Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD FX-4100 Bulldozer

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by devius View Post
    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.
    70 maybe amd lower the price... and TDP you don't know the real consuming yet.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
      70 maybe amd lower the price... and TDP you don't know the real consuming yet.
      My 125W TDP FX-5180 has no problems eating 129W with light loads.
      Michael Larabel
      http://www.michaellarabel.com/

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Michael View Post
        My 125W TDP FX-5180 has no problems eating 129W with light loads.
        Wow an exclusive new CPU series?!

        @Q, power draw chart linked a few posts ago.

        @devius, nothing wrong with the architecture. The first iteration though... Not what AMD made it up to be. Very rough.
        Still deserves better treatment than what people have been giving it till now. Let's be honest here.

        I'm getting one for the prospect of poking around that new puppy.
        Last edited by PsynoKhi0; 10-19-2011, 05:41 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by PsynoKhi0 View Post
          Wow an exclusive new CPU series?!

          @Q, power draw chart linked a few posts ago.
          Errr too much multitasking, FX-8150.
          Michael Larabel
          http://www.michaellarabel.com/

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Michael View Post
            Errr too much multitasking, FX-8150.
            See! That CPU rips through highly threaded loads, you can't keep up!

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
              i do not understand the word "chit"
              Chit chatting is basically small talk / light informal conversation
              Last edited by deanjo; 10-19-2011, 06:06 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Michael View Post
                Errr too much multitasking, FX-8150.
                read better next time we talk about a fx4000...

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                  Chit chatting is basically small talk / light informal conversation
                  if a i3 dualcore do have 2 integer units pro core they talk about a dualcore with hyperthreating

                  but if a FX4000 do have 2 integer units pro module they talk about a bad quatcore.

                  in my point of view this is Chit chatting!

                  but i do not chit chatting i'm telling the truth the FX4000 cpu is a dual-core with a hardware based hyper-threating and intel do have software based hyper-threating.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Michael View Post
                    My 125W TDP FX-5180 has no problems eating 129W with light loads.
                    That is what the turbo mode is about, isn't it? To make the CPU operate at its TDP limit, to get the most speed out of it. And unless you measure DC power draw, your PSU efficiency will eat a bit as well.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
                      And unless you measure DC power draw, your PSU efficiency will eat a bit as well.
                      There's new registers on the 15h/Bulldozer parts to be able to measure current power usage for the CPU itself, and the Phoronix Test Suite is now able to monitor that during tests.
                      Michael Larabel
                      http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Michael View Post
                        There's new registers on the 15h/Bulldozer parts to be able to measure current power usage for the CPU itself, and the Phoronix Test Suite is now able to monitor that during tests.
                        Well it allows you to measure "estimated" current draw. It operates much the same as how the thermal sensing in the AMD Phenoms work where it doesn't give the true temperature but a calculated difference from nominal.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Michael View Post
                          There's new registers on the 15h/Bulldozer parts to be able to measure current power usage for the CPU itself, and the Phoronix Test Suite is now able to monitor that during tests.
                          Interesting. And that shows the TDP exceeded continuously? Short term is also a turbo mode feature.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                            i do not understand the word "chit" do you mean shit?




                            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.
                            I dont think your understanding whats going on here....

                            Hyperthreading uses a method of multhreading called SMT, which stands for Symmetric MultiThreading The front end is capable of decoding up to 4 instructions per cycle. Those 4 instructions can be either from a single thread or from 2 threads. They then get fed into an instruction scheduler that issues the instructions into a set of ALUs and AGUs... This is a SINGLE superscaler pipeline.

                            BD architecture uses a method of multithreading called SMP, which stands for Symmetric MultiProcessing. The front end is capable of decoding up to 4 instructions per cycle. Those 4 instructions can be either from a single thread or from 2 threads. Then instructions from the first thread are fed into the instruction scheduler for the first int processor, and instructions from the second thread get fed into the instruction scheduler for the second int processor. Floating Point instructions, regardless of which thread it came from are fed into a dedicated scheduler for the FlexFP Pipeline. Per -thread- there will be 2 pipelines used, 1 for integer instructions and 1 for floating point instructions, but they work together as a single superscaler pipeline. Per -module- there will be 3 pipelines used, 2 int pipelines, one for each thread, which both share 1 fp pipeline, but they function independently as 2 superscaler pipelines.

                            Sandybridge does --NOT-- have 2 int pipeline per core. Also you are using the term ALU wrong. It stands for Arithmetic Logic Unit.. Of these each core on sandybridge has a variety of different types. It has 3 different types of int ALUs --per-- core. Each one is used for executing different types of integer instructions. The SIMD units are used for FP operations.

                            BD has 2 int pipelines per module. Each pipeline has 2 int ALUs. Both of the are mostly identical, though they do have some small differences. Keep in mind that each thread only has access to -ONE- pipeline, so per thread only 2 ALUs.

                            Hope this clears up some of your confusion. Though I understand this stuff, I'm not very good at describing it... Here are some of the best descriptions I've found. Please take the time to read them so you can improve your understanding.

                            Sandy Bridge Architecture. http://realworldtech.com/page.cfm?Ar...1810191937&p=1
                            Bulldozer Architecture http://realworldtech.com/page.cfm?Ar...WT082610181333
                            Last edited by duby229; 10-19-2011, 08:47 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                              I dont think your understanding whats going on here....
                              your thinking is wrong i know this ALL but you don't understand my argument my argument is about the practice.
                              there is no difference for the software if there is a longer pipeline splits up by hyper-threating compared to 2 shorter pipelines.
                              the Core- I3 act like a quatcore but it isn't a quatcore and the FX4000 act like a Quatcore but it isn't a quatcore.
                              an actor isn't a real one.
                              it doesn't matter if a Actor use the technique SMT or the Actor used the technique SMP
                              the I3 is a dualcore Actor imitate a 4core cpu with SMT
                              the FX4000 is a dualcore Actor imitate a 4core cpu with SMP.
                              for the consumer there is no difference for multi-core applications.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                EDIT: damn edit limit, even increased I still run into it....

                                I wanted to try and clear up what I was saying about pipelines... The front end of an architecture basically ends after the instructions are decoded and stored in the instruction que. Then the backend starts. In Sandybridge, there is only -1- instruction scheduler which issues instructions to execution units regardless of whether they ae from the first thread or the second thread, or whether they are fp or integer... In Bulldozer there is -3- instruction schedulers, 1 for each integer processor, and 1 for the floating point processor.

                                That is why I do -NOT- consider a bulldozer module as 2 cores. if AMD wanted to use that terminology then it should have been called 3 asynchronous cores. But, functionally it takes 1 bulldozer module to equal the capability of 1 sandybridge core, so in the sense of what Intel calls a core, then it would take a full module to be a core.

                                SO IF 1 MODULE = 1 CORE THEN 1 MODULE IS 1 CORE

                                FX-4000 series = 2 modules with 4 Int processors and 2 FP processors
                                FX-6000 series = 3 modules with 6 Int processors and 3 FP processors
                                FX-6000 series = 4 modules with 8 Int processors and 4 FP processors
                                Last edited by duby229; 10-19-2011, 09:20 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X