• Login
  • Register
  • Dolphin Forums
  • Home
  • FAQ
  • Download
  • Wiki
  • Code


Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums › Dolphin Emulator Discussion and Support › Hardware v
« Previous 1 ... 183 184 185 186 187 ... 189 Next »

Skyword Sword
View New Posts | View Today's Posts

Pages (2): « Previous 1 2
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thread Modes
Skyword Sword
04-10-2012, 06:14 AM (This post was last modified: 04-10-2012, 06:22 AM by NaturalViolence.)
#11
NaturalViolence Offline
It's not that I hate people, I just hate stupid people
*******
Posts: 9,013
Threads: 24
Joined: Oct 2009
Quote:No, that's only when using only one core. With two I'm pretty sure it *almost* keeps up with phenom.

Plus, his clock is pretty good.

That doesn't make any sense. Both bulldozer and phenom II have more than two cores. 1 core on bulldozer vs. 1 core on phenom II should produce the same performance difference as 2 cores on bulldozer vs. 2 cores on phenom II. The performance per core is still the same. Unless I'm misunderstanding your implications?

When using 1-4 threads the per core and total performance of bulldozer is inbetween an athlon II and phenom II since each thread has its own module.
When using 5-8 threads the per core performance is inbetween an athlon X2 and athlon II since each pair of threads is sharing a module.

However once you factor in the fact that it has a higher clock rate than any of those cpus the performance per clock per thread can be as low as an athlon X2 when using 8 threads. It still is faster than an 8 core K8 (athlon X2) chip clocked at 4.0 GHz would be due to better sse performance and the ability for a single thread to access the resources of two cores in a module, it just doesn't scale particularly well in either direction.
"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
Website Find
Reply
04-10-2012, 08:17 PM (This post was last modified: 04-10-2012, 08:25 PM by MayImilae.)
#12
MayImilae Offline
Chronically Distracted
**********
Administrators
Posts: 4,619
Threads: 120
Joined: Mar 2011
Quote:That doesn't make any sense. Both bulldozer and phenom II have more than two cores. 1 core on bulldozer vs. 1 core on phenom II should produce the same performance difference as 2 cores on bulldozer vs. 2 cores on phenom II. The performance per core is still the same. Unless I'm misunderstanding your implications?

The bulldozers use a very uncanny setup with their cores. It would take a while to explain (read the link below if you are curious) but for most multi-threaded applications, which is supposed to be it's tour de force, it actually performs worse, as programs are designed for the simpler, more traditional way of doing multiple cores, and not for the cheating methods that the Bulldozer employs. Even for programs that are optimal for it, the cheating they did doesn't provide any advantages over intel chips, not even on a bang for the buck measure.

As for comparing a Bulldozer to the Phenom II for a single core, the Phenom outperforms the Bulldozer, and the Sandy Bridges outperform both. See the link for the benchmarks.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8150-zambezi-bulldozer-990fx,3043.html
[Image: RPvlSEt.png]
AMD Threadripper Pro 5975WX PBO+200 | Asrock WRX80 Creator | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 FE | 64GB DDR4-3600 Octo-Channel | Windows 11 22H2 | (details)
MacBook Pro 14in | M1 Max (32 GPU Cores) | 64GB LPDDR5 6400 | macOS 12
Find
Reply
04-10-2012, 09:57 PM
#13
AnyOldName3 Offline
First Random post over 9000
*******
Posts: 3,535
Threads: 2
Joined: Feb 2012
Quote:As for comparing a Bulldozer to the Phenom II for a single core, the Phenom outperforms the Bulldozer, and the Sandy Bridges outperform both. See the link for the benchmarks.

I think we'd already decided this.
OS: Windows 10 64 bit Professional
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5900X
RAM: 16GB
GPU: Radeon Vega 56
Find
Reply
04-10-2012, 10:05 PM
#14
The PunisherLives
Unregistered
 
Thanks to all of you out there telling me that Bulldozer was essentially not going to cut it i have decided to return it and i have instead switched to an Intel i7 2700k. thank you and hopefully this will help me run all the performance intense games.
Reply
04-10-2012, 10:08 PM
#15
Garteal Offline
「Lab Mem. 004」
********
Global Moderators
Posts: 2,095
Threads: 24
Joined: Aug 2011
Not all ofcourse, but this is definitely an improvement over any Bulldozer CPU.
Now all you have to do is overclock it.
Find
Reply
04-10-2012, 11:30 PM
#16
DefenderX Away
Mabuhay ang Pilipinas
*******
Posts: 4,617
Threads: 186
Joined: Dec 2011
Concerning overclocking: Make sure, that you have a decent CPU cooler + good Thermal compound or you'll grill your CPU. And you have to always check your temperatures. (e.g. with CoreTemp or RealTemp)
[Image: IEZtsj]
[Image: 8fhx2zum.gif]
Website Find
Reply
04-11-2012, 12:51 PM
#17
Runo Offline
Greeny
*******
Posts: 1,194
Threads: 43
Joined: Mar 2009
(04-10-2012, 06:14 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote:
Quote:No, that's only when using only one core. With two I'm pretty sure it *almost* keeps up with phenom.

Plus, his clock is pretty good.

That doesn't make any sense. Both bulldozer and phenom II have more than two cores. 1 core on bulldozer vs. 1 core on phenom II should produce the same performance difference as 2 cores on bulldozer vs. 2 cores on phenom II. The performance per core is still the same. Unless I'm misunderstanding your implications?

When using 1-4 threads the per core and total performance of bulldozer is inbetween an athlon II and phenom II since each thread has its own module.
When using 5-8 threads the per core performance is inbetween an athlon X2 and athlon II since each pair of threads is sharing a module.

However once you factor in the fact that it has a higher clock rate than any of those cpus the performance per clock per thread can be as low as an athlon X2 when using 8 threads. It still is faster than an 8 core K8 (athlon X2) chip clocked at 4.0 GHz would be due to better sse performance and the ability for a single thread to access the resources of two cores in a module, it just doesn't scale particularly well in either direction.

I meant that on applications that can use only one core, BD would have less performance than phenom 2, while on applications that use two+ cores it could keep up with phenom.
I'm still not sure if that is right, but that was what I meant Big Grin
OS: Windows 10 Pro 64bit Creators Update
CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 960 @ 3.6 GHz
Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce GTX 960 2GB GDDR5
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-870A-USB3 AM3+ Revision
RAM: HyperX 8GB Dual Channel @ 1600Mhz
Find
Reply
04-11-2012, 01:12 PM
#18
The PunisherLives
Unregistered
 
as far as temps go i am investing in corsair h100 liquid cooling
Reply
04-11-2012, 01:50 PM
#19
NaturalViolence Offline
It's not that I hate people, I just hate stupid people
*******
Posts: 9,013
Threads: 24
Joined: Oct 2009
Quote:I meant that on applications that can use only one core, BD would have less performance than phenom 2, while on applications that use two+ cores it could keep up with phenom.

That is not correct. Relative performance between the two will stay the same if the application in question has 4 or less threads.
"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
Website Find
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Pages (2): « Previous 1 2


  • View a Printable Version
  • Subscribe to this thread
Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)



Powered By MyBB | Theme by Fragma

Linear Mode
Threaded Mode