Page 21 of 22 FirstFirst ... 1119202122 LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 217

Thread: MIPS Loongson 3A Benchmarks On Debian

  1. #201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    1. I stated the facts of why you were wrong
    2. You tried to ignore them
    3. I'm not letting you

    4. You lose.
    I let the other readers judge it. I have certainly noticed that you're not open to any logical arguments.

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    No, I'm pretty sure it's because you actually are an ass.
    There is no Law against it. This means your opinion has no relevance in this regard.

  2. #202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    Show me where AMD markets its CPUs with "ACC". It is a feature of the mainboard, more specific, the BIOS, not the CPU.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_700...ck_Calibration
    http://sites.amd.com/us/game/downloa.../overview.aspx
    "AMD OverDrive utility" is not a bios feature because you can use it without the need of a bios support at all! AMD advertising it and suggestive that with AMD Overdrive utility can achieve everything that is technically possible.
    Also the ACC is a feature of the AMD-Chipset-700-series AMD sell the chipset with THAT feature! I only buy an AMD chipset because of this! I only don't buy a Nvidia chipset for my AMD cpu only because of this feature of the AMD chipset!

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    Get your facts straight before accusing other people of talking bullshit.
    To be more specific I can prove it and I prove it in this message so its a fact YOU talk bullshit!

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    So your excuse of acting without moral is: Hey, the others do it also.
    Nice, says something about your personality.
    No I only do what AMD proposes to do using "AMD OverDrive utility" to max out the result.

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    Yep, I worked for different OEMs in the past years, I know that a small percentage of the customers are just assholes without any moral. Thank Bob that you are a minority, but nonetheless an expensive minority.
    Who cares about your pathetic life story?
    Only a few are intelligent and sure intelligence customers are expensive customers because they know there rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    True,
    LOL you are so pathetic............ I can't even phrase this in words how pathetic...

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    but it is neither morally correct to do that
    Show me the law you pathetic naive person!
    The LAW allows me that! The logical conclusion is that the LAW is the guilty! I only act inside of the LAW in the most intelligence way!

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    because it doesn't run outside the specification nor is it lawful to return products that you have willfully used outside the specifications.
    I only did what AMD suggest me to do with there "AMD OverDrive utility" advertising!

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    Sorry, but no, people call you an ass because you are an ass and with your last posts here you showed that you are not only a forum troll, but also a real life ass.
    You are so smart you prove the reality and real life by a forum post. NOT! LOL
    You are so naive and dump this is just a EPIC FAIL!

    Please get some nootropics to improve your brain performance:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nootropic

    Anyway I think you are to stupid to get the difference between a insult and a factual assertion but this is not my problem this is just your personal problem!

    I recommend suicide as a solution!
    Last edited by maldorordiscord; 07-11-2012 at 11:30 PM.

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maldorordiscord View Post
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_700...ck_Calibration
    http://sites.amd.com/us/game/downloa.../overview.aspx
    "AMD OverDrive utility" is not a bios feature because you can use it without the need of a bios support at all! AMD advertising it and suggestive what with AMD Overdrive utility can achieve everything that is technically possible.
    Also the ACC is a feature of the AMD-Chipset-700-series AMD sell the chipset with THAT feature! I only buy an AMD chipset because of this! I only don't buy a Nvidia chipset for my AMD cpu only because of this feature of the AMD chipset!



    To be more specific I can prove it and i prove it in this message so its a fact YOU talk bullshit!
    Total and epic fail. We were talking about CPUs, you claimed that ACC is a feature of AMD CPUs and now you show us the evidence that ACC is in fact not a feature of the CPU, but the chipset. You have just with this post proven yourself wrong. Thank you for your work, I couldn't have done that better.

    You will of course deny that you just have proven yourself wrong, because you in your absolute self overestimation can't cope with the concept of being wrong or less knowledgeable in any topic than any other person. And you have the nerves to call other people pathetic, your are so poor that it is actually sad to see your lame attempts of trying to make other people believe that you are smart. I don't think that you are worth my time or the time of any one else here, so I will put your second account on my ignore list. I hope that Michael will soon ban you again and all of your future accounts here (shouldn't be hard to find them, since you are incapable of changing your posting style, using a spellchecker and learn such things like the difference between tropic and topic). Lets see if you in the mean time have grasped the concept of an ignore list.

    Normally I would say have a nice life. In your case I say try to not be so poor.
    Last edited by TobiSGD; 07-11-2012 at 11:40 PM.

  4. #204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    Total and epic fail. We were talking about CPUs, you claimed that ACC is a feature of AMD CPUs and now you show us the evidence that ACC is in fact not a feature of the CPU, but the chipset. You have just with this post proven yourself wrong. Thank you for your work, I couldn't have done that better.
    You just don't get the clue AMD claim that the AMD CPU runs best with an AMD chipset because of this feature. I do only what AMD suggested in the advertising!

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    You will of course deny that you just have proven yourself wrong,
    No, because it is the fault of the AMD advertising that I do ​​what the law allows me to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    because you in your absolute self overestimation can't cope with the concept of being wrong or less knowledgeable in any topic than any other person. And you have the nerves to call other people pathetic, your are so poor that it is actually sad to see your lame attempts of trying to make other people believe that you are smart. I don't think that you are worth my time or the time of any one else here, so I will put your second account on my ignore list.
    Your babbling is just a rhetorical trick like reducing the worth of the other person without any prove "I don't think that you are worth my time" you just do personal attacks: "your are so poor" and you should not speak for other humans : "or the time of any one else"
    and so one and so one ignore people is also just a rhetorical trick: "I will put your second account on my ignore list"

    This only means you lost now you're offended like a small child!

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    I hope that Michael will soon ban you again and all of your future accounts here (shouldn't be hard to find them, since you are incapable of changing your posting style, using a spellchecker and learn such things like the difference between tropic and topic).
    Censorship is your last hope this is pathetic!

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    Normally I would say have a nice life. In your case I say try to not be so poor.
    Well enjoy your pathetic life with your Censorship fantasies!
    Suicide is also a solution for you!

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maldorordiscord View Post
    I let the other readers judge it. I have certainly noticed that you're not open to any logical arguments.
    I refuse to engage with someone who is such an obvious troll. The facts speak for themselves. You never refuted anything, only trying to sidestep arguments and start up alternative arguments, just like always.

    You lose.

    P.S. - if you haven't noticed yet, i'm following your standard procedure in refusing to let anyone else have the final word. I don't care if you keep replying for the next 20 years, I'm going to keep responding.

    There is no Law against it.
    Indeed, I never said there was. There's also no law against calling out obvious trolls and asses for being what they are.

    This means your opinion has no relevance in this regard.
    I'm pretty sure even if there was a law against being an ass, my opinion wouldn't matter. Neither would yours.

    I'm not sure where you're going with this.
    Last edited by smitty3268; 07-12-2012 at 12:59 AM.

  6. #206
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,627

    Default

    I would try ACC as well in the case i would own an amd cpu. Just returning a cpu when this does not work well is not everybody's way to go - for many ppl a x2/x3 is fast enough anyway. If you have to increase voltage then oc really will cost you money, especially when you disable power management features. That's usually the way to go to reach the limits of a cpu in a direct way (but only possible with unlocked cpus). So basically you pay later when you oc your cpu beyond the limits which work without voltage increase - don't forget to use powermanagement. Btw. if f(50000) is a too simple cpu test for you, cinebench (on win) scales pretty good as well and can compare single against multicore.

    Luckyly for amd is that raw cpu speed is mainly needed for gamers - when you forget about professional users. amd fx is no optimal highend gaming plattform, pci-e 3.0 is not even supported (but intel ivb supports it). They still find some noobs who think that more cores are faster than fewer cores with higher speed/core for the same price as it looks so nice on spec sheets. The casual office user will most like not notice a difference however, thats why amd stated a while ago that the cpus are already "fast enough" for those users. You don't get how many E450 cpus are used even for 17" laptops - when you run win on those and have to do huge updates - real fun. I would say that these cpus are a bit too slow, but current dual core cpus from intel (>=2.5 ghz) and amd (>3 ghz ) should be ok for many ppl - the one and only number that matter now is the price. Btw. because lots of ppl do not like to install the os but have got enough money to buy a new pc manufacturer most likely hope that ms creates a new os every 2/3 years Usually then the install feels "slow" enough already to create a demand.
    Last edited by Kano; 07-12-2012 at 04:34 AM.

  7. #207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    I would try ACC as well in the case i would own an amd cpu. Just returning a cpu when this does not work well is not everybody's way to go - for many ppl a x2/x3 is fast enough anyway. If you have to increase voltage then oc really will cost you money, especially when you disable power management features. That's usually the way to go to reach the limits of a cpu in a direct way (but only possible with unlocked cpus). So basically you pay later when you oc your cpu beyond the limits which work without voltage increase - don't forget to use powermanagement. Btw. if f(50000) is a too simple cpu test for you, cinebench (on win) scales pretty good as well and can compare single against multicore.

    Luckyly for amd is that raw cpu speed is mainly needed for gamers - when you forget about professional users. amd fx is no optimal highend gaming plattform, pci-e 3.0 is not even supported (but intel ivb supports it). They still find some noobs who think that more cores are faster than fewer cores with higher speed/core for the same price as it looks so nice on spec sheets. The casual office user will most like not notice a difference however, thats why amd stated a while ago that the cpus are already "fast enough" for those users. You don't get how many E450 cpus are used even for 17" laptops - when you run win on those and have to do huge updates - real fun. I would say that these cpus are a bit too slow, but current dual core cpus from intel (>=2.5 ghz) and amd (>3 ghz ) should be ok for many ppl - the one and only number that matter now is the price. Btw. because lots of ppl do not like to install the os but have got enough money to buy a new pc manufacturer most likely hope that ms creates a new os every 2/3 years Usually then the install feels "slow" enough already to create a demand.
    Sure you are right and I use an "old" system because of this an upgrade is not worth the money.
    And its ok for me to pay money on the energy bill instead of pay money to Intel.
    And be sure I hit the maximum without a unlocked cpu. You don't get more than ~3.8ghz with an unlocked phenomII 550 black edition only the 960T can get 300-400mhz more.
    And yes its really funny AMD sell PCIe3.0 graphic cards but no main-board chip-set for pcie3.0 and no cpu for this task.
    And be sure more INTEL cores are faster but more AMD cores are not faster because the closed source market and intel compiler limit amd cpu to sse4.2 and turn of AVX because incompatible implementation and turn of FMA4 because incompatible implementation and there is more need for FMA3 but intel use a trick to let amd go for FMA4 instead of FMA3 and more intel cores also mean more single-thread performance per core this result in a better result most of the time.
    Because of this you can buy a ***Intel Haswell-EP 160 Watt TDP 16core and overclock it to 400 watt TDP*** and your Gaming performance will be much better than with a similar AMD system even if you have 32cores instead of 16 cores.
    One is for sure with the haswell-EP AMD is out of the race.
    Or in other words if the 16core Loongson don't rock da house for me Ill goo with a haswell-EP just to make sure my CPU speed is decent.

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maldorordiscord View Post
    You are a optimist. the reality beat you and I can tell you why.

    Its a fact that Intel trick on AMD with FMA3 amd original plan was FMA3 instead of FMA4 then intel FAKE arguments to amd in that way: we will not support FMA3 in the future only the more complex (and more rare in use) FMA4 then intel drops FMA3 and go FMA4 but even with FMA4 intel tricked AMD again because they only allow amd to be compatible with SSE4.2 and NOT with AVX.
    But it comes even harder Intel now goes for FMA3 first with AVX2 compatible cpus and again AMD is not allowed to be compatible with AVX2 this end in a situation like that:
    Because of the big Intel market share "Intel-compiler" amd bulldozer only get SSE4.2 and no AVX and no FMA4 and no FMA3 . Also the AVX from AMD is incompatible with the AVX from Intel and the FMA4 is also incompatible with the Future FMA4 from Intel.

    You only can use a bulldozer without disadvantages because of Intel's monopoly on: Linux and only with open-source-software.
    In a closed source Intel monopole world the bulldozer can only handle SSE4.2 no AVX and no FMA4.

    "Bulldozer has the same or little more power than a 4core Sandybridge"

    This is only true for open-source multi-core applications.
    In the closed source software world in 80-90% of the cases the software do not support incompatible AMD-AVX and incompatible AMD-FMA4 its the 3Dnow vs SSE effect AMD always lose! this is a law of nature!

    "but also has 80-90% the single thread performance (instead of 50-60% that many think)."

    What a irony in your words it does have only 80% of the single thread performance calculated with incompatible AMD-AVX and incompatible AMD-FMA4 and you claim its little bit faster on multi-core applications but only on Linux with open-source software on the other side the bulldozer is the biggest fail ever on windows-vista and they also fail on windows7 to windows 8 will be the first windows without a complete failure on that kind of CPU.

    "Any way the thinking its close to Godson-T."

    LOL be sure this is not the case!
    Loongson do not try to fake a high clock speed also loongson do have 1 full FPU per core and no bullshit like SMT-hyperthreading and CMT also Loongson only implement energy efficiency complexity and they get speed by scaling up the cores instead of scaling up complexity and core clock speed.

    (Disclaimer): I personalty like the bulldozer because I'm a Linux user and I like open-source software and I like multi-thread software and I like to use ECC ram on a Desktop and I hate the behavior of Intel. But I'm not naive Intel will always win by better "smaller" manufacturing technology and cheating by instruction compatibility and cheating by compiler tricks and cheating by cooperations with software developers and games and so one and so one.
    You have misunderstanding some thinks. First learn to understand the difference "instruction set"-"execution units". Bulldozer vectors are AVX full compatible with Intel, but as a sandybridge-pentium doesn't have the extra instructions, because are replaced by FMA instructions, and thats all. FMA-AVXstyle its the execution unit, and has FMA extra instructions, and thats all. There is not a way a program does not support any kind of FMA. FMA its simple fused instructions, its a way to execute 2-instructions at once, you just need the code to be clean and visible, thats something that a good compiler does anyway (for example gcc4.7 without Bulldozer patches runs faster than gcc4.6 with Bulldozer patches. If Bulldozer had 4cores 512bitFmac as it was the first plan (instead of 8cores 256bitFmac with borrowed units from other cores), it will be better than Intel. Just bad market technique from AMD.

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    330

    Default

    Any way Godson-L3C will have 2*512bitFmac per core. Thats 2*Intel and 4*AMD. If all this can be utilized by a single thread, will have a 15-20-drystone (Sandybridge has 9.5). And Godson is made for complexity and not for energy efficiency. Energy efficient MIPS and OpenRisc processor scores 2.5-drystone with 1Million transistor not 40Million of Godson.

  10. #210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    You have misunderstanding some thinks. First learn to understand the difference "instruction set"-"execution units". Bulldozer vectors are AVX full compatible with Intel, but as a sandybridge-pentium doesn't have the extra instructions, because are replaced by FMA instructions, and thats all. FMA-AVXstyle its the execution unit, and has FMA extra instructions, and thats all. There is not a way a program does not support any kind of FMA. FMA its simple fused instructions, its a way to execute 2-instructions at once, you just need the code to be clean and visible, thats something that a good compiler does anyway (for example gcc4.7 without Bulldozer patches runs faster than gcc4.6 with Bulldozer patches. If Bulldozer had 4cores 512bitFmac as it was the first plan (instead of 8cores 256bitFmac with borrowed units from other cores), it will be better than Intel. Just bad market technique from AMD.
    "Bulldozer vectors are AVX full compatible with Intel,"

    This is wrong the AMD AVX is not binary compatible with the Intel AVX unit. And this causes problems with closed source binary applications.

    Source: http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=25

    Then you talk about compilers but this is only possible for open-source software!

    This end in a situation like this: for Linux and open-source bulldozer is well but for closed source bulldozer is shit.

Posting Permissions

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