The fastest model, the AK, featured two Piledriver modules operating at 4. We are already familiar with the two extreme points of this design space: The FX has a five percent clock speed advantage over the FX, in addition to a six percent average in per clock performance improvement. Retrieved 7 January Komodo was to launch in on the FM2 socket , but this never happened. I used a combination of powl, sqrtl and logl which are common functions in physics simulations. The summary is here:
|Date Added:||10 July 2013|
|File Size:||54.54 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Retrieved 7 January Windows 7 SP1 bit was installed, along with all additional MS updates piledirver the two scheduler patches Microsoft released for Bulldozer last year. And what do we need FPUs for then?
All these similarities a,d it easy to compare TDPs and clock speeds between the new parts and the old:. Fetch, decode, ALUs, cache, attached over a memory bus of some sort, executing a single thread. Komodo was to launch in on the FM2 socketbut this never happened.
Yep, performance scaling with SMT is dependent on the workload. The following two graphs compare the throughput of 8 vs.
The fastest model, the AK, featured two Piledriver modules operating at 4. This site may earn affiliate commissions bulldozre the links on this page. Poorly threaded web based tests like the SunSpider and Chalkboard benchmarks showed much larger gains than well threaded tests like our wPrime and Truecrypt benchmarks.
List of AMD FX microprocessors – Wikipedia
However, when considering two threads, there is a continuum of design points that range from time-slicing threads on an unmodified CPU core 1. Intel Lynnfield Core i, MHz. In a thermally-constrained environment densely-packed cardboard boxes where the high power consumption of an Bulldlzer chip causes it to lose its clock speed advantage over Intel, the AMD chips perform rather poorly regardless of how many threads are available.
Bulldozer, like the original Phenom, was a power hog. I believe you may have inadvertently included turbo-scaling losses in with your calculations for CMT scaling losses. Yeah, I run the processors up until close to thermal throttling.
Global Offensive results shown above we can see that Piledriver offers a measurable advantage over Bulldozer. Ideal speedup is 2 for replicated CPU cores.
List of AMD FX microprocessors
Speedup from two-way multithreading, comparing 8 threads to 4. NET benchmark, Piledriver is once again ahead by eight percent. I think you really need a better benchmark, preferably with the task that will actually be used.
Starting with Cinebench we can see that Piledriver offers an eight percent advantage in the single threaded test and a smaller six percent advantage in the multi-threaded test. Username or Email Address. Bulldozer – Family 15h.
Thus, marketing chooses whatever term suits their interests. But you say it does all the internal calculations, including operations with fractions, with integers? AMD was rumored to be working on a new revision of Bulldozer that would reduce power consumption, but the core if it existed never saw the light of day. If it was really floating-point, the runtime would approximately not depend on the size of the numbers.
AMD’s FX-8350 analyzed: Does Piledriver deliver where Bulldozer fell short?
Retrieved 10 February Are you aware of a cli utility that can perform pilevriver same operation using FP? There is no shortage of benchmarks, the hard part is figuring out which one is most representative of what you care about. It targets desktop, mobile and server markets.
I doubt anyone cares about how quickly you can compute pow for non-data-dependent operands in a loop.
For example, on my Ivy Bridge 4. The changes over Bulldozer are incremental.