So Jaguar cores might have more performance per core then Kaveri and Piledriver. That's pretty hilarious.
Hardware Discussion Thread
|
Makes sense, Jaguar cores are actually high binned cores. A high binned Piledriver based cpu would have pretty decent performance as well.
AMD though gave Kevari and Piledriver HUGE pipelines. Their pipelines are smaller compared to previous generations still, but they're still too long. That's the only reason why AMD CPU's have such high clocks, but going from say 4200mhz to 4600mhz won't bring in that big of a performance difference. Jaguar focused on higher IPC instead of higher clocks, which I'm not sure why AMD isn't focusing more on Jaguar aside from cost. They can pump out low-mid-high grade binned Piledriver cores over and over and sell them at a cheap price because of this. I mean come on, Kevari shows near to identical performance to Piledriver's "4 core" design while lacking l3 cache. They're doing something right with their APU designs and not their CPU designs. 04-27-2014, 12:46 PM
What the hell are you two talking about?
Piledriver is MUCH faster than jaguar in both IPC and max stable clock rate at a given voltage. This makes sense when you consider the fact that jaguar was designed specifically to trim the pipeline in order to reduce size and power consumption (thus allowing small lower power multicore chips to be made that would not be possible with a pipeline as big as piledriver) at the expense of reduced IPC and clock rate (so basically more cores in exchange for slower cores). This has been repeatedly stated by AMD in their marketing materials and is backed up by benchmarks and overclocking test runs. vbetts Wrote:Makes sense, Jaguar cores are actually high binned cores. A high binned Piledriver based cpu would have pretty decent performance as well. That makes no sense at all. vbetts Wrote:Their pipelines are smaller compared to previous generations Actually they're the largest pipelines AMD has ever used in any design by far. The exact number has never been disclosed by AMD (and it's not a very important metric to know anymore anyways) but user testing has verified that it's somewhere in the low 20s. vbetts Wrote:That's the only reason why AMD CPU's have such high clocks, While it certainly is a big contributing factor there are a number of other reasons. The pipelines aren't just longer than previous generations. They're also narrower and smaller in total gate count. Heat, syncing between pipeline units, and data corruption due to gate delays are the major barriers to raising core clock rate. AMD has specifically designed the pipeline to address these things including with publicly disclosed changes. And we don't even know about most of the low level changes that were made because that's all confidential. Many of them were likely small to medium optimizations designed to improve these factors to help boost clock rates (especially reduction of heat which was the biggest barrier for them). So saying that's the only reason is just plain false. vbetts Wrote:but going from say 4200mhz to 4600mhz won't bring in that big of a performance difference. It's a 9% increase in clock rate and improves cpu bottlenecked applications by about 9%. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here or what you're comparing it against. vbetts Wrote:Jaguar focused on higher IPC instead of higher clocks, Jaguar focused on raising IPC over bobcat. But it's IPC and clock rates are still much lower than piledriver, and for good reason. vbetts Wrote:which I'm not sure why AMD isn't focusing more on Jaguar aside from cost. They're focusing a lot on jaguar right now so I'm not sure what you're talking about. If you're asking why they're not common in laptops and desktops right now. Well because they're slow. Just look at the benchmarks! Who is going to use a cpu with 2GHz cores with the IPC of a first generation phenom on their desktop? There is no need to use cpu cores that small and slow on a desktop. They were designed for a different hardware platform. Jaguar is designed to optimize performance around the power consumption and die size restrictions of a smartphone/tablet/netbook/nettop/ultrathin. Piledriver is designed to optimize performance around much higher power consumption and die size restrictions (desktops and laptops). Using jaguar in typical laptops/desktops would offer no benefit other than a slight reduction in cost and would reduce performance dramatically. vbetts Wrote:They can pump out low-mid-high grade binned Piledriver cores over and over and sell them at a cheap price because of this. Because of what exactly? Both architecture have low, mid, and high grade binning and adjust cost accordingly. And both currently have high yields. Again this makes no sense. vbetts Wrote:I mean come on, Kevari shows near to identical performance to Piledriver's "4 core" design while lacking l3 cache. First off Kaveri is a chip architecture, piledriver is a core architecture. You can't compare them. It's like saying your computer is faster than your house. Kaveri uses the steamroller core architecture. Now to compare steamroller against piledriver steamroller does indeed have a very slightly better IPC. Again though, I don't know what your point is in bringing this up as it has nothing to do with your argument. I should point out that steamroller is also larger and more power hungry than piledriver, which necessitated the removal of the L3 cache in kaveri. vbetts Wrote:They're doing something right with their APU designs and not their CPU designs. Again this makes no sense. Consider the following: -APUs are a type of CPU -Both jaguar and piledriver are core architectures -Both jaguar and piledriver are widely used in APUs If you do not understand the terminology being used in your own statements I promise you will not be able to construct a coherent argument. Now please show me any benchmarking data where a jaguar based cpu is beating a piledriver based cpu. That is the only way you will be able to prove your statement to be valid. The fastest jaguar based cpu right now is the athlon 5350 (kabini). Here is a benchmark summary from anandtech showing almost every major laptop/desktop cpu on the market right now running circles around it (including piledriver based cpus): http://www.anandtech.com/show/7933/the-d...n-5350-am1 Similar benchmarks are widely available on many other sites. So if you don't like/trust anandtech, please feel free to take your pick when choosing your source. Because I cannot find any data to back up your statements. Plus common sense and statements made by AMD would imply that they are false, so without strong data to back them up your argument is dead in the water. Keep in mind that kabini (jaguar based) is meant by AMD to be a smaller, lower power, and slower cousin to kaveri (steamroller based). And temash (also jaguar based) is even lower on the ladder than kabini. Here: These AMD APU roadmaps have been widely circulated on just about every tech site for years now. It confirms what I've been saying and what everyone should already know. Jaguar and steamroller/piledriver are not meant for the same markets. Jaguar is smaller, lower power, and slower. It is aimed at smaller and lower power machines. Both architectures do what they're designed to do. It's that simple. So, what should we conclude from this? -Jaguar is slower than piledriver/steamroller no matter how you look at it -Using piledriver/steamroller in low power chips is stupid -Using jaguar in high power chips is stupid
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony 05-05-2014, 03:05 PM
A couple of my Raidmax case's fans have gone out. I don't mind replacing them, but I'd want to make sure they last. Does anyone around have experience with long lasting case fans?
Intel Xeon w7-3465X OC | Asus Pro WS W790-E Sage SE | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 FE | 8x16GiB G-Skill Zeta R5 DDR5-6000 | Windows 11 23H2 | (details)
MacBook Pro 14in | M1 Max (32 GPU Cores) | 64GB LPDDR5 6400 | macOS 13
05-21-2014, 08:04 AM
This weeks reminder that AMD is doomed (at least in the desktop market): http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/return_...years.html
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony 05-21-2014, 12:52 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-21-2014, 12:53 PM by Xtreme2damax.)
^ No surprise there. For a long while now they've been unable to design and release anything that outperforms Intel.
If anyone here is looking for a first gen i7 or knows someone that is hit me up. I want to get rid of this due to it being too difficult to find an adequate motherboard replacement for a reasonable price plus my plans to upgrade to Haswell and I need to money. 05-21-2014, 06:16 PM
Since they have Sony and Microsoft in their pockets they can afford to stay uncompetitive in the desktop market.
Hopefully they'll come back with something... worthwhile. Just wishful thinking. 05-22-2014, 03:20 AM
Garteal Wrote:Since they have Sony and Microsoft in their pockets What? Since when? Nearly all x86 sony/microsoft products use Intel cpus. Unless you're referring to the consoles? That's hardly a major victory considering how small the revenue is and more importantly it doesn't have anything to do with the desktop market.
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony 05-22-2014, 03:40 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-22-2014, 03:43 AM by Xtreme2damax.)
I wish consoles would become obsolete. Nowadays a low or mid range media and gaming pc can be bought for around the same price as the current gen consoles. The current gen consoles excluding Wii U as it's not really considered current gen are glorified pc's. Apparently at E3 there were Xbox One titles running on a Windows 7 pc that was slightly modified (I think), only the OS was modified somehow to boot and run the games but under the hood it was pc hardware. Maybe then developers would give the pc more attention as a platform and make more quality AAA titles for pc and stop treating all pc gamers as criminals with invasive drm schemes that do jack against piracy. Ah what a pipe dream that is as there always will be a market for consoles due to most common (technical illiterate) folks not wanting to bother assembling a system, jacked up OEM prices with pre-installed crapware hardware that is a pile of crap fit to do basic activities and varying hardware/software configurations. Plus it's money for the companies due to exclusives which equate sales of their exhorbitantly priced hardware, being able to get away charging multiple times for the same games on their new hardware.
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 6 Guest(s)