Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD's comeback with the Cyclos-Clock-Engine arming up the Piledriver

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

  • AMD's comeback with the Cyclos-Clock-Engine arming up the Piledriver

    Cyclos clock engine is based on the Resonance effect the clock engine don't need to push every clock it only need to fill up the resonance.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonant_frequency

    Resonance also means it recycling energy.

    this means the 8core-Piledriver will get a base clock of 4ghz and more with the turbo.

    http://www.golem.de/news/prozessoren...202-89965.html

    Last edited by Qaridarium; 02-22-2012, 03:26 PM.

  • #2
    http://www.gamestar.de/hardware/news...iledriver.html

    "Laut Samuel Naffziger von AMD war die sogenannte »Resonant Clock Mesh Technology« problemlos in den bisherigen Herstellungsprozess zu integrieren und die ersten produzierten Prozessoren hätten die Erwartungen erfüllt. Allerdings gab Naffziger auch zu, dass die Investition in die zuvor ungetestete neue Technik ein gewisses Risiko darstellte, das sich nun ausgezahlt habe."

    Samuel Naffziger pointed out that it was a high risk to bet on this untested technique but in the end amd win and now amd earn 10% more clock speed for free with the same power consuming.

    in may point of view this and ZRAM makes it possible for amd to beat intels 22nm cpu with a 32nm process.

    Comment


    • #3
      I don't understand how this increases clock speeds. Generating a fast clock is one thing; actually meeting setup time on all your flops is another.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
        I don't understand how this increases clock speeds. Generating a fast clock is one thing; actually meeting setup time on all your flops is another.
        it increases clock speed because it reduce the heat and then you can clock higher in the same TDP.

        and it reduce the heat because it does recycling the electrons in the vibrating laboring and then the stored electrons push in the next cycle.

        all other clock engines only push electrons this clock engine don't push electrons it vibrating pushes the laboring big difference!

        because of this you need coils and condensers for the vibrating laboring directly on the core-die

        if the vibration laboring hits the resonance frequency you need ZERO energy to hold the clock!

        because of this the new clock engine pushes the laboring always to the resonance frequency-

        the resonance is very powerful:

        Comment


        • #5
          AMD FX-Series FX-8150, 8x 3.60GHz Turbo 4.20GHz

          the new Piledriver amd cpu will have 4ghz and 4,6ghz turbo clock.

          and the new CPU name: AMD FX²-Series FX²-8250, 8x 4GHz Turbo 4.60GHz (Piledriver)
          Last edited by Qaridarium; 02-24-2012, 09:36 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
            http://www.gamestar.de/hardware/news/prozessoren/2565069/amd_piledriver.html

            "Laut Samuel Naffziger von AMD war die sogenannte »Resonant Clock Mesh Technology« problemlos in den bisherigen Herstellungsprozess zu integrieren und die ersten produzierten Prozessoren hätten die Erwartungen erfüllt. Allerdings gab Naffziger auch zu, dass die Investition in die zuvor ungetestete neue Technik ein gewisses Risiko darstellte, das sich nun ausgezahlt habe."

            Samuel Naffziger pointed out that it was a high risk to bet on this untested technique but in the end amd win and now amd earn 10% more clock speed for free with the same power consuming.

            in may point of view this and ZRAM makes it possible for amd to beat intels 22nm cpu with a 32nm process.

            LOL Qaridarium, "amd comeback" indeed, Cyclos's "resonant clock mesh technology" finally licenced by AMD after ARM already partnered with Cyclos in the early days (now you know one of the reasons why AMD were at the ARM venues and part of that PR) is for lowering the power envelope OR increasing the clocks as a side benefit, and lets be honest here AMD FX-Series FX-8150,Piledriver and all the rest need all the help they can get to lower the power and hopefully speed up the data throughput for a given watt even if they managed to slightly hand optimise the slow throughput "auto design" errors noone at amd bothered to correct the first time around.


            i really cant beleave your still falling for the AMD PR innovators sale pitch today, sure they can advertise 4.6ghz as a valid Number due to this 3rd party licencing deal, and they are first to use it commercially rather than ARM, they have their constantly evolving version sat on a tech bench waiting for the right time to put it into production, might as well let amd go through the pain of ramp up, "Cyclos announced a proof of concept processor implementation based on the ARM926EJ-processor in 2008 under the name "Project Elizabeth" along with the availability of design tool support."


            but ARM dont need to bring down the (milli)watts as a priority, AMD sure do today compared to intel, but thats beside the point , AMD are using this (anyone can)license tech today as it allows them to recycle more product from their yield waffers as in some cases yields actually improve when using resonant clock meshes with better power savings rather than generic clocks today, and even if that wasnt the case, as dan (ganousis) CEO of cyclos says "Most design teams today are quite happy to accept a small yield penalty in exchange for 10% total power reduction anyways."

            and whats your point with Zram, everyone knows MRAM is faster,cheaper and better ,plus already in commercial production OC for the longer term
            Last edited by popper; 02-24-2012, 06:15 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by popper View Post
              LOL Qaridarium, "amd comeback" indeed, Cyclos's "resonant clock mesh technology" finally licenced by AMD after ARM already partnered with Cyclos in the early days (now you know one of the reasons why AMD were at the ARM venues and part of that PR) is for lowering the power envelope OR increasing the clocks as a side benefit, and lets be honest here AMD FX-Series FX-8150,Piledriver and all the rest need all the help they can get to lower the power and hopefully speed up the data throughput for a given watt even if they managed to slightly hand optimise the slow throughput "auto design" errors noone at amd bothered to correct the first time around.


              i really cant beleave your still falling for the AMD PR innovators sale pitch today, sure they can advertise 4.6ghz as a valid Number due to this 3rd party licencing deal, and they are first to use it commercially rather than ARM, they have their constantly evolving version sat on a tech bench waiting for the right time to put it into production, might as well let amd go through the pain of ramp up, "Cyclos announced a proof of concept processor implementation based on the ARM926EJ-processor in 2008 under the name "Project Elizabeth" along with the availability of design tool support."


              but ARM dont need to bring down the (milli)watts as a priority, AMD sure do today compared to intel, but thats beside the point , AMD are using this (anyone can)license tech today as it allows them to recycle more product from their yield waffers as in some cases yields actually improve when using resonant clock meshes with better power savings rather than generic clocks today, and even if that wasnt the case, as dan (ganousis) CEO of cyclos says "Most design teams today are quite happy to accept a small yield penalty in exchange for 10% total power reduction anyways."

              and whats your point with Zram, everyone knows MRAM is faster,cheaper and better ,plus already in commercial production OC for the longer term
              wood??? i write nothing wrong and you turn it into a hate speech.. LOL

              I'm happy about Cyclos's "resonant clock mesh technology" and you turn it into : "i really cant beleave your still falling for the AMD PR innovators sale pitch today,"

              and then you come with a Troll move ARM vs x86 but in fact AMD USE IT FIRST the Cyclos engine.

              you really buy ARM if you want a 64bit-highend system ? ? are you MAD man?

              and then you really compare Zram to Mram?? are you mad? you really compare volatile memory to non-volatile memory ???

              and be sure Zram is the cheapest ram ever build because you only need 1 transistor for every bit and Zero-capacitor.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-RAM

              whatever i buy ARM if they get nativ 64bit for NAS systems and Servers and Routers.

              so be happy i'm not a ARM hater.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                wood??? i write nothing wrong and you turn it into a hate speech.. LOL

                I'm happy about Cyclos's "resonant clock mesh technology" and you turn it into : "i really cant beleave your still falling for the AMD PR innovators sale pitch today,"

                and then you come with a Troll move ARM vs x86 but in fact AMD USE IT FIRST the Cyclos engine.

                you really buy ARM if you want a 64bit-highend system ? ? are you MAD man?

                and then you really compare Zram to Mram?? are you mad? you really compare volatile memory to non-volatile memory ???

                and be sure Zram is the cheapest ram ever build because you only need 1 transistor for every bit and Zero-capacitor.

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-RAM

                whatever i buy ARM if they get nativ 64bit for NAS systems and Servers and Routers.

                so be happy i'm not a ARM hater.
                LOL perhaps its a German thing but how you turn that in to a "hate speech" iv no idea...

                i actually like you Qaridarium and ill actually make the time to read your many badly translated posts several times to see if you have a good point to make and agree with it if so.

                I'm happy about Cyclos's "resonant clock mesh technology" and you turn it into : "i really cant beleave your still falling for the AMD PR innovators sale pitch today,"
                you appear happy that a larger ghz number is involved as the reason and the basis for your so called amd to "come back", not the real reason why Cyclos's resonant clock mesh technology is really interesting, and that is all this is "interesting", not something to base a so called amd comeback on, its that simple, dont go reading anything more in to it.

                you really compare volatile memory to non-volatile memory
                again you miss the point, ill spell it out, volatile memory needs constant power to refresh it, non-volatile memory does not, mram is as fast and durable as generic volatile memory dram today and its in production now,the only downside right now is density.

                will it become the standard everywhere to lower the ram power budget, perhaps not, but it does stand a chance sure, one things for sure the industry as a whole needs something right now to replace the crap write cycle endurance of solid-statememory/NAND-based flash memory and their currently best 533-megabit-per-second DDR interface NAND device implemented in sub-20-nm technology
                Last edited by popper; 02-24-2012, 07:43 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by popper View Post
                  LOL perhaps its a German thing but how you turn that in to a "hate speech" iv no idea...

                  i actually like you Qaridarium and ill actually make the time to read your many badly translated posts several times to see if you have a good point to make and agree with it if so.
                  yes thank you.

                  Originally posted by popper View Post
                  you appear happy that a larger ghz number is involved as the reason and the basis for your so called amd to "come back", not the real reason why Cyclos's resonant clock mesh technology is really interesting, and that is all this is "interesting", not something to base a so called amd comeback on, its that simple, dont go reading anything more in to it.
                  Yes I'm happy abour more GHZ and why does this technique does not help amd to "comeback" ?

                  Originally posted by popper View Post
                  again you miss the point, ill spell it out, volatile memory needs constant power to refresh it, non-volatile memory does not, mram is as fast and durable as generic volatile memory dram today and its in production now,the only downside right now is density.
                  no i don't miss the point because ZRAM is the ram with the highest density ever! (and the energy consuming is very low)
                  so we are saying the same with different words.
                  you can use mram+zram!

                  Originally posted by popper View Post
                  will it become the standard everywhere to lower the ram power budget, perhaps not, but it does stand a chance sure, one things for sure the industry as a whole needs something right now to replace the crap write cycle endurance of solid-statememory/NAND-based flash memory and their currently best 533-megabit-per-second DDR interface NAND device implemented in sub-20-nm technology
                  sure MRAM are better than Flash.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Well when you read the full article then piledriver will only save 5-10% energy. When you look at fx-61/81 that would mean that piledriver will use at max 1x w less, so still around 110w. When you look at ivb, then intel will use also less energy, from 95w to 77w (quad cores). And intel only needs 4 true cores to match that funny 8/4 core mix of amd amd definitely needs too much energy for the speed you get from it. in order to keep up with intel amd needs to rise the frequency way over 4 ghz. when you look at the single core speed then amd is not even faster than the i3 entry cpus (maybe even a higher clocked pentium g is enough). just by comparing an amd cpu vs intel cpu at same clock speed with cinebench in single core mode you should be able to interpolate the frequency amd needs to keep up with intel - just throwing more cores into the chip does not solve this basic issue...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Kano View Post
                      Well when you read the full article then piledriver will only save 5-10% energy. When you look at fx-61/81 that would mean that piledriver will use at max 1x w less, so still around 110w. When you look at ivb, then intel will use also less energy, from 95w to 77w (quad cores). And intel only needs 4 true cores to match that funny 8/4 core mix of amd amd definitely needs too much energy for the speed you get from it. in order to keep up with intel amd needs to rise the frequency way over 4 ghz. when you look at the single core speed then amd is not even faster than the i3 entry cpus (maybe even a higher clocked pentium g is enough). just by comparing an amd cpu vs intel cpu at same clock speed with cinebench in single core mode you should be able to interpolate the frequency amd needs to keep up with intel - just throwing more cores into the chip does not solve this basic issue...
                      but a higher clock rate do solve this basic issue! because of this this new clock engine is so important!

                      now you point out that amd need more yes more they do have zram but if wikipedia is right then they don't use it right now.

                      so yes it is posible to fix both the power consuming and the speed!

                      amd only need to put ZRAM and the new clock engine together.

                      (edit) @kano and you always make wrong comparisons if you wana have single threat performance and only a 4 core then compare it to an AMD FX-Series FX-4170, 4x 4.20GHz or a Opteron 6208 but yes i know you always do it in your intel fanboy way. intel-fanboy-way=pick always the wrong amd cpu to make sure amd never win.

                      (edit) @ kano the new piledriver 4core fx-4270 do have 4,7ghz(base clock without turbo)@125 watt tdp
                      Last edited by Qaridarium; 02-24-2012, 11:01 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        i dislike that you need a xeon branded cpu for ecc ram support, otherwise intel is definitely better. that has got nothing to do because i would be an intel fan, amd is definitely much slower. and even if amd sometimes produces good chips they absolutely fail with gfx drivers. you see that with the new amd hd 7 series. those chips have got a similar hardware h264 encoder like intel gpus, but amd is too stupid to provide drivers that enable the feature. you basically want that in a cpu as well - or the default chipset for piledriver (in the cpu is impossible with am3+ but for fmX it could be added). amd dislikes single core benchmarks like the devil does not like holy water.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Kano View Post
                          i dislike that you need a xeon branded cpu for ecc ram support,
                          why not just displike intel because of this? no? you love intel.... intel fucks you!

                          Originally posted by Kano View Post
                          otherwise intel is definitely better.
                          i know how you think you think the fx-4170 is slower per watt usage than your favor intel 4 core.
                          but i also know you don't compare it to a opteron 6208 you don't do it because you can't.
                          but in fact its a 80watt cpu and its singlet-heated the double the speed than a fx8150.
                          but! you love intel sooo much you don't care about an Opteron 6208..

                          Originally posted by Kano View Post
                          that has got nothing to do because i would be an intel fan, amd is definitely much slower. and even if amd sometimes produces good chips they absolutely fail with gfx drivers.
                          no my hd4770 works good with the radeon driver and no one care about video acceleration on the desktop!

                          Originally posted by Kano View Post
                          you see that with the new amd hd 7 series. those chips have got a similar hardware h264 encoder like intel gpus,
                          i only care about webM i don't use h264 ! and again no one care about video acceleration on the desktop!

                          video acceleration are notebook/smart-phone techniques only for battery optimizations.

                          if i can't play a video because it runs to slow i buy a new cpu! not like you kano: crying at the phoronix forums.

                          Originally posted by Kano View Post
                          but amd is too stupid to provide drivers that enable the feature.
                          THE Feature? no hardware acceleration IS NOT A FEATURE! NO ONE NEED IT!

                          Originally posted by Kano View Post
                          you basically want that in a cpu as well - or the default chipset for piledriver (in the cpu is impossible with am3+ but for fmX it could be added).
                          no i don't want stupid patented crap in my hardware!

                          Originally posted by Kano View Post
                          amd dislikes single core benchmarks like the devil does not like holy water.
                          amd love single core benchmarks for the Opteron 6208!!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Kano View Post
                            Well when you read the full article then piledriver will only save 5-10% energy. When you look at fx-61/81 that would mean that piledriver will use at max 1x w less, so still around 110w. When you look at ivb, then intel will use also less energy, from 95w to 77w (quad cores). And intel only needs 4 true cores to match that funny 8/4 core mix of amd amd definitely needs too much energy for the speed you get from it. in order to keep up with intel amd needs to rise the frequency way over 4 ghz. when you look at the single core speed then amd is not even faster than the i3 entry cpus (maybe even a higher clocked pentium g is enough). just by comparing an amd cpu vs intel cpu at same clock speed with cinebench in single core mode you should be able to interpolate the frequency amd needs to keep up with intel - just throwing more cores into the chip does not solve this basic issue...
                            Its quite apparent that Intel is way in the lead. In fact, we are back to the 386/486 days, when Intel was so far ahead of any competition, that they could price their high end processors in the $$$ thousand dollar range. Right now, the top of the line i7 will cost you $1,399. Intel can get away with this pricing, because there is no competition at the high end. So yes, AMD is losing... but in the end, we will all lose, as Ivy Bridge will probably be the last generation of Intel Desktop processor for a long time... there is just no need for them to continue to advance processors without any competition.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by gururise View Post
                              Its quite apparent that Intel is way in the lead. In fact, we are back to the 386/486 days, when Intel was so far ahead of any competition, that they could price their high end processors in the $$$ thousand dollar range. Right now, the top of the line i7 will cost you $1,399. Intel can get away with this pricing, because there is no competition at the high end. So yes, AMD is losing... but in the end, we will all lose, as Ivy Bridge will probably be the last generation of Intel Desktop processor for a long time... there is just no need for them to continue to advance processors without any competition.
                              kano just read your writing and go into the next computer shop and buy his next intel system.

                              be sure!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X