Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD FX-4100 Bulldozer

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
    this cpu will speed up by 3% for the cache kernel patch and 10% for the scheduler kernel patch and maybe 20% for the compiler patches.
    also as i know amd will upgrade the micro code in the bios to fix some speed bugs.

    but yes technically this cpu is a dual-core with some extra Integer help units.

    If some one need a true quatcore with greater speed from amd he can get the Opteron 6204.
    but yes 400 isn't cheap.
    A dual core with 2 Millions transistors? Quite huge for being a dual core...

    Comment


    • #17
      Anyway, it looks comparable to an i3 in terms of price and performance.

      I'd like to know more about power consumption -- how do all these extra transistors affect it?

      If power consumption is comparable, then this particular processor is OK. Even if there are doubts is the architecture can compare with intel's high-end offerings in the near to mid future.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by blackshard View Post
        A dual core with 2 Millions transistors? Quite huge for being a dual core...
        it dosn't matter how much transistors it is in FACT a dual-core.,

        Comment


        • #19
          Anyone happen to know if there's any newer kernel patches than http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux..../focus=1170744 for Bulldozer? Google hasn't turned up any others, just checking.
          Michael Larabel
          http://www.michaellarabel.com/

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
            it dosn't matter how much transistors it is in FACT a dual-core.,
            Sound more like a dual-core-plus-dual-half-cores. Basically they added more of the circuits that are most commonly used, especially under a server type load, but probably not so good for a lot of multimedia competing for the same FP unit.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by -Cas- View Post
              I wondered if this image below is from the Anandtech review of the processor helps clear up some of the confusion with how the processor can be optimised. The issue seems to be getting 'turbo core' enabled and directing threads with shared data to the same core.

              Is the situation the same under Linux?
              Coupled with this it should interesting. Reassigning thread - core priorities?
              Last edited by PsynoKhi0; 10-19-2011, 12:27 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                it dosn't matter how much transistors it is in FACT a dual-core.,
                It matters if you're interested in technology and its development.
                It doesn't matter if you're chit-chatting.

                I'm not chit-chatting, are you?

                errata corrige: those are two *billion* transistors, and actually it is the number of transistor of the FX 8000 series (8 integer ALUs, 4 FPUS, AMD sells it as an 8-core processor), but since FX-4000 series is the same processor as FX-8000 with some non-functional units, they share the same 2 billion transistor design.
                The fact it has 2 billion transistors matters even when you're talking about *power*. Actually FX 8000 series is really awful, I expect that FX 4000 series is almost as awful as its bigger brother.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by blackshard View Post
                  It matters if you're interested in technology and its development.
                  It doesn't matter if you're chit-chatting.

                  I'm not chit-chatting, are you?

                  errata corrige: those are two *billion* transistors, and actually it is the number of transistor of the FX 8000 series (8 integer ALUs, 4 FPUS, AMD sells it as an 8-core processor), but since FX-4000 series is the same processor as FX-8000 with some non-functional units, they share the same 2 billion transistor design.
                  The fact it has 2 billion transistors matters even when you're talking about *power*. Actually FX 8000 series is really awful, I expect that FX 4000 series is almost as awful as its bigger brother.
                  Are you sure the FX-4000 series will be an 8Core/4Module CPU with 2 modules turned off? It would seem strange to go through the trouble of making the whole Module design and then not use it.. At the same time I guess considering it has the full 8Mb L3 cache which from what I saw was split up in 4 parts on the die on the 8Core. Some of the Idle numbers show that the new CPU isn't too bad, but definitely load, and OC on the 8150, that was just insane, there's a hopefully room for improvement considering this is an entirely new arch. but boy does it need it as well :P.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Medallish View Post
                    Are you sure the FX-4000 series will be an 8Core/4Module CPU with 2 modules turned off?
                    It most probably is, at least for the first batch.
                    From what I've read production costs for one die per series would be higher (especially with the first production runs, if you factor in that yield improvements would have to be duplicated across all dies), plus they can sell chips that don't meet the QA requirements for the top-of-the-line instead of just binning them.
                    It's a trick that's been used for a while. I think the first Athlon II were actually Phenom II with L3 cache cut off. Phenom II x2 could also have extra cores unlocked. Provided the motherboard allows it, it might still be possible with BD.
                    There's no guarantee though, and there might be some trade-offs (higher vcore for stable operation, lower overclockability etc.)

                    @blackshard: power draw from the FX-4100 is better than Deneb. Ditto for FX-6100 vs Thuban Link
                    Last edited by PsynoKhi0; 10-19-2011, 01:34 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by PsynoKhi0 View Post
                      It's a trick that's been used for a while. I think the first Athlon II were actually Phenom II with L3 cache cut off.
                      It's much older than that.

                      486SX was just a 486DX with the FPU disabled.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                        It's much older than that.

                        486SX was just a 486DX with the FPU disabled.
                        Meh you got me there... I should have kept the examples to disabled cores

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                          The facts people are missing is this:
                          The CPU is a dual core, but has the physical elements making it seem like a quad core, but it really isn't.
                          Actually the fact is that there is no industry accepted definition of what a core is comprised of.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Michael View Post
                            Anyone happen to know if there's any newer kernel patches than http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux..../focus=1170744 for Bulldozer? Google hasn't turned up any others, just checking.
                            i think right now window8 do have more patches in the windows kernel...

                            windows8 does have a scheduler patch with +10% speed

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by blackshard View Post
                              It matters if you're interested in technology and its development.
                              It doesn't matter if you're chit-chatting.
                              I'm not chit-chatting, are you?
                              i do not understand the word "chit" do you mean shit?


                              Originally posted by blackshard View Post
                              I
                              errata corrige: those are two *billion* transistors, and actually it is the number of transistor of the FX 8000 series (8 integer ALUs, 4 FPUS, AMD sells it as an 8-core processor), but since FX-4000 series is the same processor as FX-8000 with some non-functional units, they share the same 2 billion transistor design.
                              The fact it has 2 billion transistors matters even when you're talking about *power*. Actually FX 8000 series is really awful, I expect that FX 4000 series is almost as awful as its bigger brother.
                              8 integer ALUs sound like a 8 core cpu but the 4 core intel cpus also do have 8 integer ALUs.

                              also i 4*128bit FPUs and 4*256bit SIMD units.

                              The SIMD units tells us 4 core for the FX8000 and the FPU couns also 4.

                              the FX4000 is a dualcore in AVX256bit and its a dualcore in Floadingpoint Calculation and its a Dualcore in Integer to if you count the overall Integer units in an intel CPU because there are 2 integer units per intel core. FX4000 integer count=4 intel dualcore integer count=4

                              it is a dualcore in all criteria.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Wow... talk about sucking ass. I would like AMD to come up with an awesome new cpu architecture as much as the next guy, but this is a really terrible one. 3,6GHz with 3,8GHz "turbo"? 200 extra MHz are sure to make a huge difference. </sarcasm> This would be an awesome CPU if it cost 70 and had a 65W (or less) TDP.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X