Ok so I have seen the tests THG did comparing Intels new dual cores vs AMD's dual cores.... But how much better is the performance from the AMD FX compared to the new AMD 4800 Dual core? If the test is on THG can someone please link me to the article?
Nothing to do with SOI. Without SOI they wouldn't be able to get as high as they are. It's all down to architecture.
The P4 was designed for high clock rates (hence the long pipelines, etc, etc).
AMD took the high torque low rev approach rather than the high rpm high power approach that intel took
June 16, 2005 1:05:23 PM
Well I dont think AMD could have scaled the k8 on 130nm SOI much over 2.6. You can argue its not the process but the architecture but its actually because of both. Any architechture will hit a wall somewhere. Maybe if the P4 (NorthWood core) could've gone to 4 ghz on 130nm SOI but not much further it still would have hit a wall.
So I think wusy ment that AMD's process couldnt bring them much more mhz than now because as we know thermals are not as big of a deal to AMD...
I beleive you wrong...1st its not FSB but HT link. And i beleive benchmark showed little to no increase in the HT speed over 1000. Thats was a while ago I dont know whats the status. Also dual core might make a better usage of the HT link.(anyone?)
The difference is a 200mhz increment...
The top AMD X2 runs at 2.4ghz, the FX55 runs at 2.6ghz. The X2 has 2 cores that can process 2 threads/processes at the same time, the FX55 is 200mhz faster. Which is better depends on what you are doing (multi-tasking or single-tasking essentially).
HT was designed to handle negotiation in multi-core/multi-cpu situations, so it actually puts a nice fast bus to negotiate traffic between the CPU(s) and memory. I guess to answer your question... yes, inter CPU communication (cache snooping, etc.) will make good use of the HT bus. (I'm saying it 'backwards' technically, but I think you get the idea)
June 16, 2005 3:18:21 PM
Ya i kinda knew that(but it still clarifies). I rember reading that AMD planned their K8 to be dual core from the start. And that the crossbar was getting almost no work and that in the dual core it would be used to its potential. My question was more: does 1ghz vs 2ghz or whatever speed HT link will make a diffenrence? Cuz I rember it didnt change much with dual core even with the (if I rember correctly) nf3 150(?) that only had HT800 back then.
I don't know what kind of load dual cores put on HT, but extrapolating from single-core facts leads me to think it will take a quad-core CPU to fully utilize a 1000mhz HTT link. And I doubt that will be truly saturated unless memory bandwidth is increased...
This is a completely wild assumption however. I don't know or have any knowledge on how much bandwidth inter-cpu communications use, though it doesn't seem like it would bet that much...