So 5 years after launch, what exactly went wrong with Bulldozer?
It wasn't Intel
>>52090689
Everything!
>>52090689
Everything will be massively multi threaded within a few years, these new (sorta) 8 core processors that cost the same as a silly intel (actually) dual core will be so amazing that all intel users will soon buy AMD or commit suicide and by then we will ahve 32 core processors which will be so good your dick will fall off.
5 years later, single threaded porformance is still seriously important in most programs that people use. Any application that matters and that does multi-threading properly will be running on a xeon.
>>52090689
Extremely poor single core performance, lower than expected clock rate and a higher than justifiable price. Vishera addressed a lot of the shortcomings by increasing IPC slightly, increasing clockrates significantly and dropping the price remarkably but by then it was too late, the damage was done to its reputation and Intel had gained a significant lead.
i cant wait to see the average computer 10 years from now and how fast they will be :)
AMD made a bet that programs would be able to use 6-8 threads efficiently and so just tossed in moar coars instead of significantly improving the ones they already had.
In reality devs are lazy pieces of shit who should be whipped. They will make programs run on a single fucking thread if they can get away with it.
However the other problem is more cores means more power draw. An FX-83xx will consume around 200 watts of electricity under load while an i5 with similar performance will consume around 100 watts of electricity. Still, in today's world its not that much of a difference. Running an FX-83xx under very heavy load for 8 hours a day, for a month, assuming 1 kWh = 16ยข, equates to around 8$. The intel chip would only cost around 4$ a month for comparison. Though the scenario I described is batshit insane and most people would never use their CPU that much.
>>52092438
*81xx
>>52090689
Nothing, it is great. Intel just paid people not to make use of it in software.
>>52092438
>AMD made a bet that programs would be able to use 6-8 threads efficiently and so just tossed in moar coars instead of significantly improving the ones they already had
To be fair that's only half the strategy. AMD needed small cores to be part of their APU lineup. The general idea was that HSA would make up for the lackluster performance, which it does in certain niche cases.
If you go back through their slides, bulldozer was also supposed to scale from 5 watts all the way up to servers. That never really happened either, which is why they made the much more efficient kitty cat cores.
All in all, the bulldozer family failed to deliver on pretty much every single key point aside from small core size. It's no wonder the armchair chip designers on /g/ said AMD just should have further developed the stars cores.
>>52092438
AMD were just as lazy as the devs. Banking on programmers not being lazy is gonna lead to a bad time. Wirth's law is very real.
>>52092648
People on the industry wanting to push for innovation and new technologies, is something worth putting money on.
HSA made some decent waves.
Mantle even more so.
AMD have kick-started the wheel.
Let's hope they'll have the momentum to keep it turning.
1 Fetch/Decode per 2 cores. Intel gives you 3 integer pipelines for share between 2 hyper threads. AMD gives you 1 decoder to share between 2 cores.
Best part was /g/ defended this as solid design 5 years ago.
>>52092549
I blame the developers. 8 bulldozer cores is actually a fuckton of raw power if they can all be used efficiently like in ray tracing or video encoding. Now we have lazy nigers who will only use one maybe two threads for their programs/video games.
Face it, developers stopped giving a fuck about performance years ago. They only care about money now. If that means dishing out dogshit in a couple of months that runs on a single thread and uses 8gb of vram then so be it as long as they can jew customers out of their money with fancy ads and fake gameplay.
Bet you this is only going to get worse as cpus gain better single core performance and gpus get 16-32gb of vram
>>52092648
true
>>52092772
>as cpus gain better single core performance
>>52092772
>gpus get 16-32gb of vram
*emmett brown meme*
it's christmas i don't have my memes with me
>>52092829
just because intel is being a lazy niger, doesn't mean we still can't improve single core performance.
The thread/load balancer in their pipeline is horrible and at times it would overload a single physical (which means a tuple of logical ones) while leaving other physical processors pretty much idling.
CE here
>>52093806
why is h264 able to use all threads then? I thought programs that only stressed one or two cores meant the dev was a lazy piece of shit.
>>52093949
CE niggers talk big but don't know anything
don't bother
>>52093949
Devs don't have control over the pipeline
>>52094096
If they program in javascript sure.
