Dell, chairman and CEO of Dell Inc. said "If you look at floating point instructions, Barcelona is about 30 percent faster than Clovertown. However, if you look at integer instructions, Clovertown is about 30 percent faster than Barcelona,". (EE Times)
Penryn will be faster about 5% than current Clovertown at the same clock (w/o SSE4 optimized code). As a result, we can expect that Barcelona is roughly 25% faster than Penryn in FP-intensive app, and 35% slower in other app. Even though SSE4 performance is quite impressive, the number of applications which get benefit from the new instruction set is not so many, I guess. One more thing.. Penryn will has much faster clock speed. I cannot expect Barcelona takes back the performance crown (not performance-per-watt) from Intel anytime soon, except multi-socket configuration.
Talking about dual-core part, the benefit from the native quad-core design of Barcelona is dismissed. But Penryn has nothing to lose.
I can't wait to see the competition.
Using local llm (lmstudio) on cursor
3 months ago
2 comments:
First impression of the new generation core from AMD is much lower than what I really wanted to see. It's clock for clock performance leadership to Intel seems not strong enough to competed. Hopefully, it's energy efficiency (performance per watt) will remains competive, but only entry and middle-class performance will get the benefit. Performance king and market leader is still Intel. Not so good news to me.
AMD disappointed me again. It paper-launched the new processor as many times they did. Even benchmark sites and many of the world-class server makers could not receive the chip. I understand why they are doing this, but I really want to see strong competition of the two chip giants. Let's hope the tri-core processes from AMD at early next year will launch at very low price point. Do better AMD guys, please.
Post a Comment