Some news on Piledriver

trickynickyuk · 28 Jun 2012 at 01:04

well we just got to wait to see if they can pull it off i have a BD FX 8150 and it is fantastic performace wise

gurusan · 28 Jun 2012 at 01:05

Going to be another fail.

humbug · 28 Jun 2012 at 02:14

Tea_Bag said:
watch AMD go **** it up though by over pricing it.

They always do, but then drop the prices right down to well below Intel levels soon after.

Anyway, i have posted this a couple of times before, but here it is again.....

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/a10-5800k-a8-5600k-a6-5400k,review-32463-2.html

As you can see the clock for clock / core for core performance is up already on Trinity (vs Bulldozer) that matters when you think how much higher its also clocked (stock) Vishera FX 8350 will be a minimum of 4Ghz, 4 and 6 core Piledrivers will be higher, right now even the BD FX-4170 is clocked @ 4.2 - 4.3Ghz.

It probably will not catch up with Intel (stock) but will surpass Phenom II by about 10%, what that will do is bring it much closer to IB.

Beyond that it depends on how well it overclocks, i would think its probably going to be pretty good and a lot cooler than BD.

The whole article 'if you read it is not very complete' it almost feels like they were holding back from giving it the full treatment, and using Sandra to test that aspect of performance was also completely ridiculous given that they are supposed to be in the know, be that as it may they should know that Sandra does not use SSE3 and SSE4 on anything other than Intel CPU's, giving a completely false and skewed result.

Interesting that they cannot work out where the IPC increase has come from given that they rely on Sandra to tell them

Idiots!

Anyway, there are some good performance increases over Llano, and some not, a bit of a mixed bag but none the less a definite sign of things to come once the full beans Piledriver (Vishera FX 8350) is here.

PorkPieCat · 28 Jun 2012 at 03:32

let's see some decent competition! all it means is better prices, and more advancement in technology (though not for me, i already bought my 3570k

). i have unrealistic hopes that this comes along and fully competes with intel offerings. thanks for the link, i'll be watching this

Marine-RX179 · 28 Jun 2012 at 06:38

humbug said:
It probably will not catch up with Intel (stock) but will surpass Phenom II by about 10%, what that will do is bring it much closer to IB.

*Much closer" to IB is a bit too much...they are more like finally getting closer to 1st gen i5/i7 performance

humbug · 28 Jun 2012 at 09:49

Marine-RX179 said:
*Much closer" to IB is a bit too much...they are more like finally getting closer to 1st gen i5/i7 performance

IB is 3.8% IPC past SB, its a very small increase but yes i take your point

PS: SB is 2'nd Gen i5 / i7, not first. Phenom II is at least as old as 1'st gen ' i ' series and similar performance, AMD's (first) attempts since then has been the disaster that was Bulldozer, so you see AMD have not always been behind.

They always have been the underdogs given that their revenue is about 1% of that of Intel, yet historically AMD are the ones who have been the innovators, and still are, they have also proven they can beat their massive peers.

Intel once considered AMD such a threat they played dirty to try and shut them down, all that went to court in the end and Intel got busted for it, Despite that Intel's campaign largely succeeded, AMD are still trying to recover from that, AMD are slowly rebuilding themselves, and they will get there.

Never think of AMD as the whipping boy, Intel have far more respect for AMD's abilities than you know.

I would go as far as to say they have a constant nervous disposition, their constantly watching, awww c##p what are the inventing now? did you see Intel's reaction to APU's? they don't like them because they can see there potential and know they would struggle technically to keep up without some serious precious revenue spend.

JAGRocks09 · 28 Jun 2012 at 10:34

Did anyone else find that the article was a bit weak it was trying to say that the enhance clock mesh caused it but their comparison between Llano and Trinity 2.9ghz to 3.8ghz doesn't mean that it's the enhanced clock mesh at all, they have changed the Core architecture from Llano being Athlon based and Trinity being Piledriver based.

please correct me if I'm wrong

humbug · 28 Jun 2012 at 10:57

JAGRocks09 said:
Did anyone else find that the article was a bit weak it was trying to say that the enhance clock mesh caused it but their comparison between Llano and Trinity 2.9ghz to 3.8ghz doesn't mean that it's the enhanced clock mesh at all, they have changed the Core architecture from Llano being Athlon based and Trinity being Piledriver based.

please correct me if I'm wrong

Llano is a K10 Architecture, its the same one as Phenom II and Athlon II, only DIE shrunk. K10 has a shorter pipeline which is why floating point performance is faster, the Bulldozer arch is longer, as a result of that it is capable of higher factory clocks but as a trade off floating point is slower.

it has the resonant clock mesh and that helps with efficiency, but only by about 15% on a good day, Piledriver is somewhere between 40% and 50% more efficient than Bulldozer, as you may know Bulldozer is far less efficient than K10

No over statement here that is a colossal improvement! The problem is they can't see any mechanical deference in the architecture to explain it.

The resonant clock mesh does help with the higher clocks with in the same TDP, but no where near at that efficiency.

They can't see where, how, why... they are stumped and so ramble somewhat incoherently.

braveheart · 29 Jun 2012 at 19:48

no llano is k13 as bd is k15 and very soooooon for pd to come up, i will buy one after review first and see how much for the 8 core as i interesting to get 8350, im still using fx6200 just now

Martini1991 · 29 Jun 2012 at 20:48

I said pointless thread as it's nothing but a link to the highly questionable softpedia with nothing else in the OP.

We have a vague Q3 and clock speeds, tons of information there.

Don't see the need in being attacked by AMD fans, while I said nothing bad about AMD, I'd love for PD to kick the **** out of my 2500k.
Testy people.

Cyber-Mav · 30 Jun 2012 at 12:14

looks like amd have not learnt anything from thier mistakes. they still focusing on clock speeds. when its instructions per clock which they should be working on. no point in having a 4ghz amd which is slower than a 3ghz intel.

hope they price it cheap enough to make intel lower prices. then everyone can buy intel for cheaper cost.

humbug · 30 Jun 2012 at 12:34

Cyber-Mav said:
looks like amd have not learnt anything from thier mistakes. they still focusing on clock speeds. when its instructions per clock which they should be working on. no point in having a 4ghz amd which is slower than a 3ghz intel.

hope they price it cheap enough to make intel lower prices. then everyone can buy intel for cheaper cost.

Its not a mistake, its just a different way of doing it, IPC IS up 15% and Clock speed is up 10% plus.....

So they are Working on instructions per clock and Clock speed.

Pirata · 30 Jun 2012 at 13:35

In theorycrafting land, do you think it might close the gap enough to be a viable competition for the i5s?

I have been waiting for news about this as i never had an amd cpu and was hoping buldozzer was the one, but as we know it wasnt worth it.

I will keep reading and hoping amd release more info. Even if they are not enough to face i5s at least hope it forces intel to drop the pants a little bit!

humbug · 30 Jun 2012 at 13:58

Pirata said:
In theorycrafting land, do you think it might close the gap enough to be a viable competition for the i5s?

I have been waiting for news about this as i never had an amd cpu and was hoping buldozzer was the one, but as we know it wasnt worth it.

I will keep reading and hoping amd release more info. Even if they are not enough to face i5s at least hope it forces intel to drop the pants a little bit!

I think it will close the gap somewhat yes, we will have to wait and see

Martini1991 · 30 Jun 2012 at 14:07

If it's a 25% improvement, it'll sure make the gap smaller.
That 10 mile difference will become 5 miles

Not that I think PD will be 25%, more like 15%.

Pirata · 30 Jun 2012 at 14:26

Martini1991 said:
If it's a 25% improvement, it'll sure make the gap smaller.
That 10 mile difference will become 5 miles

Not that I think PD will be 25%, more like 15%.

Any definitive news about when will it be released?

Martini1991 · 30 Jun 2012 at 14:27

Pirata said:
Any definitive news about when will it be released?

Nope.
There's a vague Q3 rumour going around.
On past experiences Phenom to Phenom II it sounds plausible however.

Pirata · 30 Jun 2012 at 14:46

If AMD waits too long to release it, they might get stomped again by Haswell...

If i understood correctly they are meant to come out by the end of the year or Q1 2013 isnt it?

Martini1991 · 30 Jun 2012 at 14:59

Not a clue when Haswell's due, can't see it being this year.

humbug · 30 Jun 2012 at 16:53

Martini1991 said:
If it's a 25% improvement, it'll sure make the gap smaller.
That 10 mile difference will become 5 miles

Not that I think PD will be 25%, more like 15%.

Its already 25% faster than Bulldozer, look, read and think about it

Pirata said:
If AMD waits too long to release it, they might get stomped again by Haswell...

If i understood correctly they are meant to come out by the end of the year or Q1 2013 isnt it?

Steamroller <- have they been polling 6 year olds on naming them? ..... is due for late 2013 with more performance improvments, The FX Piledriver parts late this year, Trinity is about to hit the shops now.

'Trinity' <- good name.... so you can do it!!!