Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2013
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-14-2012, 09:40 AM   #26
Abwx
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sm625 View Post
It is an interesting observation. Can that much performance degredation be caused by scheduling and context switching and all of its associated overhead? If so then I'd say there is something seriously wrong with this architecture.
The dual core has more TDP headroom for a single or lightly threaded
task , hence the lower time thanks to higher turbo frequency.
Abwx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 09:43 AM   #27
Kalessian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IntelUser2000 View Post
Looks like to me the IPC is now on par with Thuban with the module penalty kicking in with multiple threads.
Pretty good assessment, yes sadly i can foresee oc'ed vishera might still lose to oc'ed x6 thuban in heavy fp workloads that are not avx-aware.
__________________
Desktop: PhII 555 @ X4 3.9ghz NB-2.7ghz 1.45V || Asus M4A89TD-Pro/Usb3 || GTX460 1GB SLI || ZR24w + DP930SB
HTPC: FX-6300 @ 4.2ghz || ASRock 990FX Extreme4 || GTX 660 2GB || 250GB 840 Pro || 50" PN50C590
Kalessian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 09:57 AM   #28
Haserath
Senior Member
 
Haserath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 724
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalessian View Post
Well looking at this graph we can get a little more insight into ph2 vs piledriver (seems the wav file is a little shorter in this ph2 test, also the ph2 runs at 3.7ghz, not 3.8ghz and itunes version isn't the same so it's far from perfect):



The 8150 is probaly turboing to 3.9ghz so call it 3.8ghz average? Wav seems to be ~5% longer, but ph2 980 is ~2% slower [than 3.8ghz]... I scaled the ph2 at 3.8ghz to be 1:25 compared to 1:31 for trinity Really dirty comparison but trinity looks to have just about caught up with ph2. Is llano better than ph2 clock for clock?
How about instead we look at these two:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...k,3224-13.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...x,3043-17.html


It's really weird that the 5400k can only turbo up to the base clock of the 5800k, but the 5400k still wins.
Haserath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 10:06 AM   #29
ttechf
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 224
Default

I was waiting for benches like this to come out because I'm wondering if I should go AMD Trinity or Intel i5 2500k for my first system build? : )
ttechf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 10:07 AM   #30
pelov
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,512
Default

Getting mighty close to high settings playable at 1080p with no discrete card.









1 more generation and I think we might see the end of all GPUs under $100 for good. 1080p at 30FPS + and high settings? Yesplz

I think I might be close to tossing my desktop in favor of a small APU HTPC. It looks like I may get my wish in 2013. Couple that with a nice Asus tablet and dock and I'm all set
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Childs View Post
hahahahaha "Is this 911? John Travolta just stroked my shaft, call the president!"
pelov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 10:18 AM   #31
Homeles
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemesis 1 View Post
Where are you guys getting IPC increase of 15%. Certainly not based on the benchmarks in this preview. OR do we do % differant for AMD than intel . If trinity is a 15% increase in IPC intel IVB is 25% faster IPC than SB. Funny you AMD guys are . Alot like the Dems.
From this:


Keep watching your Faux News, kid. And your math is atrocious.
Homeles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 10:30 AM   #32
Kalessian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haserath View Post
How about instead we look at these two:
Cool, thanks. My 1:25 was close

Edit: Yeah it is weird that the 5400k does 1:25 yet in the 3.8 no turbo test trinity only does 1:31...
__________________
Desktop: PhII 555 @ X4 3.9ghz NB-2.7ghz 1.45V || Asus M4A89TD-Pro/Usb3 || GTX460 1GB SLI || ZR24w + DP930SB
HTPC: FX-6300 @ 4.2ghz || ASRock 990FX Extreme4 || GTX 660 2GB || 250GB 840 Pro || 50" PN50C590

Last edited by Kalessian; 06-14-2012 at 10:41 AM.
Kalessian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 10:41 AM   #33
KompuKare
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Karnage View Post
Toms really fail's at benchmark reviews.
+1. The irony is the reviewer did leave this reply in the comments:

"Don't worry--I'm working on the data right now. As it stood, this story took more than a week of all day/all night testing, troubleshooting, new BIOS installing, and re-testing to nail down. It can go on indefinitely if you let it ;-)"

Ok, previewing pre-lease hardware with flaky BIOSes cannot be nice but don't Tom's have a database of tests they keep so they can at least include some other CPUs or does each reviewer start from stratch. And that power usage chart is interesting but totally unreadable...
__________________
_______________
|| i5-3570K at stock || Asus P8Z77-V LX || 8GB DDR3 || 120GB Sandisk Extreme
|| Gigabyte HD7950 || Corsair CX400 (Seasonic) || Nec 2170NX (1600x1200)
KompuKare is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 10:50 AM   #34
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 10,464
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sm625 View Post
It is an interesting observation. Can that much performance degredation be caused by scheduling and context switching and all of its associated overhead? If so then I'd say there is something seriously wrong with this architecture. It is already hugely disappointing that it just barely beats llano even though it is running 30% faster.

I dont see how this competes with a llano 3870k when both are overclocked. The trinity is very likely to top out at around 4.4GHz, which wont beat a 3.3GHz llano much less a 3.6GHz llano.... (gaming aside)
Yep, remember the Bulldozer hotfixes? Looks to be the same case essentially. Less cores, less jumping. Also why the 5400K wins.

A new run with all but one module disabled on the FX8150, 5800K, 5600K and 5400K would be interesting to test if thats the case.

If Toms had done any multithreaded tests we might have seen it too.
__________________
Anandtech forums=Xtremesystems forums

Last edited by ShintaiDK; 06-14-2012 at 10:53 AM.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 10:52 AM   #35
grimpr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 985
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalessian View Post
Pretty good assessment, yes sadly i can foresee oc'ed vishera might still lose to oc'ed x6 thuban in heavy fp workloads that are not avx-aware.
Remember, an 8 threaded BD/PD has 4 Floating Point Units compared to Thubans 6, an 4 threaded Trinity A10 has 2 Floating Point Units compared to Llanos 4.


Last edited by grimpr; 06-14-2012 at 10:55 AM.
grimpr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 10:59 AM   #36
Nemesis 1
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,379
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Homeles View Post
From this:


Keep watching your Faux News, kid. And your math is atrocious.
Ya kid. So you say 15% based on 1 benchmark. Its how we do it for intel is we take the average after throwing the high and lows out . So when AT does his review based only on the same programs that AT did in the IVB review and removing the high and low than your average is what AT . Thats at the same clock as last generation . or its not just IPC members call the ipc increase.

Last edited by Nemesis 1; 06-14-2012 at 11:02 AM.
Nemesis 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:00 AM   #37
pelov
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,512
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Yep, remember the Bulldozer hotfixes? Looks to be the same case essentially. Less cores, less jumping. Also why the 5400K wins.

A new run with all but one module disabled on the FX8150, 5800K, 5600K and 5400K would be interesting to test if thats the case.

If Toms had done any multithreaded tests we might have seen it too.
Yea... that's stupid. It's the most disappointing part of the CMT approach, I think. And nobody should be forced into buying a crappy operating system, win8, in order to reap the full benefits of the new scheduler that handles their architecture better.

Or you can go Linux
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Childs View Post
hahahahaha "Is this 911? John Travolta just stroked my shaft, call the president!"
pelov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:03 AM   #38
Homeles
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemesis 1 View Post
Ya kid. So you say 15% based on 1 benchmark. Its how we do it for intel is we take the average after throwing the high and lows out . So when AT does his review based only on the same programs that AT did in the IVB review and removing the high and low than your average is what AT members call the ipc increase.
When you have acceptable English and grammatical skills, you can attempt to have an argument with me. Until then, you are not remotely worth any of my time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Yep, remember the Bulldozer hotfixes? Looks to be the same case essentially. Less cores, less jumping. Also why the 5400K wins.

A new run with all but one module disabled on the FX8150, 5800K, 5600K and 5400K would be interesting to test if thats the case.

If Toms had done any multithreaded tests we might have seen it too.
Yeah, it looks like it's an OS scheduling issue, not an inherent flaw of the architecture.
Homeles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:05 AM   #39
Riek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Yep, remember the Bulldozer hotfixes? Looks to be the same case essentially. Less cores, less jumping. Also why the 5400K wins.

A new run with all but one module disabled on the FX8150, 5800K, 5600K and 5400K would be interesting to test if thats the case.

If Toms had done any multithreaded tests we might have seen it too.
This could indeed be the case. But those fixes didn't really bring any noticeable performance gains, so nothing he can do about it.

edit: i thought the difference was ok, but its rather big with close to 9%. Curious if windows 8 really improves for this by that much.

Last edited by Riek; 06-14-2012 at 11:11 AM.
Riek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:07 AM   #40
Nemesis 1
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,379
Default

Debating AMD fanbois is a waste of time . But I have time to waste Mister nazi grammer cop. Trinity sucks as a CPU. It does GPU things better but not good enough . When its good enough I will never buy another GPU . HASWELL! You have a writing form I have seen befor . This is the second time.
Nemesis 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:11 AM   #41
Homeles
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemesis 1 View Post
Debating AMD fanbois is a waste of time . But I have time to waste Mister nazi grammer cop. Trinity sucks as a CPU. It does GPU things better but not good enough . When its good enough I will never buy another GPU . HASWELL! You have a writing form I have seen befor . This is the second time.
Your English skills are deplorable, and I should not have to spend 10 minutes translating the piles of garbage that your spew. If you're going to try having a discussion on a forum, I strongly suggest you learn how to communicate your thoughts effectively.

Also, where's your proof that I'm a fanboy?
Homeles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:23 AM   #42
sm625
Diamond Member
 
sm625's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beginner99 View Post
Yeah, now has similar IPC as a 2007 intel CPU...great achievement.
I dont even see that. I'm sure a Q6600 at 3.8GHz would lay waste to these chips at the same clock. Even at 3.3GHz, a Q6600 should be faster.
__________________
I am looking for a cheap upgrade to my 3 year old computer.
AT forum member #1: Buy a 4790k

I am looking for a way to get 10 more fps in TF2.
AT forum member #2: Buy a 4790k
sm625 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:28 AM   #43
Homeles
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beginner99 View Post
Yeah, now has similar IPC as a 2007 intel CPU...great achievement.
With that logic, a processor that can handle 1 million instructions per clock (which is ludicrously high) that refreshes at 1Hz is faster than a 1 instruction per clock processor refreshing at 3 billion Hz.

IPC is completely irrelevant without taking clock speed into account. Instructions per second is the metric that matters.
Homeles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:30 AM   #44
Nemesis 1
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,379
Default

I don't need proof My animal instincts are strong . The sent of AMD is all over you. Nice attempt at diversion to the facts . Grammar nazi! You want to debate english skills I suggest you go to a british forum and debate your english skills with theirs. To declare IPC increase for Trinity at this point is a no go. We need AT review. Run the exact same benchmarks that was used for IVB review from there we can get a feel for trinities true compute performance. I don't care What CPUs people buy or use . But the constant lieing by AMD fanbois is wearing thin . 6 years and counting now . Nothing but lies.

The constant trolling by you is also wearing thin. So knock it off
-ViRGE

Last edited by ViRGE; 06-16-2012 at 03:52 AM.
Nemesis 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:31 AM   #45
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,040
Default

@ veri745
You are correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sm625 View Post
It is an interesting observation. Can that much performance degredation be caused by scheduling and context switching and all of its associated overhead? If so then I'd say there is something seriously wrong with this architecture. It is already hugely disappointing that it just barely beats llano even though it is running 30% faster.

I dont see how this competes with a llano 3870k when both are overclocked. The trinity is very likely to top out at around 4.4GHz, which wont beat a 3.3GHz llano much less a 3.6GHz llano.... (gaming aside)
Are you looking at the same preview as I am?

Sandra 2012: 1)Arithmetic : ~equal in Gflops and Trinity 24% faster in Gips;2) Multimedia: Float.mpix/s Trinity is 2.13x faster , Int.mpix/s Trinity is 2.15x faster;3)Cryptography: Trinity is 5.36x faster in AES256 and 1.3x faster in SHA256
Adobe Photoshop CS5: Trinity 5800K is 23% faster
Adobe Premiere Pro CS5.5: Trinity 5800K is 13% faster
Adobe AF CS6: Trinity 5800K is 17.5% faster
3dsmax 2012: Llano is 2.7% faster (within margin of error) <-fp heavy workload ,4 Llano fp units vs 2 PD FP units
Solidworks 2010 : Llano is 1.8% faster (within margin of error) <-fp heavy workload ,4 Llano fp units vs 2 PD FP units
ABBY Finereader 10: Trinity 5800K is 12% faster
Fritz: Llano is 3.4% faster <-fp heavy workload ,4 Llano fp units vs 2 PD FP units
Visual Studio 2010: Llano is 4.4% faster
Adobe Acrobat X: Trinity 5800K is 55% faster
Mainconcept: Trinity 5800K is 10% faster
Handbrake: Trinity 5800K is 6.2% faster
Lame: Trinity 5800K is 21% faster
iTunes: Trinity 5800K is 18% faster
Winzip: Trinity 5800K is 15% faster
Winrar: Trinity 5800K is 20% faster
7-zip: Trinity 5800K is 7% faster
OpenCL: Winzip(equal),Luxmark(Trinity 5800K is 22% faster)

Average adv. for Trinity 5800K (versus 3850 @2.9Ghz): 15% without Sisoft sandra and ~22% with Sisoftsandra results. Without Fritz and sisoft sandra,so only real world workloads, 5800K is ~16% faster than 3850 @ 2.9Ghz.
As for OCing,I googled a bit and most reviewers got results between 3.6 and 3.8Ghz from their 3870K samples with 3.8Ghz having stability issues in most cases(being barely stable with air cooling methods). So it's safe to assume 3.7Ghz for 3870K is practical limit for air cooling.
On the other hand,with this early platform THG managed to get 4.5Ghz out of Tirnity while AMD claims that with their (more mature/stable?) system they have managed 4.8Ghz,which IMO is very likely to end up being the limit for air cooling. So ~4.8Ghz vs 3.7Ghz on air cooling. 4.8Ghz is around 20% faster than stock 5800K which usually runs at 4Ghz due to Turbo. 3.7Ghz on Oced Llano is 27% faster than 3850. So in the end,the OCed 5800K @ 4.8Ghz should be around 10% faster (according to THG numbers above) than 3870K @ 3.7Ghz. Llano on average has 17% higher IPC than Trinity and 6% higher IPC than Phenom II. In turn, Phenom II has ~11% higher IPC than Piledriver and 20% higher IPC than Bulldozer. Piledriver has around 10-15% (depending on benchmark) higher IPC than Bulldozer,or closer to ~10% on average.

To summarize,5800K @ max OC (~4.8Ghz estimated;on par with FX4100's OC results ) is still better option than 3870K @ max OC (3.7Ghz based on online reviews with air cooling). Difference is around 10% in CPU tests. GPU portion is also overclockable in both CPUs and one is to expect that Trinity will hold its lead or extend it to more than 30% with max. OC on both CPUs.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."

Last edited by inf64; 06-14-2012 at 11:41 AM. Reason: fixed some errors
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:36 AM   #46
Homeles
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemesis 1 View Post
I don't need proof My animal instincts are strong . The sent of AMD is all over you. Nice attempt at diversion to the facts . Grammar nazi! You want to debate english skills I suggest you go to a british forum and debate your english skills with theirs. To declare IPC increase for Trinity at this point is a no go. We need AT review. Run the exact same benchmarks that was used for IVB review from there we can get a feel for trinities true compute performance. I don't care What CPUs people buy or use . But the constant lieing by AMD fanbois is wearing thin . 6 years and counting now . Nothing but lies.
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, Since you refuse to provide proof that I'm an AMD fanboy, your assertion can be dismissed.

The funny thing is, I agree with you. We do need a more thorough review. I was just destroying your ridiculous claim that there wasn't anything showing IPC increases in this review, when Tom's specifically addressed that issue.

There's no lies here. Just just ignorance -- and loads of coming from you.
Homeles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:48 AM   #47
Soulkeeper
Diamond Member
 
Soulkeeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 5,920
Default

my 3870K at 3.4GHz generally smashes FX4100's at 4.4GHz in benchmarks

Here is an example of my system laying waste to one here

even with a 15% increase in performance that system would still lose 2/3 of those benchmarks at 4.66GHz
__________________
A8-3870 @3.3GHz 1.3125v
16GB 1866 9-9-9-23 1t 1.35v
Linux software/gaming exclusively
linuxsociety.org

Last edited by Soulkeeper; 06-14-2012 at 11:54 AM.
Soulkeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:50 AM   #48
Magic Carpet
Golden Member
 
Magic Carpet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,822
Default

My first impression from this preview is a bitter disappointment. Still relies on high clock to be relevant. Mini-Netburst, all over again. But let's wait for the retail samples first
Magic Carpet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:54 AM   #49
Homeles
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic Carpet View Post
Still relies on high clock to be relevant. Mini-Netburst, all over again. But let's wait for the retail samples first
If the end result (high clock + low IPC) ends up being faster, what's the problem with it? We're not even a year into the Bulldozer era from AMD... it's too early to chalk it up to being a P4 disaster.
Homeles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 11:59 AM   #50
Nemesis 1
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,379
Default

Well The fact that you said I said there was no IPC increase is amusing . No where did I make such a claim . . But if your going to Figure IPC . Its has to be the same method that is used to determine Intel IPC increases. Clocks normalized and run the benchmarks ./ Its that simple . IVB was run against the same clocked SB . normalized. A 15%IPC increase for trinity is = to about a 10% increase in IVB.
Nemesis 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.