1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Memory
  5. Motherboards
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Storage
  9. Operating Systems


Facebook RSS Twitter Twitter Google Plus


Phoronix Test Suite

OpenBenchmarking.org

Multi-Core Scaling Performance Of AMD's Bulldozer

Michael Larabel

Published on 26 October 2011
Written by Michael Larabel
Page 1 of 7 - 20 Comments

There has been a lot of discussion in the past two weeks concerning AMD's new FX-Series processors and the Bulldozer architecture. In particular, with the Bulldozer architecture consisting of "modules" in which each has two x86 engines, but share much of the rest of the processing pipeline with their sibling engine; as such, the AMD FX-8150 eight-core CPU only has four modules. In this article is a look at how well the Bulldozer multi-core performance scales when toggling these different modules. The multi-core scaling performance is compared to AMD's Shanghai, Intel's Gulftown and Sandy Bridge processors.

Each Bulldozer module consists of two x86 out-of-order processing engines, two 128-bit FMAC units, and two integer cores, but shares the fetch/decode stage, the floating-point scheduler, the L2 cache, and other parts of the module. Some have loosely compared this to Intel's Hyper Threading technology. Below are slides provided by AMD that detail the AMD Bulldozer model.



In the Linux benchmarks of the AMD FX-8150 that were published this past Monday on Phoronix, the multi-core performance of the eight-core Bulldozer was shown to be comparable to that of Intel's Sandy Bridge (Core i5 2500K) and Gulftown (Core i7 970, Core i7 990X) CPUs in some of the workloads. Today's results are a new set of numbers when running the very multi-threaded-friendly Linux benchmarks and controlling the number of modules/cores that are enabled.

The UEFI on the ASUS Crosshair V Formula motherboard, which was part of the Bulldozer kit sent over by AMD, allows enabling/disabling the individual cores of the Bulldozer CPU. The multi-threaded benchmarks were run with one, two, four, six, and eight core/thread configurations. When testing with four or less, it was ensured that each core enabled was to its own module and not shared. Likewise, with the comparative Intel results, each physical core was allotted first before enabling the Hyper Threading. For the motherboards/CPUs that don't support the individual toggling of cores, the core count was limited in the Linux kernel by using the "maxcpus=" kernel option, which limits the number of cores that are exposed to the operating system.

<< Previous Page
1
Latest Linux Hardware Reviews
  1. SilverStone Precision PS10
  2. ASRock Z97 Extreme6
  3. Nouveau Re-Clocking Is Way Faster, Shows Much Progress For Open-Source NVIDIA
  4. NVIDIA Wins Over AMD For Linux Gaming Ultra HD 4K Performance
Latest Linux Articles
  1. Linux 3.16 File-System Tests On A Hard Drive
  2. Benchmarking Deepin 2014 With DDE 2.0 Using Linux Games
  3. Testing Btrfs On The Linux 3.16 Kernel
  4. Preview: Fedora 20 Updated vs. Fedora 21 Rawhide Benchmarks
Latest Linux News
  1. The Beta To The Final Minor Release Of RHEL5 Is Out
  2. The Witcher 2 Works On Beta Improvements
  3. Fedora Gets A Kernel Playground Repository
  4. Firefox Might Finally Be Moving Closer To Better KDE Integration
  5. RealVNC Introduces VNC Wayland Developer Preview
  6. Looking Forward To The Future Of KDE Frameworks 5
  7. Mageia 5 Alpha Updates A Lot Of Software
  8. KDE 4.14 Branched, Mix-Release Planned For December
  9. The Exciting QEMU 2.1 Is Up To Its Release Candidate Phase
  10. Manjaro Linux Developers Experience A Mass Exodus [Updated]
Latest Forum Discussions
  1. Some shady script in Phoronix opening shady ad in new tab
  2. Using Udev Without Systemd Is Going To Become Harder
  3. Advertisements On Phoronix
  4. Glamor now enabled in Debian radeonsi
  5. Qualcomm DMCA Notice Takes Down 100+ Git Repositories
  6. Lennart: The State & Future Of Systemd
  7. Updated and Optimized Ubuntu Free Graphics Drivers
  8. Maker3D - create your 3D RPG