DM in rant shocker
No one's said IPC hasn't increased.
A BD core could be 10% higher than a Phenom II core, but due to a modules design, when it's executing two threads, due to the shared resources, there is a performance hit, you're just trying to debate it's not that high.
Like I've said, it could be better, it could be worse.
Compare an FX6100 at 3.3GHZ against an 1100T in fritz at 6 threads (At stock), if they're the same performance, I'm right, if it's lower, I overestimated BD, if it's higher, I'm wrong
Then, compare them using a thread each.
Then 2 threads each, all the way through to 5, as you've already done 6.
The problem is as said, you're basing this all off a quote that afaik, you've misunderstood.
All chips, bar none, don't scale at 100% increase in performance for each thread, this never happens, you're making a big deal about this 80%, when the quote was nothing to do with scaling, at all, in any way.
I didn't say it would be slow, or fast, that scaling would be good, or bad, or that a single thread on a module wouldn't be faster than two threads, it should be, why wouldn't it be, it is on every other chip ever made.
The problem is drawing one conclusion from an incorrect piece of information isn't right, even if the result ends up the same.
I could say, a 6970 is slower than a 580gtx, because there isn't a black hole in our solar system, I could take the fact that a 6970 IS slower as proof of a black hole, that doesn't make that assumption correct.
The quote, as said, is that a
MODULE, not the second thread in a module, would have roughly 80% the performance of some theoretical core they could potentially otherwise make that would be bigger for each core.
There is no hint, no indication that a second thread will scale at 80%, as with all other multicore chips, in some workloads it will scale badly, and in some, better.
I'm not in any way trying to argue the scaling WILL be better than 80%, in some situations it
WILL be worse and in some it will be better. You're completely ignoring the fact that a hexcore Phenom doesn't scale at 100% either, even if Fritz scales quite well(but still not 100%), doesn't mean it does in everything, nor that a different architecture will scale well in the same things.
At its best Phenom 2 can do 3 interger instructions per clock, Bulldozer can do 2, but it can do 2 other things per clock aswell. Some benchmarks may/may not respond well to that. Look at Intel chips on superpi, it gives a highly unreleastic real world performance comparison because of the particular design of the chip, in real software and most benchmarks the i7 can't perform as superpi indicates.
Either way, you won't be right in any of the scenarios you gave, you weren't talking about outright performance, but scaling, you'd need to say a maximum of 80% increase in performance in basically every benchmark to prove the scaling is 80%, the problem still remains is that AMD have not claimed the second core in a module only scales at 80%, this is something you're extracted from a quote that said nothing of the sort.
And with the loss of Dirk and Rick, that's only gone down
It hasn't actually, the industry has seen Rory Read's appointment as a good thing, and has upgraded its buy status in several analyst companies based on the markets they are likely to go after and the success they've had.
They've also hired guys who are FAR more successful in terms of enterprise/corporate markets, which is where AMD needs some market share to start being really profitable. Nvidia is all but eating the cost of sales to gain market share in desktop and isn't very profitable at all, but the enterprise/corporate/professional sales are making HUGE profit for Nvidia.
It seems Rick Bergman was fired:
http://www.hardocp.com/news/2011/09/22/amd_fires_rick_bergman_under_cloud_mystery
It is down to the fact that GF cannot supply enough 32NM parts. On top of this Zacate production was not enough too as the company had not ordered enough chips. He also was not elected for the CEO position.
The article says:
"We understand that Bergman will be the first of the dominoes to fall."
ITs bullcrap, AMD can't make its chips anywhere but Glofo, this was a decision from years and years ago, AMD couldn't make any high end chip anywhere but AMD/Intel fabs, Intel aren't an option, Glofo is ramping up and having problems, he wouldn't in any way get fired over Glofo failing to provide them enough chips. It was likely Bergman who got them on a per chip pricing contract rather than per wafer, which is probably saving them millions upon millions as Glofo has issues with 32nm. It doesn't matter who is put in charge, or who could have been in charge, Glofo make AMD's chips and theres no other option for AMD.
Every other source is claiming Bergman walked because he thought he should be CEO, which maybe he should have been.
