speechless
This post has been edited by edwin3210: Jun 8 2007, 10:30 AM
[WTF] barcelona delayed.
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 10:30 AM, updated 19y ago
Show posts by this member only | Post
#1
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
808 posts Joined: Jan 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 10:45 AM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#2
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
10,544 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: GMT +8:00 |
Am i the only one who is NOT surprised?
|
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 10:52 AM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#3
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
954 posts Joined: Jul 2005 From: Anywhere! |
they gonna lose to intel seriously
my beloved AMD |
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 11:18 AM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#4
|
|
Elite
5,434 posts Joined: Dec 2006 |
but they always delay it and makes no point....
really fedup... |
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 11:20 AM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#5
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
4,060 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang / PJ |
|
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 11:21 AM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#6
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
808 posts Joined: Jan 2007 |
QUOTE(superpc @ Jun 8 2007, 10:52 AM) they gonna lose to intel seriously not rili, and pray that it wont happen. from the info that have been surfaced, barcelona will match intel current core processor. as for the claim by AMD that barcelona will outperform core by 20% or more, i seriously doubt that my beloved AMD |
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 11:58 AM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#7
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,955 posts Joined: Jan 2006 From: Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerych |
|
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 12:33 PM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#8
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
10,544 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: GMT +8:00 |
QUOTE(X.E.D @ Jun 7 2007, 10:58 PM) Wait. This was expected already? I thought it was yearend delivery for both serverside and consumer... there's no way you can make substantial changes to your marchitecture in less than half a year, so don't count on it. Core2 was not started after Core was finished, else they would have never completed it so fast. Intel has more resources to have more concurrent development teams.(IMO Penryn wouldn't come Q3, most probs mid-end of Q4. I'll wager my FX5200. Hopefully they'll redo some marchtecture magick (don't think it's too late- Core Duo to Core 2 Duo was fast) after getting stable silicon. Achieving both is a challenge though. |
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 12:41 PM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#9
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
3,239 posts Joined: Jun 2005 |
not suprised. more like expecting it
afterall, ATi has infected AMD with their delay sickness. Added on June 8, 2007, 12:54 pmmy condolence for Barcelona http://www.gearlog.com/2007/06/amds_barcel...z_and_disap.php Hope it's not true... another one, QUOTE According to Dean McCarron of Mercury Research, if AMD-or any other card maker for that matter-doesn't have a product ready to ship by Q4 in a given year, there generally isn't huge rush to get it out the following quarter. http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2099613,00.asp This post has been edited by toughnut: Jun 8 2007, 12:54 PM |
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 01:39 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
9 posts Joined: Jun 2007 |
Terrible news... but did AMD said to reuters that we can expect a demo somewhere around july? btw, read this another malaysian news website regarding barcy updates, its been well circulated in many forums.. http://xpentor.com/mamboserver/index.php?o...id=516&Itemid=1
BTW, i'm a newbie to this forum, XD |
|
|
Jun 8 2007, 04:31 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,810 posts Joined: Mar 2007 |
I dont know how they got themselves into such a mess
This post has been edited by joe_star: Jun 8 2007, 04:34 PM |
|
|
Jun 12 2007, 09:03 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
4,060 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang / PJ |
Anandtech wrote up something. The poor performance might be due to immature BIOS implementations. My guess wasnt wrong too, the clock scaling is not up to expectation and AMD might delay Barcelona launch.
|
|
|
Jun 12 2007, 09:08 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
808 posts Joined: Jan 2007 |
QUOTE(charge-n-go @ Jun 12 2007, 09:03 AM) Anandtech wrote up something. The poor performance might be due to immature BIOS implementations. My guess wasnt wrong too, the clock scaling is not up to expectation and AMD might delay Barcelona launch. here is the whole story |
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 12 2007, 09:29 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
10,544 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: GMT +8:00 |
That anand article looks suspect to me... performance doesn't scale exponentially with clockspeed lol
|
|
|
Jun 12 2007, 09:37 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
3,239 posts Joined: Jun 2005 |
if performance does scale exponentially with clockspeed, i will consider LN2. really!
anyway, this time DAMMIT seem like in big mess. everything seem like didn't work out for them. even accusing intel of being unfair edit: removed s This post has been edited by toughnut: Jun 12 2007, 09:39 AM |
|
|
Jun 12 2007, 09:41 AM
|
|
VIP
15,903 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Miri |
QUOTE(toughnut @ Jun 12 2007, 09:37 AM) if performance does scale exponentially with clockspeed, i will consider LN2. really! i thought it was intel who accused amd for being unfair comparing barcelona with clovertownanyway, this time DAMMIT seem like in big mess. everything seem like didn't work out for them. even accusing intel of being unfair |
|
|
Jun 12 2007, 09:43 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
4,060 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang / PJ |
QUOTE(ikanayam @ Jun 12 2007, 09:29 AM) That anand article looks suspect to me... performance doesn't scale exponentially with clockspeed lol I guess the performance lost might b due to poor memory utilization by the BIOS (max of DDR2-667 and timing might not b good). It is a miracle if BIOS could make the CPU performance scale exponentially with clock speed LOL. |
|
|
Jun 12 2007, 09:49 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
10,544 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: GMT +8:00 |
Assuming performance is not where it should be, my guess is that some things are still not working right and they had to microcode the fixes which makes it really slow.
|
|
|
Jun 12 2007, 10:08 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
4,060 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang / PJ |
Maybe it is some pre-fetchers problem, since they are new.
Besides this, maybe the performance is not up to expectations in single thread applications due to small L2 caches and 3 issue core. Intel has an absolute advantage when it comes to cache and prefetching. |
|
|
Jun 12 2007, 10:16 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
10,544 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: GMT +8:00 |
I'm surprised that they did not show any encoding benchmarks which should show the largest gains due to SSE128. Looking at die shots, the additional 64bit of the SSE/FP engine seems to be "tacked on" to the existing K8. Doesn't seem to have major changes to the layout per core. So that could be broken, and if the original SSE/FP engine is working they might just have made temporary fixes (to this and a few other things) via microcode, which is why performance isn't so hot, and they can't really show encoding benchmarks because it will look crappy.
Cinebench (which DT ran) is hardly a single threaded app. It scales well up to 16 cores or so. |
| Change to: | 0.0205sec
1.41
5 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 20th December 2025 - 09:25 PM |