What do AMD CPUs have over Intel?

[i_build_nanosuits]

i owned both, intel is better...strong fast cores are king in this world and intel offer's that. AMD is good for budget build and awesome multithreader (FX-8320 for example can overclock a ton and compete with an i7-3770 at stock in many scenarios of rendering, encoding, editing...) but for gaming where strong fast cores remain a priority you are better with even an old sandy bridge i5...no matter how far you overclock the AMD chip it never catch up it's lack on single-core performance wich will prove to be crucial for gaming...an FX should be paired with a GTX 770 or radeon R9 280x maximum, anything above will get bottlenecking in many games, i experienced this myself as i used an FX-8320@4.6GHZ for 6 months with a GTX780, now with an i7 haswell the bottlenecking is completely gone.

[thebennyboy]

People ignored your post because you automatically looked like an idiot to them when you brought futureproof up. Your level of understanding CPU's perfectly explains my statement that why Intel has more competition with amd fanboys than their cpu's. Dude paid like 250$ for his olddozer cpu who thinks its futureproof with its 8 years outdated IPC getting wrecked even at 5GHz by a i5 at stock when 2 games are properly utilizing more than 4 cores. Before Directx12 comes out, you'd be asking advice here for a new cpu so I'd advice you to shut it until DX12 comes out.

Shut it about Mantle, nvidia's new drivers are reducing cpu bottlenecking way better. Linking the evidence for this:

http://pclab.pl/art58123.html

http://i.imgur.com/taEVTSg.png

http://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/battlefield-4-mantle-benchmarks.gif

Google amd vs nvidia cpu overhead

Reading that only strengthens my opinion and likely others too about how much of a raging fanboy you are. You provide little or no evidence to back yourself up and just talk out of your ass. I am now leaving this thread to let you simmer in your own Intel sponsored juices, you should also work out how to give proper evidence instead of just saying "Google it". Even when you do Google what you've mentiones it proves very little. Also, since when did nvidia become a part of this discussion? Bringing in another pretty poor argument try and revive your argument? Give it a rest and learn how to properly argue your point.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Reading that only strengthens my opinion and problem other too about how much of a raging fanboys you are. You provide no evidence to back yourself up and just talk out of your ass. I am now leaving this thread to let you simmer in your own Intel sponsored juices, you should also work out how to give proper evidence instead of just saying "Google it". Even when you do Google what you've mentiones it proves very little. Also, since when did nvidia become a part of this discussion? Bringing in another pretty poor argument try and revive your argument? Give it a rest and learn how to properly argue your point.

there's nothing better than first hands experience, if you want true unbiased answers or anybody else wants it for that matter feel free to contact me via PM i'll be glad to share my experience on these with you guys.

[kariakar5]

They give you good performance for a low price. Great for budget gaming builds especially when paired with the R9 290x

[thebennyboy]

there's nothing better than first hands experience, if you want true unbiased answers or anybody else wants it for that matter feel free to contact me via PM i'll be glad to share my experience on these with you guys.

Please do, we need some unbiased people in here. Also ye. Please PM it.

[vm'N]

Threads like this just make me want to slap some ppl, the amount of fanboys on this forum are terrible. Both Intel and AMD have fanboys, although it is more common for people to talk shit about AMD. If your going to have an argument, prove your point instead of talking out of your ass.

Lets go through the pipelines of both Piledriver and Haswell. (As I promised)

 

A sketch of bulldozers stages (NOTE; This is not how it should have been put up. This is essentially a 1.5 "core")

EDIT; There were only minor changes from bulldozer to piledriver.

A sketch of Haswells stages

Front-end:

Lets start with the branch-predictor; The branch predictor is essentially trying to predict future instructions and so on by previous instructions with a very complex algorithm.

Haswells branch predictor is one of the most advanced branches you can find today. This is one of the areas where Intel is truly dominant over every other manufacture (NOT ONLY AMD).

If the case is that the branch predictor will predict wrong it will flush everything to where it was discovered. (Haswell are better at discovering the mistake earlier in the pipeline so it doesn't affect the performance as much).

Fetch; This is the component that will fetch the CISC instructions and the data required. The better fetch the more you can fetch at a time.

The instruction queue; This is the last queue before the decode stages. Haswell have 2x20 (for hyper-threading. Normally Intel used a 1x26 queue, but it ended up been one thread dominating the other. So the implemented a second one), meanwhile piledriver have 1x16(for BOTH backends). This is a major no go for piledriver. This is one of piledrivers major flaws, and one of the reason why piledriver will starve under heavier workloads.

Decoders; Piledriver have 4 "normal" decoders. Haswell have 3 normal decoders (called simple decoders) and 1 advanced (called complex). The complex decoders is purely designed towards SIMD instructions, that normally would require many cycles to be decoded.

Back-end:

Then we are at the schedulers; Intel is using one unified scheduler for both its ALU cluster and SIMD cluster. Meanwhile piledriver is using a separate scheduler for each cluster. So piledriver have 2 ALU scheduler and a SIMD scheduler. (NOTE: Only one of the ALU cluster is presented in the diagram. This is because we are trying to compare a single amd "core" to an haswell core. Piledriver feature CMT technology (duplicate ALU cluster in a core). So for a whole CMT core just add an additional ALU cluster).

You can see piledrivers retirement queue is only 128 entries, but is FP (SIMD) scheduler is 160 entries. This is because the entire CMT core, SHARE the SIMD cluster. So AMD have another 128 retirement queue in the CMT core. However this also shows why a single thread on piledriver will have such a weak SIMD performance. Because it cannot essentially fully utilize the SIMD cluster with only 128 entries. Plus if the ALU cluster is pulling resources you have even LESS for the SIMD cluster.

Intel is having a 192 entries unified scheduler which can handle both extremely heavy AVX (SIMD) and Integer workloads on a single thread. Up till 168 entries.

Essentially: Intels unified scheduler keeps the overview on everything, meanwhile AMD uses the retirement scheduler.

Lets start with the ALU cluster;

Haswell have 4 ALUs (integer) and 4 AGUs (load / store) per core with 6x256bit SIMD. (1 out of 4)

Piledriver have 2 ALUs and 2 AGUs per core (1 out of 8) with a SHARED 2x128 FMAC and 2xMMX SIMD. (1 out of 4)

So in pure ALU instructions that are VERY predictable, VERY well-threaded, the FX 8350 can be even with the core I7 4770k.

In EVERYTHING that is even slightly non-predictable, piledriver will start to suffer. Something that requires to heavy decoding, piledriver will suffer.

But in something that cannot fully utilize the 16 ALUs split over 8 ALU cluster, haswell WILL be dominant.

And I haven't even mentioned SIMD instructions...

[i_build_nanosuits]

Please do, we need some unbiased people in here. Also ye. Please PM it.

well...i posted this already i will re-post it and comment some more okay:

 

i owned both, intel is better...strong fast cores are king in this world and intel offer's that. AMD is good for budget build and awesome multithreader (FX-8320 for example can overclock a ton and compete with an i7-3770 at stock in many scenarios of rendering, encoding, editing...) but for gaming where strong fast cores remain a priority you are better with even an old sandy bridge i5...no matter how far you overclock the AMD chip it never catch up it's lack on single-core performance wich will prove to be crucial for gaming...an FX should be paired with a GTX 770 or radeon R9 280x maximum, anything above will get bottlenecking in many games, i experienced this myself as i used an FX-8320@4.6GHZ for 6 months with a GTX780, now with an i7 haswell the bottlenecking is completely gone.

 

Obviously, as you've read i think intel has better performance across the board, varying from marginal at best (in heavily multi-thread tasks such as video encoding,3d rendering, compression...) to defenetively a lot better (light threaded applications such as games for example who relies on strong single core performance). NOW, is it justyfing the price difference between both solutions, not for most users (remember the i7 CPU alone cost almsot twice as much as an FX-8320 WITH the motherboard!!).

 

Let me now explain some stuff, a core i5-4670K (4690K same sh!t) for example will have much faster cores and cost a little more than an FX, the multi-thread performance is not as good as an FX, so if one do A LOT of video rendering for example, then the FX is obviously the better choice...but if the main purpose of the build is gaming only, then saving some more for an i5 i think is worth it especialy if you consider heat and power cosumption...even better i would say would be a locked i5 with a cheap intel motherboard, that cost about the same as an FX with a beefy CPU cooler and higher end motherboard, but will perform better for purely gaming.

 

So it all depends on the budget and use for the system, if one is to game only and is on a budget i' recommend the locked i5 + cheap H97 motheboard for example...more budget would allow for an unlocked i5 with Z97 board.

If one NEED the multi-thread performance allong with gaming and on a budget i'd say an FX-8320 with a good quality 970 board or 990FX with a good CPU cooler and overclock, this is good...but as i mentionned the GPU should be GTX 770 at MOST.

If budget is no issues and you want purely the best for both gaming and rendering then the i7haswell is the way to go...but that cost much more.

[patrickjp93]

Hyper-threading doesn't duplicate or split up an ALU cluster. A core I7 4770k still only have 4 ALU clusters.

That's not what my reading on the hyperthreading tech has led me to believe.

http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/hyperthreading-technology-explained/

 

While it's not exactly doubling your core count, it's a scheduling system so advanced it may as well be doubling the core count except in cases where multiple threads must use exactly the same resources.

[vm'N]

That's not what my reading on the hyperthreading tech has led me to believe.

http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/hyperthreading-technology-explained/

 

While it's not exactly doubling your core count, it's a scheduling system so advanced it may as well be doubling the core count except in cases where multiple threads must use exactly the same resources.

You are have completely misunderstood SMT then.

SMT is an technology in use to increase throughput and be powerefficient.

SMT is in use because newer architecture have such a wide execution stage that a single thread cannot fully utilize it. So by letting the fetch, fetch for 2 threads and have it decoded you can more or less leave it alone. The backend doesn't care and doesn't know what is what.

The back-end is simply processing certain values. Lets take an example;

You play wow, you killed a mob you gain 30 XP (low right?)

You already have 170 XP.

The processor will first issue two LOAD commands(whereever the data might be (usually in the memory)

LOAD A (170)

LOAD B (30)

ADD A,B=C (can be translated into ADD 170,30=C)

STORE C

The wider the execution stage, the more performance you can gain from SMT.

SMT is basically having 2 processes ran simultaneously on a single core. They have a dynamic relationship regarding the resources.

So it is STILL 4 ALU clusters. Not 8 ALU clusters.

[patrickjp93]

You still havn't provided any logical evidence that intel is innovating for and pushing into mobile.

 

If you cannot fathom that there are plenty of situations, such as we see all the time in the middle east, where  a small group of people cannot convince the government or the people with their limited power and resources, then nothing I say can educate you on such matters. Politics isn't simple, people aren't simple, just because what you say is right does not mean that people will listen, care or act. A revolution is not so easily strung together.

 

Seriously, your ideology falls right in line with extremists. The Taliban are therefore justified in killing innocent americans, innocent pakistanis, innocent people in general, because by your logic they are responsible for the wrongdoings in the middle east? Is the government therefore justified in killing the innocent afghanis, iraqis and pakistanis with drones, because they all hold that responsibility for that loss of american life? Is it the fault of the jews in nazi germany they were subjected to genocide?

 

Please, don't just type whatever bull comes out of your rear end, because that's all i can see in your posts.

This is a does-not-follow fallacy. Nothing I've said justifies the killing of innocents. It only provides the rationale and basis. The Taliban killing our soldiers and attacking our government is perfectly justified, and accusing the U.S. of being the Great Satan, while obviously using religious symbols to excite the masses, is not unjustified. We let our government destroy the middle east and now we are dealing with the fallout both from The Shias and Sunnis whose balance we upset.

 

And your following lines involving the people being blamed for their own persecution, really? When the majority of the people are against you and remove your power to argue, then it's not your fault, but that wasn't the case in Greece or in the U.S.. I'm very familiar with the happenings in Greek politics at the time. The number of people standing up for change was tiny, and the arguments were not well constructed. That is the fault of the people.

[patrickjp93]

You are have completely misunderstood SMT then.

SMT is an technology in use to increase throughput and be powerefficient.

SMT is in use because newer architecture have such a wide execution stage that a single thread cannot fully utilize it. So by letting the fetch, fetch for 2 threads and have it decoded you can more or less leave it alone. The backend doesn't care and doesn't know what is what.

The back-end is simply processing certain values. Lets take an example;

You play wow, you killed a mob you gain 30 XP (low right?)

You already have 170 XP.

The processor will first issue two LOAD commands(whereever the data might be (usually in the memory)

LOAD A (170)

LOAD B (30)

ADD A,B=C (can be translated into ADD 170,30=C)

The wider the execution stage, the more performance you can gain from SMT.

SMT is basically having 2 processes ran simultaneously on a single core. They have a dynamic relationship regarding the resources.

So it is STILL 4 ALU clusters. Not 8 ALU clusters.

My mistake. I just woke up. I confused ALUs for the schedulers. Arithmetic Logic Unit =/= instruction scheduler. I'm sorry . It is that there are 8 schedulers vs. just 4 in a non-HT format, which then manifests in what you described as well as other operations that use different parts of the ALU cluster running at the same time.

[vm'N]

SMT doesn't duplicate the schedulers..

The OS can only see the fetch. If a fetch can fetch 2 threads, the OS can see 2 fetches.

The OS have no idea what happens behind the decoders. If it can see a fetch, that is were it will queue the thread.

[ZeroBreaker]

This is a does-not-follow fallacy. Nothing I've said justifies the killing of innocents. It only provides the rationale and basis. The Taliban killing our soldiers and attacking our government is perfectly justified, and accusing the U.S. of being the Great Satan, while obviously using religious symbols to excite the masses, is not unjustified. We let our government destroy the middle east and now we are dealing with the fallout both from The Shias and Sunnis whose balance we upset.

 

And your following lines involving the people being blamed for their own persecution, really? When the majority of the people are against you and remove your power to argue, then it's not your fault, but that wasn't the case in Greece or in the U.S.. I'm very familiar with the happenings in Greek politics at the time. The number of people standing up for change was tiny, and the arguments were not well constructed. That is the fault of the people.

 

I'm not sure you are in touch with the current state of affairs in the world. The US government has not destroyed the middle east, and has had little influence in 'the balance of shias and sunnis'. I'm a muslim myself, and that is an utterly laughable statement to make. Just to educate you a little, Sunni's have always been the majority and had more power when looking at islam generally. Shias are considered a minority when looking at islam as a whole. They tend to be concentrated in areas, but they consistently have been attacked verbally and often physically in the islamic world for controversial beliefs - this has been going on as long as shia islam has been around. the US has never had anything to do with it, in fact the US has in a way united these two forces against itself.

The attacks in the middle east were wrong because they were directed at countries which had nothing to do with attacks on the US, and backfired by inciting hatred against the west where there was practically none. That is the general gist of the situation there. Not only have you completely misunderstood the whole issue, you are attempting to simplify it - No world issues are simple things.

And thanks for clarifying. Initially you said it would be your fault even if you did all you could in your power, but now you say if you are in the minority it is not your fault?

Just to be clear, you are saying that the taliban are justified in killing american soldiers because of wrong decisions of the US government (who have the power to enact a draft forcing people to become soldiers) ? fricking hell mate, think before you hit the post button or just don't bother.

[Admire]

*Clicks on a Intel vs. AMD topic........Finds discussion about terrorism and foreign policy.........LEAVES!*

[Legitsu]

where the hell are the mods 

[Bloodkil933]

Rofl? Youre referring to single core performance with IPC.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k-4-8ghz-multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7189/choosing-a-gaming-cpu-september-2013/8

http://pclab.pl/art58123.html

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screenshots/original/2013/09/SC2HotS-pcgh.png

http://www.hardwarepal.com/best-cpu-gaming-9-processors-8-games-tested/

http://i.imgur.com/4rU8fJF.png

http://hardwarepal.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Battlefield-4-1920-x-1080-Low-settings-GTX-770-vs-7970.jpg

http://cdn.overclock.net/1/1f/500x1000px-LL-1fa7a24a_3350949334973.png

FX 9590:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/62166-amd-fx-9590-review-piledriver-5ghz-11.html

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-9590-9370_5.html#sect0

 

The games you've quoted only make use of 4 or less cores, show me some benchmarks of games that are not 720p and in fact 1080p AND that utilize all 8 cores of the 8320/8350. and 8 FPS difference at 1080p at most? Yes, because that's totally worth the £100 for more the 4770k. And also PCIe3.0 or 2 does NOT make a difference. GPU's aren't at a stage yet where PCIe 2.0 will create a bottleneck.

[Faa]

The games you've quoted only make use of 4 or less cores, show me some benchmarks of games that are not 720p and in fact 1080p AND that utilize all 8 cores of the 8320/8350. and 8 FPS difference at 1080p at most? Yes, because that's totally worth the £100 for more the 4770k. And also PCIe3.0 or 2 does NOT make a difference. GPU's aren't at a stage yet where PCIe 2.0 will create a bottleneck.

Show me benchmarks that are cpu bound. I'm tired of people claiming zero fps difference when the game is in reality cpu bound like fuck. I've included Crysis 3 & BF4, maybe take the time to look at them. You don't even need an i7 to outperform a 8350, its pointless buying i7's and 8350's. All you need these days is a i5/6300.

[thebennyboy]

Show me benchmarks that are cpu bound. I'm tired of people claiming zero fps difference when the game is in reality cpu bound like fuck. I've included Crysis 3 & BF4, maybe take the time to look at them. You don't even need an i7 to outperform a 8350, its pointless buying i7's and 8350's. All you need these days is a i5/6300.

 

I'm not going to argue with you about that but there is an article that i have read and think that you and some other people should read. The thread is: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/48571-intel-amd-architectural-discussion-how-far-ahead-is-intel/ and it was written by @TechFan@ic and it is a very interesting read.

[ericlee30]

They have cheaper CPU's.

[SotarK]

I really liked my FX-8350 when I had it. Overclocked to 5Ghz it kept up pretty well. Although after I got a new job I went to a 4670k and absolutely wouldn't be able to go back. 

[patrickjp93]

I'm not sure you are in touch with the current state of affairs in the world. The US government has not destroyed the middle east, and has had little influence in 'the balance of shias and sunnis'. I'm a muslim myself, and that is an utterly laughable statement to make. Just to educate you a little, Sunni's have always been the majority and had more power when looking at islam generally. Shias are considered a minority when looking at islam as a whole. They tend to be concentrated in areas, but they consistently have been attacked verbally and often physically in the islamic world for controversial beliefs - this has been going on as long as shia islam has been around. the US has never had anything to do with it, in fact the US has in a way united these two forces against itself.

The attacks in the middle east were wrong because they were directed at countries which had nothing to do with attacks on the US, and backfired by inciting hatred against the west where there was practically none. That is the general gist of the situation there. Not only have you completely misunderstood the whole issue, you are attempting to simplify it - No world issues are simple things.

And thanks for clarifying. Initially you said it would be your fault even if you did all you could in your power, but now you say if you are in the minority it is not your fault?

Just to be clear, you are saying that the taliban are justified in killing american soldiers because of wrong decisions of the US government (who have the power to enact a draft forcing people to become soldiers) ? fricking hell mate, think before you hit the post button or just don't bother.

Wrong, with the ousting of Saddam Hussein the U.S. effectively gave Iraq to the Shias, giving Iran unprecedented regional influence without a neighbor keeping them in check. Again you prove you can't follow basic logic. And of course with the Shia government led by a man who persecutes the Sunnis, this has led the ISIS military group being able to rally the Sunnis of Iraq to their side.

 

This is all a result of direct U.S. interference.

[Legion]

AMD CPUs double as heaters. Great for the winters. 

 

So old and still great

[patrickjp93]

I'm not sure you are in touch with the current state of affairs in the world. The US government has not destroyed the middle east, and has had little influence in 'the balance of shias and sunnis'. I'm a muslim myself, and that is an utterly laughable statement to make. Just to educate you a little, Sunni's have always been the majority and had more power when looking at islam generally. Shias are considered a minority when looking at islam as a whole. They tend to be concentrated in areas, but they consistently have been attacked verbally and often physically in the islamic world for controversial beliefs - this has been going on as long as shia islam has been around. the US has never had anything to do with it, in fact the US has in a way united these two forces against itself.

The attacks in the middle east were wrong because they were directed at countries which had nothing to do with attacks on the US, and backfired by inciting hatred against the west where there was practically none. That is the general gist of the situation there. Not only have you completely misunderstood the whole issue, you are attempting to simplify it - No world issues are simple things.

And thanks for clarifying. Initially you said it would be your fault even if you did all you could in your power, but now you say if you are in the minority it is not your fault?

Just to be clear, you are saying that the taliban are justified in killing american soldiers because of wrong decisions of the US government (who have the power to enact a draft forcing people to become soldiers) ? fricking hell mate, think before you hit the post button or just don't bother.

No no no, I said if the minority was truly powerless, such as the Jews having been walled off before they knew what hit them.

[Judist]

Take the political discussion elsewhere please.

[vm'N]

I'm not going to argue with you about that but there is an article that i have read and think that you and some other people should read. The thread is: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/48571-intel-amd-architectural-discussion-how-far-ahead-is-intel/ and it was written by @TechFan@ic and it is a very interesting read.

There simply are some wrong points throughout.

I will quickly point them out;

- Piledriver can process two floating point operation at the same time. So it can function as 8 threads for the SIMD cluster (I gave a explanation in my previous post).

- HSA is NOT meant to replace SIMD cluster as he refer to. I have also previous pointed out (not in this thread) what exactly HSA will be useful for.

- "however anything that utilizes all threads available runs faster on the smaller more parallel architecture of the AMD module" - Again he is wrong. I have previously mention in this thread where exactly the module shines, and where it doesn't.

- "So architecturally speaking, Intel isn't really ahead of AMD nor is AMD ahead of Intel so to speak" - Extremely big no. Intel is far ahead in certain technologies. Especially the frontend and SIMD cluster.

This was simply something I quickly spotted.