PCTuning fórum

del42sa píše:ale to byla asi i částečně idea BD modulu. Ne zvětšovat IPC, ale INT throughput.

StepanPepan píše: Bulldozer is a bunch of little cores with shared resources. This makes good sense in 16 core server processor. Not so much sense in desktop. This a processor that accidentally went where it does not belong.

StepanPepan píše:
Jak dobrá je ta idea, pokud vyústí v desktopovém procesoru, který je horší než předchozí generace? Proč AMD cpe ten procesor i do desktopů, nechápu.

ArgCZ píše:Stepane, pokud FX-8150 dosáhne horšího výsledku než X6 1100T tak sním svoje ponožky.

godlike píše:Meli ten 3Dmark projet s 2500K.Myslim, ze by pres 30000 dal taky.Je vubec nakej herni rozdil mezi a 2500k a 2600k?HT stejne lidi v hrach vypinaji ne?FX je na hry stejne horsi nez 2500K,to je jasny uz ted.

stepanpepan:Jak dobrá je ta idea, pokud vyústí v desktopovém procesoru, který je horší než předchozí generace? Proč AMD cpe ten procesor i do desktopů, nechápu.

“Please explain why having two separate integer cores is better than one fat one. For example, if each core has two ALUs and two AGUs and 16 KB of L1 cache, what if it was one integer core with 4 ALUs and 4 AGUs and 32KB cache? Theoretically, you’d get about the same performance for multi-threaded programs and better single threaded performance.” – Ryan

We get asked that a lot. The key is that a single core that would be able to compete with the throughput of two smaller cores would consume a disproportionate amount of die space and consume more power. Taking Bulldozer and turning each module into one “big core” instead of two cores with some shared resources would net you a disproportionately higher price and disproportionately higher power consumption.

In reality what we are doing is driving efficiency. And don’t worry about the single threaded performance –we have already stated publicly that Bulldozer single threaded performance is expected to be higher than our current core architectures.

What you have to keep in mind is that we are bringing innovation and driving towards the future. Back in 2005 when we did the first x86 dual core processors, there were some that argued that single core processors were better because a.) they had higher clock speed and b.) no applications really take advantage of multiple cores. Where are those people today?

When we innovated with bringing x86-64 to the market there were those that said 32-bit applications were better because they were faster and nobody really needs to access more than 2GB in most cases anyway. Where are those people today?

In this business you can either look out the windshield and focus on the road ahead and the technology that is coming up in the future or look in the rear view mirror and constantly obsess about how things were in the past.

BTW: Herni vykon BD je samo lepsi nez na Thubanu v porovnani default na default

vlastně tady na to JF odpovídá i když si nemyslím, že by to jakkoliv zvedlo spotřebu (ta by měla zůstat stejná) Je vidět , že to vrtalo v hlavě už více lidem

del42sa píše:... tady na to JF odpovídá i když si nemyslím, že by to jakkoliv zvedlo spotřebu (ta by měla zůstat stejná) Je vidět , že to vrtalo v hlavě už více lidem

“Please explain...

THANATOS píše:Hladis

BTW: Herni vykon BD je samo lepsi nez na Thubanu v porovnani default na default

to by bolo velmi fajn pre Trinity, hlavne ak pri rovnakej spotrebe ako Llano dokaze pracovat na vyssej frekvencii, sice v tej dobe bude aj IB ale uprimne jeho IGP vykon nedosiahne ani Llano IGP a kvalita ovladacov je stale zla.

flanker píše:uvidíme, co nabídne např WIN8...Jen bude mrzuté, že případně kvůli možnému lepšímu výkonu ve win8 s FX bych muel zas shánět nové windows ....