crack amd computer chips
11:21 AM Posted In computer chips|crack any computer chip|crack any pc |chips|bord|motherbord|system|cracking|password cracking Edit This 0 Comments »
This week, scores relating to AMD's recently unveiled Opteron processor and its AMD64 technology (formerly x86-64, or Hammer) were posted on SPEC's website.
The single-CPU scores fell slightly below those of Intel's best. However, the dual- and quad-CPU configurations were another story altogether. Below is the comparison of those systems: (Note: Itanium 2 shows four-way and 8-way systems)
The dual- and quad-CPU Opteron systems scaled extremely well across each increase. The two primary reasons for this are the multi-ported HyperTransport bus architecture, and the fact that each CPU runs with memory connected directly to it. The AMD64 architecture allows for programs to be running on each CPU, with the majority of its memory workload being issued only to the processor it's connected to. This frees up bus traffic and allows all CPUs to work much more closely to the configuration seen by single-CPU systems, which have full, exclusive access.
Read more about single-CPU Opteron scores at ChipGeek. Visit the SPEC Web page to see both Single-CPU and Multi-CPU scores. Visit SPEC scores for previous quarters: 2003 Q1, 2002 Q4, 2002 Q3, 2002 Q2, 2002 Q1.
RICK'S OPINION
Looks like AMD's HyperTransport vision has paid off, and in a major way. In fact, these tests show how incredibly Opteron scales, and what performance can be offered when the memory bottleneck is removed.
Bear in mind that Opteron CPUs utilize a 1 MB L2 cache. They do not have the several-MB L3 caches that the Itanium systems use. These are reasonably small chips, coming in at around 200 mm^2, including the cache. This is in stark contrast to Itanium's current Itanium 2 system at approximately 420 mm^2. This gives AMD a huge pricing advantage.
If you look closely at the graph above, you'll note that the four-way Opteron nearly equals an 8-way Itanium 2 in terms of integer performance! That, in and of itself, says a mouthful about this architecture.
AMD has been critized routinely for delaying its products, even by me. I would have to say that all evidence to date makes any and all comments made by the naysayers, myself included, absolutely null and void.
By dishing out a good old fashioned trouncing like this, AMD's Opteron is definitely here to stay! Look for large-scale migration by the end of the year. Multi-CPU Opteron systems are surpassing everything we hoped for. Major kudos and truly excellent work go out to you, AMD!
Read more: http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/amds-dual-and-quad-opteron-scores-beat-intels-best-2003059/#ixzz0oj3FjJtI
The single-CPU scores fell slightly below those of Intel's best. However, the dual- and quad-CPU configurations were another story altogether. Below is the comparison of those systems: (Note: Itanium 2 shows four-way and 8-way systems)
The dual- and quad-CPU Opteron systems scaled extremely well across each increase. The two primary reasons for this are the multi-ported HyperTransport bus architecture, and the fact that each CPU runs with memory connected directly to it. The AMD64 architecture allows for programs to be running on each CPU, with the majority of its memory workload being issued only to the processor it's connected to. This frees up bus traffic and allows all CPUs to work much more closely to the configuration seen by single-CPU systems, which have full, exclusive access.
Read more about single-CPU Opteron scores at ChipGeek. Visit the SPEC Web page to see both Single-CPU and Multi-CPU scores. Visit SPEC scores for previous quarters: 2003 Q1, 2002 Q4, 2002 Q3, 2002 Q2, 2002 Q1.
RICK'S OPINION
Looks like AMD's HyperTransport vision has paid off, and in a major way. In fact, these tests show how incredibly Opteron scales, and what performance can be offered when the memory bottleneck is removed.
Bear in mind that Opteron CPUs utilize a 1 MB L2 cache. They do not have the several-MB L3 caches that the Itanium systems use. These are reasonably small chips, coming in at around 200 mm^2, including the cache. This is in stark contrast to Itanium's current Itanium 2 system at approximately 420 mm^2. This gives AMD a huge pricing advantage.
If you look closely at the graph above, you'll note that the four-way Opteron nearly equals an 8-way Itanium 2 in terms of integer performance! That, in and of itself, says a mouthful about this architecture.
AMD has been critized routinely for delaying its products, even by me. I would have to say that all evidence to date makes any and all comments made by the naysayers, myself included, absolutely null and void.
By dishing out a good old fashioned trouncing like this, AMD's Opteron is definitely here to stay! Look for large-scale migration by the end of the year. Multi-CPU Opteron systems are surpassing everything we hoped for. Major kudos and truly excellent work go out to you, AMD!
Read more: http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/amds-dual-and-quad-opteron-scores-beat-intels-best-2003059/#ixzz0oj3FjJtI
RSS Feed (xml)
0 comments:
Post a Comment