Will this change the way we look at Bulldozer?

[hasu]

Sorry, not for gaming!

I was looking at how my AMD stocks are doing and came across this news...

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...or-amds-bulldozer-architecture-132609878.html

Supercomputer maker Cray Inc., which includes PGI compilers with nearly all of its HPC systems worldwide, has indicated that some of its largest HPC customers will upgrade their existing systems to include 16-core "Interlagos" processors

PGI compilers, with their support and optimization for both the latest AMD Interlagos CPUs and many-core GPUs, are a key component of the Cray XE6 and Cray XK6 supercomputers

 

[Stoneburner]

When the hell did this forum turn into art criticism? This isn't about perspective, this is about empirical evidence. Empirically, BD is trash.

What's next, a post about how Bulldozer is post-modern commentary on American free trade policy driving laborers to work harder but accomplish less?

 

[exar333]

I don't think so. Cray made this committment before BD was released, and the shipment to Cray was announced before BD was released and reviewed.

BD definitely can make sense in areas that take advantage of the architecture and/or cores, but I do not believe this will make a difference to the perception. AMD needs to fix the issues and re-release a faster version (IPC), better clocks (Mhz) an reign-in power consumption to really change how BD is perceived.

 

[Ferzerp]

This is old news. It doesn't make BD good; it just means Cray made a booboo, or got a really good pricing deal.

 

[hasu]

This is old news. It doesn't make BD good; it just means Cray made a booboo, or got a really good pricing deal.

Could be true. It is all about price. If Bulldozer (8150) is available for $100 or even $150, I am sure we will trash AMD much less.

 

[podspi]

Well, we ARE still waiting on server benches, and custom-compiled code for BD COULD see speedups vs legacy.

None of that changes the fact that BD is a bad fit for almost all consumer workloads. But hopefully it isn't quite as pitiful for server and HPC uses...

 

[Arachnotronic]

I have said this over and over again: Bulldozer is a chip designed for servers in mind first and foremost. It'll do just fine in the high margin server market.

AMD's assault on the mainstream desktop is with Llano, which ROCKS because of its badass IGP. AMD's assault on the server arena could be successful. High end desktop? Meh, probably not in the best of shape. But with PC gaming "dying", who will buy those chips anyway?

 

[exar333]

I have said this over and over again: Bulldozer is a chip designed for servers in mind first and foremost. It'll do just fine in the high margin server market.

AMD's assault on the mainstream desktop is with Llano, which ROCKS because of its badass IGP. AMD's assault on the server arena could be successful. High end desktop? Meh, probably not in the best of shape. But with PC gaming "dying", who will buy those chips anyway?

Gaming with Llano sucks anyway, so it's a worthless feature to begin with.

 

[AtenRa]

This is old news. It doesn't make BD good; it just means Cray made a booboo, or got a really good pricing deal.

Desktop apps and Server apps are different,

Desktop apps go for higher performance through higher ILP and need higher IPC CPU's, Server apps are multithreaded and taking advantage of TLP/DLP and need higher throughput CPUs which utilizes more cores.

Bulldozer will shine in Servers when apps will take advantage of its strengths

 

[Arg Clin]

I have said this over and over again: Bulldozer is a chip designed for servers in mind first and foremost. It'll do just fine in the high margin server market.

AMD's assault on the mainstream desktop is with Llano, which ROCKS because of its badass IGP. AMD's assault on the server arena could be successful. High end desktop? Meh, probably not in the best of shape. But with PC gaming "dying", who will buy those chips anyway?

I wouldn't say PC gaming is dying - that's a myth. Revenues continues to climb solidly each year.

That some developers would like to give the impression that console gaming is what's hot is really more wishful thinking on their part, trying to push things in that direction.

Other than that I agree, and would like to add that only a handful of games are very cpu demanding.

 

[sm625]

Gaming with Llano sucks anyway, so it's a worthless feature to begin with.

This is a factually incorrect statement. By the numbers, PC gaming is farmville, sims 3, WoW, SC2, LoL with just a few BF3's tossed in here and there. Llano can run all these at medium or better settings, at typical 19-22" monitor resolutions.

 

[jhu]

Well, we ARE still waiting on server benches, and custom-compiled code for BD COULD see speedups vs legacy.

None of that changes the fact that BD is a bad fit for almost all consumer workloads. But hopefully it isn't quite as pitiful for server and HPC uses...

So these chips are already out. Why haven't Anand and company done any linpack or tpc benchmarks?

 

[frozentundra123456]

Gaming with Llano sucks anyway, so it's a worthless feature to begin with.

Agreed, on the desktop especially. Desktop Llano is kind of in limbo, like the old saying, "jack of all trades and master of none".

CPU performance trails intel by far, and for me at least, the graphics superiority is not enough to make up for the CPU deficit. Just get an Intel CPU and add a 70 or 80 dollar graphics card. You will have performance far superior to Llano in both CPU and graphics.

And for those who only do e-mail, web surfing, office tasks, even the HD2000 is sufficient.

I will say that Llano makes more sense in the mobile market, and Bobcat in the small form factor. Seems to me that an E450 netbook size laptop like the HP dm1z is a decent competitor to the ultrabook concept of Intel at half the price.

 

[MisterMac]

So these chips are already out. Why haven't Anand and company done any linpack or tpc benchmarks?

Caaaauuuuse Cray and other HPC type builiders took em all.



I cannot really imagine it will do well in the general server market.
Nevermind you in any DENSITY market with the heat/power consumption.


It'll be more in the lower end market with 1/2 socket servers for small virtualization, i see it beating up intel as long as price is right.

A 16 thread BD for under 1k, and i'm sold.
I need threads not IPC

 

[frozentundra123456]

This is a factually incorrect statement. By the numbers, PC gaming is farmville, sims 3, WoW, SC2, LoL with just a few BF3's tossed in here and there. Llano can run all these at medium or better settings, at typical 19-22" monitor resolutions.

Only one of those I have played is SC2, which is an anamoly because it is highly CPU dependent and not very graphically demanding. I already made another post stating what I think of desktop Llano, but I want to respond to this directly.

I am not sure whether you can document your claims about the gaming ability of Llano, but even if true, Llano is weaker than a HD5570 because it is bandwidth limited. And I seriously doubt that prebuilt desktops will use the high speed memory that dimishes the bandwidth penalty. I have a five year old desktop with a 9800GT that is faster than Llano.

So I dont consider the graphics of Llano really adequate for gaming. I still would prefer a discrete card on the desktop. A 50.00 card could easily match Llano, and a 100.00 card if purchased wisely, would probably double its performance. Plus you could match it with an i2300 and get far superior CPU performance as well.

 

[exar333]

This is a factually incorrect statement. By the numbers, PC gaming is farmville, sims 3, WoW, SC2, LoL with just a few BF3's tossed in here and there. Llano can run all these at medium or better settings, at typical 19-22" monitor resolutions.

You can feel free to game on low/medium settings. No thanks. Just buy a <$100 discrete and you are much better. No self-respecting WoW player would game with a Llano, too little GPU and CPU power. Consoles would better suit you at that point.

If farmville is all you play, then any IGP will suffice.

Edit: Back on topic....no, this doesn't change how we see BD. It still sucks...

 

[podspi]

So these chips are already out. Why haven't Anand and company done any linpack or tpc benchmarks?

My guess is they are waiting for actual Interlagos platforms.

I'm surprised I haven't seen any Zambezi benches in the forums, though.


Although maybe not. I wouldn't buy one just to test linpack

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

When the hell did this forum turn into art criticism? This isn't about perspective, this is about empirical evidence. Empirically, BD is trash.

What's next, a post about how Bulldozer is post-modern commentary on American free trade policy driving laborers to work harder but accomplish less?

lmmfao

 

[Ferzerp]

Desktop apps and Server apps are different,

Desktop apps go for higher performance through higher ILP and need higher IPC CPU's, Server apps are multithreaded and taking advantage of TLP/DLP and need higher throughput CPUs which utilizes more cores.

Bulldozer will shine in Servers when apps will take advantage of its strengths

:/

Actually being an infrastructure architect by trade and seeing how most of the people on this board seem to think that realm works, I know better than to get in to that conversation again.

 

[Nemesis 1]

No it won't change how we look at BD . Only AMD fanbois. I look forward to next qT results AMD should have 60&#37; server share up from its present 5%

 

[Cerb]

Caaaauuuuse Cray and other HPC type builiders took em all.

What about those FX-8150 CPUs every review site has? The single-die server chips are not going to perform differently from the desktop ones, at least not by more than a couple percent.

 

[BD231]

Could be true. It is all about price. If Bulldozer (8150) is available for $100 or even $150, I am sure we will trash AMD much less.

I don't see how the transition from being an overpriced piece of crap to a cheap piece of crap is going to help things.

 

[hasu]

I don't see how the transition from being an overpriced piece of crap to a cheap piece of crap is going to help things.

If that were true then walmart would not be existing.

 

[BD231]

If that were true then walmart would not be existing.

Go buy your kid a 60 dollar bike and watch it break in two months, meanwhile I'll be gettin my money's worth on a quality bike that lasts. What's your point?

 

[hasu]

I don't see how the transition from being an overpriced piece of crap to a cheap piece of crap is going to help things.

What's your point?

I was wondering the same about your comment. My point was to show how a reduced price would help a company. Forget about consumers. Businesses normally don't think long term (then there won't be outsourcing, right?), because they want to keep their stock price high "today"