Originally posted by xpue
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Hammering The AMD Ryzen 7 1800X With An Intense, Threaded Workload
Collapse
X
-
If what you are implying is that the purpose of benchmarking is to gimp one product so as to try to extrapolate its results onto another product, then you are wrong. I mean it is ok to compare against different configurations as long as you never ever say to the reader that it represents some other product that its not.Last edited by duby229; 17 March 2017, 09:59 AM.
Comment
-
Seriously you guys aren't surprised by the SMT results are you? Some of you show signs of shock or indignation about it. Surprise, suprise! Intel's architecture has the same flaw! The difference is that Intel's cache hierarchy in total has much lower latency than AMD, even Zen. Memory bandwidth will improve once BIOS bugs get fixed, but the fact is that memory accesses on Intel products are much faster. And SMT puts very serious demand on low latency access. (Due to context changes and pipeline flushes)
I still think it's pretty darn stupid for AMD to make an attempt to compete with Intel on Intel's home field. CMT was by far the better design. It still has the potential to annihilate everything else if AMD would just shrink it to 14nm and scale it up to 3 integer units per pipeline.Last edited by duby229; 17 March 2017, 09:55 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by duby229 View PostIf what you are implying is that the purpose of benchmarking is to gimp one product so as to try to extrapolate its results onto another product, then you are wrong. I mean it is ok to compare against different configurations as long as you never ever say to the reader that it represents some other product that its not.Last edited by torsionbar28; 17 March 2017, 10:13 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by duby229 View PostSeriously you guys aren't surprised by the SMT results are you? Some of you show signs of shock or indignation about it. Surprise, suprise! Intel's architecture has the same flaw! The difference is that Intel's cache hierarchy in total has much lower latency than AMD, even Zen. Memory bandwidth will improve once BIOS bugs get fixed, but the fact is that memory accesses on Intel products are much faster. And SMT puts very serious demand on low latency access. (Due to context changes and pipeline flushes)
I still think it's pretty darn stupid for AMD to make an attempt to compete with Intel on Intel's home field. CMT was by far the better design. It still has the potential to annihilate everything else if AMD would just shrink it to 14nm and scale it up to 3 integer units per pipeline.
But that os far from critical. It's intentinal compromise, which, once people sort their code, won't even be noticed by most.
For those in that 1%, well, there is always Xeon.
Sheer memory latency is also non-issue for most code, except those few casees with high mispredict percentage. Context change time depends more on bandwidth than a relatively small access time difference.
And even in this test, without any change, things get much more in AMD's favor once you factor in the price and power consumption.
Local early adopters can't stop praising it on cumulative CPU power alone. People say it's in class of its own. It overclocks chldishly easily.
All that for €400. What more do you want ?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Brane215 View Post
WTF are you talking about ? What has CMT/SMT to do with connecting fabric ? Yes, AMD's interconnect might be somewhat slower, but that was expected.
But that os far from critical. It's intentinal compromise, which, once people sort their code, won't even be noticed by most.
For those in that 1%, well, there is always Xeon.
Sheer memory latency is also non-issue for most code, except those few casees with high mispredict percentage. Context change time depends more on bandwidth than a relatively small access time difference.
And even in this test, without any change, things get much more in AMD's favor once you factor in the price and power consumption.
Local early adopters can't stop praising it on cumulative CPU power alone. People say it's in class of its own. It overclocks chldishly easily.
All that for €400. What more do you want ?
EDIT: You do realize the whole purpose for SMT right? The bottom line fact is that Intel -overengineered- their architecture and could not keep the pipeline full. Every context switch caused the pipeline to flush and refill. (It still does this on every context change) So they adapted an SMT technique called Hyperthreading to try and keep the pipeline full by issueing a second thread so that at all times the pipeline could be doing work. In later generations they extended it by adding additional integer units to the pipeline, and that even exacerbated the problem even more.Last edited by duby229; 17 March 2017, 10:51 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by xpue View PostMore powerful cpu demonstrates better performance -- they suggest gimping it while calling it overpriced. Seems legit.
Why bother wasting the time to reply if you're not first going to spend some time to understand?
Comment
-
Originally posted by duby229 View Post
EDIT: You do realize the whole purpose for SMT right? The bottom line fact is that Intel -overengineered- their architecture and could not keep the pipeline full. Every context switch caused the pipeline to flush and refill. (It still does this on every context change).
Comment
-
Originally posted by Brane215 View Post
And even in this test, without any change, things get much more in AMD's favor once you factor in the price and power consumption.
Local early adopters can't stop praising it on cumulative CPU power alone. People say it's in class of its own. It overclocks chldishly easily.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment