找回密码
 新注册用户
搜索
查看: 33753|回复: 89

[分享] 小爆一下某神N久前对推土机的测试结论

  [复制链接]
发表于 2011-10-12 21:30:23 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
本帖最后由 金鹏 于 2011-10-13 20:05 编辑

NDA解除,爆一下某神对拖拉机跑BIGADV的的性能评价

推土机 4x16 Opteron 已入手
2011-3-2 20:33 编辑

具体不便透露,一台测试机已到,正在安装ubuntu 10.10 server x64 性能请参考近期 PPD

睿频没开,频率暂时也不公布了

512G DDR3-1333

[09:15:07] Completed 0 out of 250000 steps  (0%)
[09:18:59] Completed 2500 out of 250000 steps  (1%)
[09:22:42] Completed 5000 out of 250000 steps  (2%)
[09:26:16] Completed 7500 out of 250000 steps  (3%)
[09:30:08] Completed 10000 out of 250000 steps  (4%)
[09:34:06] Completed 12500 out of 250000 steps  (5%)

saco 发表于 2011-3-2 18:49 | 只看该作者

6901



金鹏 2011-3-4 01:13
兄弟从4路Interlagos推算桌面3.6G的Zambezi性能能超越980X么?
saco 2011-3-4 12:59
原生8核肯定在FAH中能超越虛擬8核,但是未必能超過虛擬12核
在目前的測試中,AMD的下一代產品只是堆核堆頻率+自動超頻
單核性能相比原先產品提升30%,並沒有amd宣稱的50%,
也許和驅動有關
運行fah的話,兩顆56xx至強其實只有真實的12核心,而成績也只稍遜與24核心的2XAMD馬爾庫尼,
未來從單顆CPU性能來講,AMD仍舊落後INTEL一大截,當然價格也落後一大截


金鹏 2011-6-8 20:52
不知道兄弟测试推土机跑BIGADV啥情况?
游客,如果您要查看本帖隐藏内容请回复



压力测试CPU多线程高密度计算BIGADV客户端是不二之选
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 21:34:07 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 金鹏 于 2011-10-14 08:17 编辑

讓我看看

参考anandtech对推土机的深度评析,可以印证大明神的测试结果
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/11

Final Words
In many cases, AMD's FX-8150 is able to close the gap between the Phenom II X6 and Intel's Core i5 2500K. Given the right workload, Bulldozer is actually able to hang with Intel's fastest Sandy Bridge parts. We finally have a high-end AMD CPU with power gating as well as a very functional Turbo Core mode. Unfortunately the same complaints we've had about AMD's processors over the past few years still apply here today: in lightly threaded scenarios, Bulldozer simply does not perform. To make matters worse, in some heavily threaded applications the improvement over the previous generation Phenom II X6 simply isn't enough to justify an upgrade for existing AM3+ platform owners. AMD has released a part that is generally more competitive than its predecessor, but not consistently so. AMD also makes you choose between good single or good multithreaded performance, a tradeoff that we honestly shouldn't have to make in the era of power gating and turbo cores.

Bulldozer is an interesting architecture for sure, but I'm not sure it's quite ready for prime time. AMD clearly needed higher clocks to really make Bulldozer shine and for whatever reason it was unable to attain that. With Piledriver due out next year, boasting at least 10-15% performance gains at the core level it seems to me that AMD plans to aggressively address the shortcomings of this architecture. My only concern is whether or not a 15% improvement at the core level will be enough to close some of the gaps we've seen here today. Single threaded performance is my biggest concern, and compared to Sandy Bridge there's a good 40-50% advantage the i5 2500K enjoys over the FX-8150. My hope is that future derivatives of the FX processor (perhaps based on Piledriver) will boast much more aggressive Turbo Core frequencies, which would do wonders at eating into that advantage.



AMD also shared with us that Windows 7 isn't really all that optimized for Bulldozer. Given AMD's unique multi-core module architecture, the OS scheduler needs to know when to place threads on a single module (with shared caches) vs. on separate modules with dedicated caches. Windows 7's scheduler isn't aware of Bulldozer's architecture and as a result sort of places threads wherever it sees fit, regardless of optimal placement. Windows 8 is expected to correct this, however given the short lead time on Bulldozer reviews we weren't able to do much experimenting with Windows 8 performance on the platform. There's also the fact that Windows 8 isn't expected out until the end of next year, at which point we'll likely see an upgraded successor to Bulldozer.



So what do you do if you're buying today? If you have an existing high-end Phenom II system, particularly an X4 970 or above or an X6 of any sort, I honestly don't see much of a reason to upgrade. You're likely better off waiting for the next (and final) iteration of the AM3+ lineup if you want to stick with your current platform. If you're considering buying new, I feel like the 2500K is a better overall part. You get more predictable performance across the board regardless of application type or workload mix, and you do get features like Quick Sync. In many ways, where Bulldozer is a clear win is where AMD has always done well: heavily threaded applications. If you're predominantly running well threaded workloads, Bulldozer will typically give you performance somewhere around or above Intel's 2500K.



I was hoping for Bulldozer to address AMD's weakness rather than continue to just focus on its strengths. I suspect this architecture will do quite well in the server space, but for client computing we may have to wait a bit longer for a more competitive part from AMD. The true culprit for Bulldozer's lackluster single-threaded performance is difficult to track down. The easy answer would seem to be clock speed. We've heard of issues at Global Foundries and perhaps Bulldozer is the latest victim. If AMD's clock targets were 30% higher than Phenom II, it simply didn't make them with the FX-8150. I've heard future derivatives will focus more on increasing IPC indepedent of process technology and clock speed, but if you asked me what was the one limit to success I would say clock speed. As a secondary factor, AMD appeared to make some tradeoffs to maintain a reasonable die size at 32nm. Even then Bulldozer can hardly be considered svelte. I suspect as AMD is able to transition to smaller transistor geometries, it will be able to address some of Bulldozer's physical shortcomings.

The good news is AMD has a very aggressive roadmap ahead of itself; here's hoping it will be able to execute against it. We all need AMD to succeed. We've seen what happens without a strong AMD as a competitor. We get processors that are artificially limited and severe restrictions on overclocking, particularly at the value end of the segment. We're denied choice simply because there's no other alternative. I don't believe Bulldozer is a strong enough alternative to force Intel back into an ultra competitive mode, but we absolutely need it to be that. I have faith that AMD can pull it off, but there's still a lot of progress that needs to be made. AMD can't simply rely on its GPU architecture superiority to sell APUs; it needs to ramp on the x86 side as well—more specifically, AMD needs better single threaded performance. Bulldozer didn't deliver that, and I'm worried that Piledriver alone won't be enough. But if AMD can stick to a yearly cadence and execute well with each iteration, there's hope. It's no longer a question of whether AMD will return to the days of the Athlon 64, it simply must. Otherwise you can kiss choice goodbye.

翻译网页:http://www.chiphell.com/thread-277833-1-1.html
大多数情况下 AMD's FX-8150 可以拉近  Phenom II X6 和 Intel Core i5 2500K 之间的差距。如果负载合适,推土机甚至可以和顶级 Sandy Bridge 较劲。我们终于有了一款采用功率选通,带有工作正常的Turbo Core特性的高端AMD CPU。遗憾的是AMD这些年来一直受到抱怨的单线程性能(lightly threaded ),仍然没有改进,推土机在这方面很蹩脚(Bulldozer simply does not perform)。更糟的是,在一些重度多线程的引用中,推土机相对上一代 Phenom II X6 的提高太小,现有AM3+平台的用户不值得为此升级。AMD发布的推土机虽然总体上比上一代更有竞争力,但是不是在各个方面都有改善。AMD 非让你在 单线程性能和多线程性能之间做选择。在这个功耗选通和Turbo Core 被采用的时代,我们根本不应该被迫做这种选择。

推土机当然是一个有意思的构架。但是我觉得他还没有准备好。 AMD很明显的需要更高的频率来让推土机真正的发光,但是不管由于什么原因AMD没做到这一点。当 打桩机明年出现的时候要提高提高10%-15%的性能,看来AMD打算狠狠的改进现在的构架缺陷。我唯一不确定的是核心上15%的提高是不是足够赶上已有的差距。和 2500K 相比, 后者对推土机有40-50% 的优势。我希望推土机以后的变种能有更给力的Turbo Core频率,这对于拉近差距很有用。     
           
AMD还和我们说,Win7 对推土机优化还不够好。由于AMD独特的模块化结构,操作系统线程的调度需要知道什么时候要把线程归到一个模块,什么时候要分到有独立缓存的不同模块。Win 7 的调度没考虑到推土机的结构,看到哪里有空就塞到哪里。而没有考虑最优方案。 Windows 8 预期会解决这个问题。但是由于推土机评测的准备时间很短,我们还没有足够的Win8平台下的测试。 这也是由于Win8 在明年底的时候才会推出,而到时候推土机很可能已经有升级版了。

        
那么如果现在你要花钱,会买什么?   如果你已经有了一个高端Phenom II 系统,特别是X4 970 以上或者X6,我认为你没有任何理由再升级。如果你要坚持你的平台,那么你最好等到下一波AM3+产品线的到来。如果你要买新的,那么我觉得2500K总体来说是是更好的选择。你会得到更可靠的性能,不随应用不同而变化很大。而且你还得到 Quick Sync 之类的特性。在许多方面,推土机在AMD一贯做的好的方面明显有优势:重度多线程的程序。如果你主要是跑线程化很好的负载,那么推土机一般会带来超过Intel 2500K 的性能。(注:这也许能解释LINUX下跑BIGADV远超2600K的原因?
        
我本来希望推土机能弥补AMD以往的弱点,而不是只增强它拿手的方面。我觉得这个构架会在服务器领域表现不错,但是在客户机方面AMD还没有提供有足够有竞争力的产品。推土机缺乏单线程性能的真正的原因很难 追查,简单的回答可以是时钟频率问题。我们已经听说了最近  Global Foundries 遇到的麻烦,推土机也许就是最新的受害者。 如果AMD对推土机频率的目标是比Phenom II增加30%。那么AMD在 FX-8150就没做到。我听说以后的推土机变种会强调IPC的增强,而不是强调频率。但是如果非要说是哪一个因素限制了推土机的成功,我会说是频率。第二个因素是因为AMD要在32nm技术下控制芯片面积。现在推土机是非常不“苗条”的。我觉得随着AMD向更小的晶体管转移,会弥补一部分推土机物理(尺寸)上的不足。

好的消息是AMD 有很给力的路线图,我们希望它能被很好的执行。我们都需要AMD雄起。我们已经看到,如果没有AMD的强力竞争会怎么样:我们会得到人为受限的CPU,超频极度受限,特别是在比较便宜的档次。我们毫无选择因为没有替代产品。我不认为推土机是个足够强的替代产品能让Intel回到极度竞争状态。但是我们的确需要推土机达到这种水平。我相信AMD能做到,但是仍然需要很大的进步才行。 AMD 不能只靠他的 更好的 GPU构架来卖APU,它需要提高X86的性能--更明确的是说,AMD需要在单线程性能上做提高。推土机没做到这一点,我担心打桩机也还不够。但是如果AMD能保持每年一更的步调,而且很好的执行,还是有希望的。 AMD回到Athlon 64的年代,这不是一个会不会的问题,它必须这样! 否则我们就和选择权说拜拜了。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 21:35:57 | 显示全部楼层
我也看看,希望给力点~~~
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 21:47:55 | 显示全部楼层
会有什么惊喜呢?
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 21:47:58 | 显示全部楼层
哈哈,看看,过年发了钱看看是2600k还是推土机。。。。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 22:06:42 | 显示全部楼层
晕,还要回复,楼主为增加人气,用心良苦。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 22:09:52 | 显示全部楼层
恩……看看……虽然我DIY仅限笔记本……
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 22:22:05 | 显示全部楼层
回复才能看~~~
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 22:24:02 | 显示全部楼层
是2600K的1.2倍,推土机是神器啊
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 22:31:45 | 显示全部楼层
回复看看!物理多核心算分布式本来就很赚嘛!
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 22:39:19 | 显示全部楼层
领福利~
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 22:45:21 | 显示全部楼层
回复可见= =……
据说推土机在日常应用中就是杯具
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 22:50:41 | 显示全部楼层
如果我的发言没营养 那么,我是在攒积分
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 23:01:16 | 显示全部楼层
AMD的芯片在服务器领域还有一定优势
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-12 23:02:08 | 显示全部楼层
压力测试CPU多线程高密度计算BIGADV客户端是不二之选
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 新注册用户

本版积分规则

论坛官方淘宝店开业啦~
欢迎大家多多支持基金会~

Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|中国分布式计算总站 ( 沪ICP备05042587号 )

GMT+8, 2024-3-29 13:41

Powered by Discuz! X3.5

© 2001-2024 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表