Multi-Core Scaling Performance Of AMD's Bulldozer

Published on October 26, 2011
Written by Michael Larabel
Page 1 of 7
Discuss This Article

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 Hardware Reviews
  1. Sumo Lounge Emperor
  2. Gallium3D Continues Improving OpenGL For Older Radeon GPUs
  3. 15-Way Open vs. Closed Source NVIDIA/AMD Linux GPU Comparison
  4. Nouveau vs. NVIDIA Linux Comparison Shows Shortcomings
Latest Software Articles
  1. Intel Linux OpenGL Driver Leading Over Apple OS X
  2. The Cost Of Ubuntu Disk Encryption
  3. Btrfs vs. EXT4 vs. XFS vs. F2FS On Linux 3.10
  4. AMD Radeon R600 GPU LLVM 3.3 Back-End Testing
Latest Linux News
  1. Raspberry Pi Gets New Wayland Weston Renderer
  2. Debian GNU/Hurd 2013 Release Brings New Packages
  3. Intel Ultrabook Performance Is Faster With Mesa 9.2
  4. Hot Relocation HDD To SSD Support For Btrfs
  5. Phoronix Test Suite 4.6.0 "Utsira" Released
  6. New Intel X.Org Driver Supports All Of Haswell
  7. SQLite Now Faster With Memory Mapped I/O
  8. Microsoft Releases Skype For Linux 4.2, Has Bug-Fixes
  9. Qt For Tizen Launches, Based On Qt 5.1
  10. KTAP Released For Linux Kernel Dynamic Tracing
  11. Linux 3.10-rc2 Kernel Takes In A Few Extra Pulls
Latest Forum Talk
  1. Debian GNU/Hurd 2013 Release Brings New Packages
  2. Linux's "Ondemand" Governor Is No...
  3. Humble Indie Bundle Finally Sells Out
  4. Hot Relocation HDD To SSD Support For Btrfs
  5. Kubuntu, KDE Has Little Hope For Ubuntu's Mir
  6. AMD Radeon R600 GPU LLVM 3.3 Back-End Testing
  1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Motherboards
  5. Peripherals
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Operating Systems
  9. All Articles
  1. Linux Benchmarking
  2. OpenBenchmarking.org
  3. Phoronix Test Suite