's not a horrible place to be and it may come down a bit after settling in.