backtop


Print 124 comment(s) - last by Justin Case.. on Oct 1 at 11:13 PM

New Phenom triple-core processor coming in 2008

AMD today updated its roadmap with another multi-core processor, to slot between its dual and quad-core processors – Phenom triple-core processors. The new Phenom triple-core processors feature three processing cores on a single die and based on AMD’s Barcelona architecture, which launched last week in Opteron form.

The new triple-core processors will feature similar specifications as its upcoming Phenom X2 and X4 brethren. The Socket AM2+ processors feature 512KB of L2 cache for each core and a shared pool of L3 cache. Essentially, the Phenom triple-core processors are quad-core variants with one core disabled. This allows AMD to simply disable one core on quad-core dies for maximum use of a single wafer.

AMD claims to be the only company to offer tri-core processors, which the company claims to bring “true multi-core technology to a broader audience.” AMD has not given the Phenom triple-core processors an official name yet. However, it wouldn’t be too surprising if the tri-core processors followed the current Phenon naming scheme and received the Phenom X3 name.

“With our advanced multi-core architecture, AMD is in a unique position to enable a wider range of premium desktop solutions, providing a smarter choice for customers and end users,” said Greg White, vice president and general manager, Desktop Division, AMD. “As a customer-centric company, AMD is committed to working with our OEMs to deliver compelling value propositions across their multi-core product families with capabilities that address their requirements and aspirations.”

Features unique to AMD’s Barcelona and Stars architectures such as split power planes and dynamic independent core speed adjustments remain supported on triple-core processors. Additionally, AMD Phenom triple-core processors support HyperTransport 3.0 for up to 16GB/second of I/O bandwidth.

AMD claims significant performance gains over dual-core processors with its triple-core processors in benchmarks such as SYSmark 2007 and 3DMark06, where gaming and digital content creation performance is key.

“A continued commitment to elegant design and innovative processor architecture is instrumental to revolutionizing the technology industry,” said Richard Shim, research manager for IDC's Personal Computing program. “The advent of triple-core processors is a valuable market opportunity for customers to deliver end users compelling solutions and further differentiate on the desktop.”

Expect AMD to launch its Phenom triple-core processors in Q1 2008. AMD plans to launch its quad-core Phenom X4 next quarter.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

The INQ was right after all...
By MDme on 9/18/2007 1:01:31 AM , Rating: 1
just had to get it out of my chest....




RE: The INQ was right after all...
By Justin Case on 9/18/2007 2:11:49 AM , Rating: 3
That might have something to do with the fact that they actually go hunting for news instead of sitting at home waiting for the manufacturers' press releases to arrive in their inbox. ;)


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By James Holden on 9/18/2007 2:43:12 AM , Rating: 3
Nobody remembers when you're right. People remember when you're wrong.

Justin, if you aren't living proof of that, I don't know who is.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3400


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By johnsonx on 9/18/2007 12:24:27 PM , Rating: 2
yep, Rydermark is the first thing that comes to mind every time I see Justin Case post anything. Thanks to that, and other.... epsiodes...., my BS detector starts to beep quietly as soon as the name comes up.


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By Justin Case on 9/18/2007 6:38:19 PM , Rating: 1
I absolutely stand by my comments to Rydermark: if the author had said "this is a real-time render of a 3D scene", I would have called bullshit. Without knowing what that image was supposed to be, you simply cannot conclude that the author's claims (which were related to the precision of some nVidia shaders) were true or false.

In fact, even if the author had claimed that image was a real-time 3D render (which, as I said then and repeat now, would be complete bullshit), that still would not tell us anything about the fundamental claim about the precision of the shaders.

But since the benchmark's author did not say what the image was supposed to be, for all you or I know, it could simply be the result of running a pre-rendered bitmap through some shader code, using a manually defined mask.

Unfortunately it seems a lot of people like to comment on issues related to pixel shaders without even understanding what a pixel shader is. Pixel shaders operate in pixel space, not on vertices. In games they are typically applied during the rendering process, but there's no reason why they can't be applied to a pre-existing bitmap.

Saying that "it looks just like a filter was applied in Photoshop, which proves it wasn't a pixel shader" is a demonstration of ignorance; a "filter" applied to a group of pixels (i.e., a bitmap) is exactly what a pixel shader does. In fact, a lot of (2D, pixel) filters used by high-end compositing applications (Shake, AFX, etc.) are implemented as... you guessed it, GPU pixel shaders.

Of course, it's easier to make a lot of noise and vote down posts that point out your ignorance than it is to actually go learn something about it. But the problem with that approach is that you continue to be ignorant.


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By CyborgTMT on 9/18/2007 8:48:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Without knowing what that image was supposed to be, you simply cannot conclude that the author's claims (which were related to the precision of some nVidia shaders) were true or false.

Fudo:
quote:
SOME TWO weeks back we promised you screenshots to back up a story about a fudge on Nvidia benchmarks.


Seems pretty clear to me they are supposed to be screenshots of the benchmark.

quote:
But since the benchmark's author did not say what the image was supposed to be, for all you or I know, it could simply be the result of running a pre-rendered bitmap through some shader code, using a manually defined mask.

Taking an image and applying a manual mask... Yah, that's called using Photoshop.

quote:
Unfortunately it seems a lot of people like to comment on issues related to pixel shaders without even understanding what a pixel shader is. Pixel shaders operate in pixel space

Where the pixel fairies have their kingdom and all is good in the universe.

quote:
Saying that "it looks just like a filter was applied in Photoshop, which proves it wasn't a pixel shader" is a demonstration of ignorance

Actually the fact that most of the stock images that they used to create those 'screenshots' were found on the web demonstrates your continued ignorance.

quote:
Of course, it's easier to make a lot of noise and vote down posts that point out your ignorance than it is to actually go learn something about it. But the problem with that approach is that you continue to be ignorant.


I know a significant amount of information when it comes to pixel shaders considering I've worked with quite a few over the years. I've had my hands in more game code than you could possibly imagine.


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By Justin Case on 9/19/2007 2:01:22 AM , Rating: 2
First, Fudo (who will believe just about anything, and misunderstands half of what he's told) is not the author of the benchmark. I was under the impression that the DailyTech article was about the benchmark (and specifically about the author's claims that the nVidia shader pipeline did not have the same precision as the ATI one), not about Fudo. What you're trying to do isn't even proper ad hominem (which would be to attack the benchmark's author); you're attacking the guy (Fudo) who said the other guy (Rydermark author) had said that nVidia's shaders had reduced precision, as a way to dismiss (or avoid addressing) that claim.

Second, tons of benchmarks use stock / public domain images that can be found on the web (does the name "Lenna" ring any bells?). Your point was...?

Third, "screenshot" is not the same as saying "a 3D render". Lots of benchmarks include 2D tests, and there is no fundamental difference between running a pixel shader on a 2D bitmap or on a 3D scene. In fact, it's perfectly possible to create a pixel shader benchmark that doesn't work on or display any images at all. A "pixel shader" is just a program meant to be applied to pixel values. The "pixels" are simply (sets of) numbers. You can run it, time it, compare the result of the calculations to the expected value, and you have all the data you need, even without displaying any pictures (let alone 3D scenes).

If, as you claim, you've "had your hands on tons of game code" (more than I can possibly image - whoah! you must be John Carmack's smarter brother), you must know that.

In fact (as I mentioned in the original thread), if anyone at DT was really interested in Rydermark's claims (instead of using that just as an excuse to attack the Inquirer), all they had to do was write such a program and check the results. I'm sure they had access to the cards mentioned by the Rydermark guys. But it was pretty obvious they couldn't care less about that (besides, nVidia probably advertises on DT).


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By CyborgTMT on 9/19/2007 2:36:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
First, Fudo (who will believe just about anything, and misunderstands half of what he's told) is not the author of the benchmark ..(blah blah blah).. as a way to dismiss (or avoid addressing) that claim.

1 - I was not attacking the benchmark or the creators. I was attacking the INQ and you for believing that crap.
2 - The creators of the benchmark themselves have stated that they never sent those pictures to Fudo and they see no difference between the two companies in their benchmark.
quote:
Second, tons of benchmarks use stock / public domain images that can be found on the web (does the name "Lenna" ring any bells?). Your point was...?

I'll get to that with my answer to your next point.
quote:
Third, "screenshot" is not the same as saying "a 3D render". Lots of benchmarks include 2D tests, and there is no fundamental difference between running a pixel shader on a 2D bitmap or on a 3D scene.

My 'point' is THIS ISN'T A 2D RENDERING APP. It's a 3d graphics benchmarks. And there is a very fundamental difference to running on a 2d bitmap and a 3d scene as they use completely different shader calculations.
At this point I'm really tempted to write out exactly how pixel shaders - which isn't a program but a series of instruction sets - work but this off topic conversation has wasted too much space already. Besides if you don't get it by now it's not worth the time.
quote:
If, as you claim, you've "had your hands on tons of game code" (more than I can possibly image - whoah! you must be John Carmack's smarter brother), you must know that.

No, but coincidentally the first gaming software I ever worked with was the Quake engine.


By Justin Case on 10/1/2007 11:13:03 PM , Rating: 2
A shader isn't an "instruction set". An "instruction set" is a language. A shader is a sequence of instructions, also known as... a program. Pixel shaders have been around for a long, long time (much longer than you probably think).

If you never worked on a game before the Quake engine was available, then I've probably "had my hands on more game code" than you could possibly imagine.

Oh, and your #2 statement is simply false.


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By johnsonx on 9/19/2007 4:02:12 PM , Rating: 2
beep....beep...BEEP! BEEP! BEEP! BEEP! BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP................. ..


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By TomZ on 9/18/2007 10:10:26 AM , Rating: 2
Justin, if you are affiliated with Inq, you should disclose it here.


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By crystal clear on 9/18/2007 11:26:28 AM , Rating: 2
Just in case- if you Justin are as Tom says,then admit it if it is true-NO CRIME committed.

Tom has the unique ability exposing people correctly-like the guy using DUAL USER NAMES.....remember.

Great work TOM.


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By TomZ on 9/18/2007 1:15:00 PM , Rating: 2
I can't take credit for this, someone else made the possible association in the thread linked above.


By CyborgTMT on 9/18/2007 2:08:38 PM , Rating: 2
Hehe, I love a good INQ bashing. That thread brought back some fun memories :).

Justin - you're just a lap-dog so don't feel bad when people with real knowledge around here hit you with a rolled up newspaper.


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By Justin Case on 9/18/2007 6:54:17 PM , Rating: 2
No, Tom, as I've told you before, I'm not. I just happen to like news sites that actually publish news, as opposed to sites that have slowly become "press-release replicators".

If all I want is to read AMD's official press releases, I can go directly to AMD's site. The point of IT journalism is to go looking for the news and tell them to the end users before they are made publicly avilable by the industry. Knowing about a new product 24 hours in advance can be the difference between making a lot of money or losing it. And, in that aspect, the Inquirer (and the Register, and a couple of other real news sites - including Anandtech, in the old days) has been quite good to me over the years. And, also from that point of view, the more people ignore it or fail to understand its articles, the better. You continue to get your "news after the fact", and I'll continue to get my "unfounded and premature speculation"... that turns out to be right 8 times out of 10.

P.S. - Why on Earth would I want to use "dual user names", as the numbskull below suggests? Do I look like I have any problem speaking my mind with this one...? Feel free to check my IP. Check your own, while you're at it, maybe you'll find that you're suffering from schizophrenia.


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By TomZ on 9/18/2007 8:44:10 PM , Rating: 2
Well, thanks for clarifying. I don't think anybody is saying they think you have two user accounts. That was referring to somebody else who got caught in the act. And for the record, no, I only have one user account here, like anybody cares anyway.


RE: The INQ was right after all...
By crystal clear on 9/19/2007 3:28:37 AM , Rating: 1
Tom you put forward a question-

Justin, if you are affiliated with Inq, you should disclose it here.

A response of YES or NO is missing,rather you get a vague response evasive in nature


By rdeegvainl on 9/19/2007 5:29:11 AM , Rating: 2
Not siding with anyone here,
but did you read his first word in the post, the one that says "NO"


By crystal clear on 9/19/2007 3:23:12 AM , Rating: 1
Nobody accused you of using 2 usernames !-while you're at it, maybe you'll find that you're suffering from schizophrenia.

Numbskull should be your username !


"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki