Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41

Thread: AMD's FX-8150 Bulldozer Benefits From New Compilers, Tuning

  1. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Gentoo FTW?
    trouble is that gentoo is still on GCC 4.5.3
    http://packages.gentoo.org/package/sys-devel/gcc

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    451

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ssam View Post
    trouble is that gentoo is still on GCC 4.5.3
    http://packages.gentoo.org/package/sys-devel/gcc
    GCC 4.6 ebuilds have been available since August of last year. Gentoo users are free to use whichever version of GCC that they please. With newer (unsupported or ~arch branch) packages, there is no guarantee that the resulting binary will function correctly.

    F

  3. #33
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Owatonna, Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fuzz View Post
    Would be neat to see something like Gentu (Ubuntu + Gentoo lol) with a spawn of portage + aptitude... binaries for all different processors (you could do binaries for all different USE flags too, theoretically, but that would just be a HUGE undertaking with some packages having 100+ USE flags that's at least 100^100 builds). I think it could be done but that just makes the repositories that much more critical etc.
    That's what Sabayon is trying to achieve with its Entropy system.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueJayofEvil View Post
    That's what Sabayon is trying to achieve with its Entropy system.
    Thanks, didn't know that. Now I have cause to check Sabayon out... .

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5

    Default

    I wonder if all C-ray tests are under same conditions? If so when comparing

    i7 - 3960x with gcc 4.7 rc1 = 25,7secs and
    FX-8150 with gcc 4.7 march=bdver1 = 26,92

    doesnt it give fx-8150 a uberbig performance jump??

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,598

    Default

    Maybe take a look at the 4 cores of bulldozer, those are combined of 2 integer units and 1 fpu. You have got 8 integer units and 4 fpus then. If you find benchmarks where bulldozer shines you can say that those definitely do not use many fpu commands. Bulldozer is definitely a fake 8 core, you have to select your software very well to get increased speed, the older Thurban (x6) had "real" cores. One big problem with all amd cpus is that they work pretty inefficient compared to intel ones. If you look at povray (1 core bench) or cinebench 1 core results then even very cheap intel cpus can beat amd's top models. And when you know that most apps are only using 1-2 cores then you know what cpus are faster if you don't compile all the day

  7. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    And when you know that most apps are only using 1-2 cores then you know what cpus are faster if you don't compile all the day
    most apps are not CPU bound so it does not matter what CPU you have. if you have CPU bound apps that are single threaded, then you have already lost.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ssam View Post
    most apps are not CPU bound so it does not matter what CPU you have.
    Of course CPU matters! Everything adds up, but CPU and I/O throughtput are most important.

    Quote Originally Posted by ssam View Post
    if you have CPU bound apps that are single threaded, then you have already lost.
    In Linux, thread=process, so both threading and parallel processing are utilized, so no - you have not lost if your app is "single threaded", you just make sure that app forks good.

  9. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    Of course CPU matters! Everything adds up, but CPU and I/O throughtput are most important.


    In Linux, thread=process, so both threading and parallel processing are utilized, so no - you have not lost if your app is "single threaded", you just make sure that app forks good.
    sorry i should have said "single threaded or single processed" or "only uses a single core"

    if you have an app that is only using 1 core, and you buy yourself the processor with the best single core performance, then you might make it 20% faster. congratulations. if you could make that app multithreaded (or multi processed, it makes no difference if you use openmp, mpi, fork, whatever), then you will probably get close to a 2 or 4 times speed up on your existing hardware. win. if you code is already multithreaded, then you will want to add more cores to make it faster.

    now if you have a CPU bound job, that really is non-parallelisable, then you are getting into interesting problems. but i think most people here are interested in things like games, graphics, and video.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    Maybe take a look at the 4 cores of bulldozer, those are combined of 2 integer units and 1 fpu. You have got 8 integer units and 4 fpus then. If you find benchmarks where bulldozer shines you can say that those definitely do not use many fpu commands. Bulldozer is definitely a fake 8 core, you have to select your software very well to get increased speed, the older Thurban (x6) had "real" cores. One big problem with all amd cpus is that they work pretty inefficient compared to intel ones. If you look at povray (1 core bench) or cinebench 1 core results then even very cheap intel cpus can beat amd's top models. And when you know that most apps are only using 1-2 cores then you know what cpus are faster if you don't compile all the day
    that is how the intel monopole game works.
    amd chose to build a server cpu for there opensource customers.
    the desktop cpus and notebook cpus are just unimportant for amd!
    unimportant because they go for APU on notebooks and lowend desktop!
    the GPU in the APU goes bigger and bigger and the cpu dosn't matter.

    on the other side be sure the opteron 6308 will be a nice cpu! (also single-threated just because of higher clock speed because of the new clock engine! and some speed-bug-bugfixes!)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •