AMD Bulldozer Microprocessors May Not Bring Dramatic Performance Boosts.

[PraxxtorCruel]

AMD Expects 16-Core Microprocessors to Be 50% Faster than 12-Core Chips

Analysts and market observers have expected Advanced Micro Devices' code-named Bulldozer microprocessors to tangibly boost performance compared to the company's today's chips. But while from architectural standpoints Bulldozer looks impressive, the company itself does not make claims about extraordinary performance improvements. In fact, "per-core" performance of the new Bulldozer-based processors will be only slightly higher compared to contemporary chips.

"From a performance standpoint, if you compare our 16-core Interlagos to our current 12-core AMD Opteron 6100-series processors (code named “Magny Cours”) we estimate that customers will see up to 50% more performance from 33% more cores. This means we expect the per core performance to go in the right direction - up," explained John Fruehe, the director of product marketing for server/workstation products at AMD.

While "per core" performance of Bulldozer may not be that impressive, the new chip designs may allow AMD to clock the forthcoming microprocessors higher without increase of power consumption and heat dissipation or to pack more cores into the next-generation processors without any running into thermal problems.

Based on the information provided by AMD during its annual Analyst Day last November, the first Bulldozer micro-architecture desktop/workstation chip code-named Zambezi (which belongs to Orochi family, according to the firm) will feature eight x86 processing engines with a multithreading technology, two 128-bit FMAC floating point units, shared L2 cache, shared L3 cache as well as integrated memory controller. AMD also states that the new CPU will feature “extensive new power management innovations”. The new chips that belong to Bulldozer family will also support Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) that support 256-bit FP operations. Based on a diagram that AMD demonstrated in the past, the company intends to dramatically improve multithreading performance of its CPUs with the help of two INT schedulers, an FP scheduler and separate data caches for each of four cores should do the job very well.

In the second quarter of calendar 2010 the world's second largest supplier of central processing units taped out the first Bulldozer microprocessors. The "tape out" means that the artwork for the photomask of a circuit is sent to manufacturing. While it is unclear at this point whether AMD had already received samples of the Bulldozer processors back from manufacturing and assembling or at least manufactured wafers from Globalfoundries, given that the company on Tuesday made the first Bulldozer performance-related statements, it is likely that the firm has first samples at hands.

 

[JonJ678]

Might They Not? Shocking.

 

[drunkenmaster]

Firstly he's talking about compared to a server only chip right now, so likely to be talking about specific applications, and their 12 core server chip is no slouch.

ITs also debateable exactly what he means, Bulldozer essentially comes with two interger "cores" within each what would normally be called a core, so he could actually be saying a 8 cored Bulldozer, with 16 interger cores and 8 shared FPU units is faster than their 12 separate core current chip, which would actually indicate an absolutely humoungous IPC improvement, just catagorised differently.

Supposedly the shared FPU architecture means that a second interger unit, means a "2 core unit" for Bulldozer only takes up 5% more space than a normal single core Phenom style core.

SO the first desktop chips seem set to actually be "4 unit/4 pairs of interger cores/8 core cpu" , but its not entirely clear, we might end up with 8 unit/16 core chips very quickly, its hard to know exactly what they are aiming for as they are being far quieter about Bulldozer than Intel normally are with new architectures.

Its not in AMD's best interests to publically say how fast it might be before its available and have Intel maybe raise clocks on Sandybridge to counter any speed advantage AMD might eek out.

I'd expect the server chips, especially a 16 core one, vs a 12 core one, would face some pretty significant scaling problems with bandwidth aswell, so you really can't know the limitation on that specific platform.

SImply being 32nm on a much improved process means a P2 on 32nm would be around half the size, use 2/3rds the power and be able to clock higher, adding a new architecture that is at least a decent wedge faster in IPC will only make it more competitive. Cost to produce means they can produce and sell 8 core chips at the same price point as quad cores now.

 

[Echo]

Come on pull your finger out AMD, Intel R&D have been twiddling their thumbs since July 2006!

 

[Redmint]

Considering it's the first real architecture change since the single core Athlon 64s most people are expecting something good, lets hope it's at least a decent step forward from the Phenom IIs.

 

[SirCanealot]

I'm really hoping AMD can pull a trick or two out of their hat with this one, too. They've been working their nuts off for a while now, and it'll be great to see Intel pushed again.

As everyone says, the competition can only be good for us consumers!

I mean, imagine if AMD current crop performed as well as the i7 line clock for clock... Intel wouldn't have a chance with AMD's prices

 

[Baboonanza]

Intel could easily undercut AMD in every consumer market segment if they wanted to, but it's not in their interest. They can control 75+% of the market while charging premium prices for the 'Intel' brand, and keeping AMD alive also keeps the regulators off their backs.

I guess the server market may be more competetive, I don't know enough about it.

 

[Meaker]

A 16 core bulldozer is like an 8 core with HT.

An 8 core CPU 50% faster than a native 12 core?

Thats pretty amazing.

 

[theforce]

I also have high hopes for Bulldozer. A new architecture with better performance per core, built on a smaller process could only mean good things.

Seems it is time to start saving for a new Bulldozer system.

 

[PermaBanned]

The whole point of Bulldozer is that it's supposed to be able to run a single thread across multiple cores, allowing people to actually make use of them without a lot of effort in the programming department which never yields anywhere near 100% efficiency.

 

[Redmint]

Ooh I didn't actually know that, sounds good if it works.

 

[mrteabag]

Worth waiting?

 

[cavemanoc]

The whole point of Bulldozer is that it's supposed to be able to run a single thread across multiple cores, allowing people to actually make use of them without a lot of effort in the programming department which never yields anywhere near 100% efficiency.

If they do manage to pull this off we could see a phenomenal leap forward in terms of how much we get out of our machines in 'day to day' operations. I dearly hope they can get close to achieving this goal as it would, again, be the proverbial rabbit out of the hat and might just ignite a bit of competition again!

 

[ZXSpectrum]

The whole point of Bulldozer is that it's supposed to be able to run a single thread across multiple cores, allowing people to actually make use of them without a lot of effort in the programming department which never yields anywhere near 100% efficiency.

I have not heard that either.. there was talk about that being integrated into corei7 but never made it..

It would be great if a cpu that had 8 cores at 2.5Ghz would run at 2.5Ghz if all the cores were in use but if the program was just single threaded it could merge the speed of the cores and create a 20Ghz CPU...

Now that would be

 

[Jayster]

I have not heard that either.. there was talk about that being integrated into corei7 but never made it..

It would be great if a cpu that had 8 cores at 2.5Ghz would run at 2.5Ghz if all the cores were in use but if the program was just single threaded it could merge the speed of the cores and create a 20Ghz CPU...

Now that would be

Interesting indeed

 

[djkav]

I'm waiting to see thats these integer modules will do in terms of performance. It sounds more like a Cell style of processor than the traditional cores.

Its nice to see them looking at new methods of increasing processing power now that we are hitting the edge of what we can do with silicon.

 

[Sylver123]

If this single thread across multiple cores thing really does work, I wonder how long it`ll take Intel to implant something similar into their chips or if they will even have too, to stay competitive.

 

[PraxxtorCruel]

Personally I feel, people who currently have the 980x in their systems are not gonna see much (if any) difference between the new tec coming out and what they have now,.

 

[Gashman]

If this single thread across multiple cores thing really does work, I wonder how long it`ll take Intel to implant something similar into their chips or if they will even have too, to stay competitive.

chances are that A) if bulldozer does infact run single threads over several cores the current intel processors shouldn't stand a chance in single threaded applications (example), but you would likely notice less domination as the amount of threads went up, back to the whole one intel core vs. one AMD core at that level. personally will believe it when i see it, would love AMD to pull something like that off but i can't see it personally, intel R&D haven't been sitting around doing nothing for these years of 'core' dominance so i doubt it will give AMD a clear cut advantage, maybe at first but wouldn't expect it to last long. intel is the only way to go these days, they're simply offering the superior processors at the moment.

 

[Gashman]

If they do manage to pull this off we could see a phenomenal leap forward in terms of how much we get out of our machines in 'day to day' operations. I dearly hope they can get close to achieving this goal as it would, again, be the proverbial rabbit out of the hat and might just ignite a bit of competition again!

well speaking from my own point of view here, nothing i do day to day (except gaming) would likely see a major improvement, what sort of 'day to day' things are you referring to here? what are your day to day activities...? just curious by the way