• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What's happening at BTR 4 .. and report issues here
#71
(01-31-2016, 03:28 AM)SickBeast Wrote:  Perhaps you are right and they should get rid of it.

It's too late to renegotiate any contracts with GloFo now. AMD is locked in and only a bankruptcy could end their obligations.
Dodgy
#72
(01-30-2016, 11:26 PM)SickBeast Wrote: The way it looks to me is that AMD gave their CPU marketing decision the authority to essentially make engineering decisions about the CPU.  If you look at the way they advertise Bulldozer as an 8 core CPU it's very misleading.  There are only 4 floating point units.  So while there are 8 integer units they are held back by the lack of FPUs.  So it's not a true octa core CPU.  Clearly they wanted to be able to market the fact that their CPUs had 8 cores for less money than Intel's quad cores.  We all know the result of that decision.  I don't blame their engineers at all.  Management should never have given the marketing people such power and the marketing people shouldn't have been so stupid.  Who can expect a marketing person to design a CPU though.  That would be like hiring your hairdresser to be your dentist.  Yet AMD's management clearly did this.  It's really mind blowing, isn't it?  And that is just the tip of the iceberg with AMD's marketing department.

You are correct that there are only 4 FPU's in an AMD "8 core" (LOL!) cpu. That is not what holds performance back though. it is the CPU frontend - the part of the CPU that takes in x86/x64 instructions and converts them into RISC operations that the cores actually process (this is something modern CPU's have done since the Pentium Pro on Intel's side and the K5 on AMD's) that actually holds things back.

Why does the frontend hold things back? Because there are only 4 frontends, not 8 (just like the FPU's), and two cores must share one frontend which slows them down.
#73
If it was such an easy fix then why didn't AMD do it? We had Bulldozer, then Steamroller, then Piledriver, then Excavator. So three revisions of Bulldozer and they didn't make the changes needed to make Bulldozer into a proper CPU. That either speaks further to their stupidity or else it wasn't that simple and the processor was a complete turkey.
#74
The frontend for an OOO (Out Of Order execution engine) is pretty significant, something around 18-20% of the transistor budget for one complete core.

Even if they fixed the frontend, you would still only have half as many FPU's as needed (only an issue for gaming, but still a big issue since the consumer highend CPU market is mostly gaming), even if they doubled up the FPU's as well (not sure of the transister budget, but somewhere around 15-20% sounds right) you have slow caches to contend with that would need redesigning to keep up with the work the cores are now doing.

If you did all that you would have a ton more transisters, a ton more power usage and a CPU that would get so hot it'd likely burn its way to the centre of the earth while burning out nuclear power plants with its energy demands.

So AMD would likely have had to abandon 8 cores until they had access to a better process and produce hot power hungry quad cores only.
#75
Interesting. Thanks for the detailed analysis! For someone who can't stand AMD you sure know a lot about their processors! :)
#76
No more than anyone who knows basic modern processor theory and read the articles on bulldozer.

Surely you don't believe I dislike AMD simply because they are AMD (same with ATi), I always have solid reasons why I either like or dislike something, anyone who thinks I take sides simply because of favoritism or loyalty is badly mistaken about me.
#77
Their GPUs are pretty good. I have been very happy with my 280x. Their drivers have come a long way as well. The new interface is nice and they have been adding new features. Actually I haven't had any driver issues with my card.
#78
(01-31-2016, 01:44 PM)SickBeast Wrote: If it was such an easy fix then why didn't AMD do it?  We had Bulldozer, then Steamroller, then Piledriver, then Excavator.  So three revisions of Bulldozer and they didn't make the changes needed to make Bulldozer into a proper CPU.  That either speaks further to their stupidity or else it wasn't that simple and the processor was a complete turkey.

Bulldozer was a design issue. AMD chose the failed design way that Intel originally went with their Pentium and long pipelines in the original GHz race. AMD *assumed* that computing would be more parallel that it is and that 8 IPC-weak cores would be able to keep up with 4 fast ones IF the SW was (re)written to take advantage of parallelism. Well, they were right - about the GPU only. Nvidia took it and ran with CUDA as an ALTERNATIVE way to compute and ideal for the CPU, while the software written for the x86 code executed on the CPU remained and remains serial and is only very slowly being recompiled to take advantage of more than a couple of cores.

AMD had no back-up to BD. If they were smart, they would have had Phenom III waiting in the wings and they should have DUMPED Bulldozer before it came to market. But they had no back-up plan, and they are only now getting Zen ready.
Rolleyes

Disgustingly stupid shortsighted self-serving management coupled with brain-dead marketing driven goals did it to themselves. AMD has NO ONE to blame but THEMSELVES.
Dodgy
#79
It isn't always technical. Often it is the sleaze, lies, shilling, trolling and reputation smearing that offends at least as much as the lack of technical prowess.
#80
(01-31-2016, 03:08 PM)SickBeast Wrote: Their GPUs are pretty good.  I have been very happy with my 280x.  Their drivers have come a long way as well.  The new interface is nice and they have been adding new features.  Actually I haven't had any driver issues with my card.

For a card originally released in 2011 and basically unchanged except for a clockspeed boost, it's OK.


However. It is now solidly midrange now and it barely runs 1080P with details maxed out; forget MSAA on the newer games and lower details on the latest demanding games. It is barely better than the GTX 680 which shipped only with 2GB of vRAM ...

Did I just say that ... ?
:D

I am seriously feeling better (still hurts) but at least I don't have to go sitting the entire day on the couch with my leg up. I'll be done in a bit and post a new topic when it is up.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)