Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

AMD new gen CPU's and the new gen Consoles


40 posts in this topic

Posted

Okay this has been bugging me for a while now. It's a bit hard for me to explain it all in English but I'll try to do my best so just bear with me.

 

We all know when the new gen FX came out (8150 and so on) they were a disaster in single-threaded workloads, it has gotten a bit better now but not by much compared to what Intel has against them. AMD got a fair load of criticism for it, still does. (I'm not talking about the fanboys from either side, but the review sites like Toms etc.) Now, since both the new Xbox and PS are using Jaguar (8 core) game developers have much more in hand to start making more of an use of the multi-threaded workflows.

 

Whats my point in all of this is that can it be so AMD was already in talks with Sony and MS about the new consoles before releasing the new FX so they sacrificed single threaded to more of an multicore arch knowing it would pay off later when the new gen consoles are released? I mean mostly as I've seen it's Singlethreaded = Intel, Multithreaded = AMD, but when software will be more dependent on cores later on then AMD MIGHT actually get back in the game again?

 

The TDP is not really a topic right now in all of this. Intel is on a smaller node so it's natural they have lower TDP's. AMD is still on 32nm if I remember correctly?

 

I'm of course talking about the desktop CPU's, don't know much about APU's but since they use the same arch I guess it should also go for those as well.

 

I know this might sound messy as heck but it's the easiest way I can explain my thoughts right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

AMD was clever to go after the consoles, most of the ports nowadays are more or less optimized for the x86 architecture but nonetheless they still are ports, hence I'm really having my doubts wheter or not fully optimization is made on them. This reflected itself on intel always going on first because they can handle more computational overheat than AMD, this time around however the native implementation is x86 on the AMD side, with this in mind developers will utilize all the resources put in that APU, which certainly translates to a better view on the AMD PC side... I'm curious to see the new games and how their ports compare in both intel and AMD platforms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I personally think AMD just jumped the gun and went for more cores too early in the game.

 

As for TDP, can't really expect an energy efficient chip which runs at almost 4GHz and with 8 cores.
Just look at Intels new CPU's, finally releasing an 8 core with an even higher TDP (150w compared to 125-130w from AMD).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I personally think AMD just jumped the gun and went for more cores too early in the game.

 

As for TDP, can't really expect an energy efficient chip which runs at almost 4GHz and with 8 cores.

Just look at Intels new CPU's, finally releasing an 8 core with an even higher TDP (150w compared to 125-130w from AMD).

 

AMD's latest CPU's have a TDP of 220W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

AMD's latest CPU's have a TDP of 220W.

 

Which is a limited edition, factory overclocked, non-mass produced CPU for enthusiasts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

its interesting because like ya said theres not much game wise thats optimised for multithreaded / more cores wise mainly cus apparently its not needed. except maybe alot of games are ports from the previous generation of consoles where the cpu's prolly couldnt handle all that much also i dont think the xbox operating system could handle it all that well. Now then if the new xbox OS is based of a custom build of win 8 that opens up alot of possibilities as win 8 handles all that stuff far better than anything before it and its well known gamers choose win8 because of its speed improvements under the hood. you can bash metro and all that crap as much as you want but the basic fact is that it is faster than win 7 and handles multithreaded stuff better, i think it can use unused cores at an OS level by shifting loads onto the unused cores without the app/game telling it to do it, dont qoute me on that cus i might be remembering it wrong. There both getting the jaguar AMD cpu's think there both 8 core, i bet the xbox could manage it far better than the sony simply because MS builds operating systems and the directx API, SDK's everything you can imagine. Sure PS4 has more power on paper but it will prolly end up even tbh optimisation counts for a hell of alot so theres prolly not much in it

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Which is a limited edition, factory overclocked, non-mass produced CPU for enthusiasts.

 

No, the FX-9370 is none of those things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

No, the FX-9370 is none of those things.

It is, AMD said that it's only available to OEM. FX8350 is the one for consumers.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Steamroller is next architecture promising really great enhancement..

 

Worth reading Anandtech article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6201/amd-details-its-3rd-gen-steamroller-architecture

 

I think console processors are also based on steamroller architecture cores with GCN 1.1 or 2 based GPU cores. It will be hell of a combinations. So lets hope that on desktop market, AMD brings at least some competition for Intel future gen processors.

 

AMD next node will be 28 nm or whatever TSMC or Global Foundries decides.

For Intel next node is 14 nm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

CPUs are all about single-threaded performance and will remain this way. We're not headed towards CPUs with more cores, but rather heterogenous systems combining a processor that excels at serial workloads (i.e. the "CPU") and one that excels at parallel workloads (i.e. the "GPU"), both sharing the same memory and sometimes even on the same die (i.e. Trinity -> Kaveri).  This is the design used in the next-gen consoles; on PC we're slowly heading there (I guess?) with recent advances like compute shaders, gpu computing frameworks like CUDA, OpenCL, AMP, etc.

 

For the past several years Intel has done plain better than AMD in the desktop CPU space; AMD has attempted to compensate for its poor architectural performance by throwing more cores and higher frequencies at the problem, with lackluster results. However as Carmack noted during his last 2-hours speech, AMD dictating the architecture on next-gen consoles should give it an edge as all engine code will be optimized for AMD first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

CPUs are all about single-threaded performance and will remain this way. We're not headed towards CPUs with more cores, but rather heterogenous systems combining a processor that excels at serial workloads (i.e. the "CPU") and one that excels at parallel workloads (i.e. the "GPU"), both sharing the same memory and sometimes even on the same die (i.e. Trinity -> Kaveri).  This is the design used in the next-gen consoles; on PC we're slowly heading there (I guess?) with recent advances like compute shaders, gpu computing frameworks like CUDA, OpenCL, AMP, etc.

 

For the past several years Intel has done plain better than AMD in the desktop CPU space; AMD has attempted to compensate for its poor architectural performance by throwing more cores and higher frequencies at the problem, with lackluster results. However as Carmack noted during his last 2-hours speech, AMD dictating the architecture on next-gen consoles should give it an edge as all engine code will be optimized for AMD first.

 

 

AMD's HSA is where it's at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

this wont somehow give AMD an edge in the future in the computing space at all. Theres one reason,and one reason only why Sony and Microsoft went with the jaguar chip. PRICE. You have to remember jaguar is an architecture for mobile type devices. It has low power consumption,and its way cheaper than putting a beast like a core or piledriver/(steamroller?) chip in there. The consequences of this is that developers are going to have to multithread up the ass to get good performance out of these console chips.  We've also heard 3rd party developers accounts on how next gen console games are written for PC first(singlethreaded,cough), then dirty compiled to consoles, then optimized,likely by doing some heavy multithreading. I bet the custom GPUs are also going to be used to offload computations to give the cpu some breathing room,and don't forget the Cloud ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

this wont somehow give AMD an edge in the future in the computing space at all. Theres one reason,and one reason only why Sony and Microsoft went with the jaguar chip. PRICE. You have to remember jaguar is an architecture for mobile type devices. It has low power consumption,and its way cheaper than putting a beast like a core or piledriver/(steamroller?) chip in there. The consequences of this is that developers are going to have to multithread up the ass to get good performance out of these console chips.  We've also heard 3rd party developers accounts on how next gen console games are written for PC first(singlethreaded,cough), then dirty compiled to consoles, then optimized,likely by doing some heavy multithreading. I bet the custom GPUs are also going to be used to offload computations to give the cpu some breathing room,and don't forget the Cloud ;)

 

Jaguar isn't an architechture, it's the name for AMD's APU offerings built on Steamroller.

 

So basically, 4 Steamroller modules and one on-die GPU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Jaguar isn't an architechture, it's the name for AMD's APU offerings built on Steamroller.

 

So basically, 4 Steamroller modules and one on-die GPU.

 

jaguar is a microarchitecture. its an improvement over the bobcat microarchitecture. jaguar chips use jaguar cores,not steamroller cores. steamroller is a microarchitecture itself. it is an improvement over the piledriver microarchitecture. There are APUs using Jaguar, and there are APUs using Piledriver,and there will be APUs using Steamroller. Low cost Notebook APUs like the A6-5200 are using jaguar cores, because guess what, these are low power devices, while desktop APUs like a10-5800k are using piledriver cores because these are performance devices that dont need to be low power. xbox one and ps4 are using jaguar cores in their APU,not piledriver,not steamroller.

 

bobcat->jaguar low power microarchitecture

 

bulldozer->piledriver->steamroller performance microarchitecture

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Jaguar isn't an architechture, it's the name for AMD's APU offerings built on Steamroller.

 

So basically, 4 Steamroller modules and one on-die GPU.

Steamroller is the successor to Piledriver, Jaguar is the successor to Bobcat. Different architectures, different target platforms. The APUs built on Steamroller will be called Kaveri.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

this wont somehow give AMD an edge in the future in the computing space at all. Theres one reason,and one reason only why Sony and Microsoft went with the jaguar chip. PRICE. You have to remember jaguar is an architecture for mobile type devices. It has low power consumption,and its way cheaper than putting a beast like a core or piledriver/(steamroller?) chip in there. The consequences of this is that developers are going to have to multithread up the ass to get good performance out of these console chips.  We've also heard 3rd party developers accounts on how next gen console games are written for PC first(singlethreaded,cough), then dirty compiled to consoles, then optimized,likely by doing some heavy multithreading. I bet the custom GPUs are also going to be used to offload computations to give the cpu some breathing room,and don't forget the Cloud ;)

 

Price and the fact that that APU runs a radeon 7850 equivalent, all in one chip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

AMD owns ATi, and remember that a lot of consoles have been powered by ATi GPUs now. Add to that the fact that high end Power PC support is virtually non-existent now that Apple dropped them, and that the Cell architecture was not as big a hit as Sony wanted, and you get AMD in the Xbox and PS3.

 

That said, AMD has been making better APUs than Intel for a long time now. That hasn't had much of an effect on their high end market, however.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Seems like the consoles are using an eight core version, not the four core you can get in PCs.

 

So it doesn't seem like it's a one to one comparison, at least with currently offered products.

 

It certainly validates their strategy to some degree, but that doesn't make their earlier products any more competitive.  I'm not sure it could've happened any other way.

 

I've had enough trouble with this box I'd probably move back to AMD next year if I wasn't making the X1 my main comp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

IMO if AMD had APUs with only a dual core or quad core processor attached, I believe MS and Sony would have still gone with them. I don't think the multiple cores are driving much of the purchasing decision.

 

Also remember that in terms of purchasing, it's got to be much easier to get a deal from AMD to produce a huge number of chips just for you, versus Intel, who already has a significant marketshare to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Seems like the consoles are using an eight core version, not the four core you can get in PCs.

 

So it doesn't seem like it's a one to one comparison, at least with currently offered products.

 

It certainly validates their strategy to some degree, but that doesn't make their earlier products any more competitive.  I'm not sure it could've happened any other way.

 

I've had enough trouble with this box I'd probably move back to AMD next year if I wasn't making the X1 my main comp.

 

Those processors follow the piledriver architecture: 4 modules: 8 integer units 4 FPUs. Both fx8320 and fx8350 follow the same architecture as x1 and ps4. (also 8120 but those processors are not as good as piledriver, nonetheless they still deliver fair amount of processing power, I don't know how much more though), APUs from AMD haven't yet gotten into the 8 core realm, that's supposed to change with steamroller architecture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

They're not really using an 8 core version. They are using 2 quad core modules that each have their own l2 cache,and each module communicates with the Northbridge separately. Its really 2 chips taped together basically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Jaguars cores are independant from everything I've read, they don't follow that logic at all.

 

Those processors follow the piledriver architecture: 4 modules: 8 integer units 4 FPUs. Both fx8320 and fx8350 follow the same architecture as x1 and ps4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

AMD is not in a position as bad as some fanboys think they are.

 

I think their strategy (APU and multi core) is not bad and could definately pay later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Ultimately I don't think it would make a massive amount of difference. The fact that Intel CPUs have higher per thread execution performance does not mean that they are deficient in threaded tasks, the benchmarks suggest the 2 are about even in math heavy applications, but it would probably bring AMD on level pegging with Intel which would certainly not be a bad thing for consumers.

 

Their ownership of ATI also gives them a big edge in GPU performance which will also help matters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I like AMD but AMD has the technology to shutdown or wind down the CPU when it isn't being used. I forget the name for it but, AMD might be able to get back in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.