Fun comparison.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
CPUs From 2004 Against AMD's New 64-Core Threadripper 3990X + Tests Against FX-9590
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by birdie View PostGains in single threaded performance for the past 10 years have still been minuscule in comparison to what we had from 1981 to the end of the 00's where performance increased 100 fold or maybe more.
It would be great if someone managed to compare the following CPUs:- Intel 386
- Intel 486
- Pentium Pro
- Pentium 2
- Pentium III
- Pentium 4
- Core 2 Duo
- Sandy Bridge
- Sky Lake
- Ice Lake
- Likes 3
Comment
-
I held on to my old FX 6300/990FX system all the way up until Zen2, when I purchased my current R7-3700X/X570 system.
Needless to say the performance difference is astounding
I'm so glad I stuck with AMD even though I had to live with lesser performance for quite awhile. But I knew that if AMD went under we'd be at the mercy of the predatory Intel corporation forever.
As an embedded systems engineer who designed a few simple custom microprocessors and microcontrollers back in the day I realized what a monumental error Bulldozer was. And a year or so after its release I also sadly realized that the architecture couldn't be salvaged, and it would be awhile before a new one could be developed. I didn't know it would be quite this long, but still the wait was worth it.
- Likes 7
Comment
-
Originally posted by atomsymbol
It is probable that at least one of the measurements is invalid.
Even my 4600u intel laptop is faster than the 3700x with this.
You can check for yourself:
Compile with "gcc -O3 prime.c -o prime_gcc"
Code:#include <stdbool.h> #include <stdint.h> #include <stdio.h> // // https://stackoverflow.com/questions/37513311/prime-number-generator-in-c // bool IsPrime(int test) { // i <= sqrt(test) // but to avoid sqrt you can do i * i <= test for(int i= 2; i * i <= test; i++){ if(test%i==0){ return false; } } return true; } int main() { int count=0; for (int i=1;i<1000*1000*10;++i) { if (IsPrime(i)) { count++; } } printf("%d\n",count); }
Last edited by Raka555; 09 February 2020, 03:39 AM.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raka555 View Post
I repeated it several times.
Even my 4600u intel laptop is faster than the 3700x with this.
Code:# perf stat ./rand 664580 Performance counter stats for './rand': 7.479,07 msec task-clock:u # 0,999 CPUs utilized 0 context-switches:u # 0,000 K/sec 0 cpu-migrations:u # 0,000 K/sec 52 page-faults:u # 0,007 K/sec 35.198.688.120 cycles:u # 4,706 GHz 15.034.444 stalled-cycles-frontend:u # 0,04% frontend cycles idle [B]33.164.471.465 stalled-cycles-backend:u # 94,22% backend cycles idle[/B] 17.446.305.050 instructions:u # 0,50 insn per cycle # 1,90 stalled cycles per insn 3.508.141.911 branches:u # 469,061 M/sec 4.877.261 branch-misses:u # 0,14% of all branches
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Yes. Best test: S3_Virge against Matrox Millennium against TNT NVIDIA Riva. And do not forget Voodoo2.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raka555 View Postvs Raspberry PI ?
It is actually not that impressive that it is only 4x faster with compiling the kernel and only 2x faster encoding an mp3 than the AMD FX-9590 with its 64/128 against 8/8...
The kernel compilation also does not scale linearly with CPU performance.
For me lots of cores only looks good in benchmarks designed for that purpose.
In the "real world" you still get bad diminishing returns ...
Yesterday I ran a program that calculates prime numbers and I was not impressed that my 2012 model i7-3770 (3.4GHz/3.9GHZ) did it in 4s versus my "shinny new" ryzen7-3700x (3.6Ghz/4.4GHz) which only managed 8s....
The prime calculator likely uses a special code path for Intel's AVX which the 3770 supports, and will fall back to a generic, slow, codepath for AMD (where the Ryzens now would support the same AVX that 3770 did).
The threadripper will outperform the old 3770 in any metric at any time, even intel-optimized AVX. It just can't outperform it if it can't use its accelerated paths, which is a decision of the software developer.
Running bloatware is where the ryzens shine with all their cache, but pure calculations intel seems to still be far ahead...
Running anything is where the Ryzens shine, Intel just has nothing to compete.
Intel CPUs are far more expensive for less performance, while using more power. Even specially optimized AVX512 software, compiled with Intels compiler will in many cases be executed much more quickly on a cheaper Ryzen based design.
Of course the huge caches are also nice, since you get those for no extra charge, while you have to spend more than twice the money for half the cache on a much slower Intel CPU.
Intel only sells their large caches on Xeon CPUs for a Xeon price and, sadly, Xeon performance.
- Likes 10
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raka555 View Post
I repeated it several times.
Even my 4600u intel laptop is faster than the 3700x with this.
You can check for yourself:
Code:$ time ./prime_gcc 664580 real 0m8.030s user 0m8.030s sys 0m0.000s
Last edited by birdie; 08 February 2020, 06:18 PM.
Comment
Comment