Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39

Thread: AMD FX-8150 With The Open64 5.0 Compiler

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leeenux View Post
    Wow, what a sweeping generalization... and a very misleading one at that.

    How about something like:

    "Unless you're building a PC to run the Cinnebench single threaded benchmark, you're better off with a Core2 Duo."

    Bulldozer did have some regressions, mostly in single threaded benchmarks. However, it's also faster than the Phenom II X6 in many single threaded benchmarks, and almost universally faster in well threaded benchmarks.

    I'm posting from an FX8120, and it feels faster than any Sandy Bridge, Nehalem or Phenom II I've ever used. I have the following windows open:

    Eclipse(EPIC-Perl)
    Netbeans(PHP)
    Firefox
    A Virtualbox VM running an Apache/PHP/Postgresql test server
    A Virtualbox VM running a SVN server
    PGAdmin3
    Several terminals
    Gedit
    ...and a few more random windows

    , and not ever a hint of lag, despite running 2 craptastic Java-based IDEs at the same time. I can even do something CPU intensive like creating a Truecrypt volume or compiling the Linux kernel, and still no slowdown whatsoever. I hate to break it to you, but a quad core Sandy Bridge cannot do all of those things and still be perfectly responsive, especially if you're using it's IGP.
    you just point out the effect of running a benchmark and the reality.
    yes in the reality all cores are floated with any kind of stuff all the time.
    in an benchmark only 1 program make a load.
    i also think that the bulldozer beat the intel cpu if you run all stuff in the same time.

    i for example i do not open up 1 browser windows i do have 60+ browser windows.
    you can beat any cpu only with the browser just open up 200 of them and do some stuff.

    the "singlecore" performance really only care in benchmarks.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    136

    Default

    So I tried to test your experience with intel and amd systems. I own a Athlon64 3700+, used it until end of oktober. It had a nvidia 6600GT inside. Since then i have a i7 2600K (running the iGPU).
    Another PC in the room runs on an AthlonII X3 435 (3x2.9GHz) and a nvidia 220 GT.
    All PCs running kde4 (3700+: kde-4.6.5, the others kde-4.7.3)
    Running 5 Firefox-windows, some with dolphin, many OOo-windows made the UI quite laggy in the X3, my 3700+ even cried when running kile + one OOo + one firefox with 10 tabs.
    I never experienced any lag on my i7, so i opened firefox with 15 tabs, running several websites, including Flash videos. Opened 30 more FF-Windows, tvbrowser (java), kile and kdevelop.
    At this point, Desktop-Effects from kde4 were not that quick anymore - Alt-Tab needed a fraction of a second to show me the cover switch, but then, the windows switched smoothly.
    So, ok, I need to do something stressing the CPU...
    building kdelibs with -j10, building gentoo-sources with -j5, importing kdelibs into kdevelop, in parallel do edit projects with large files in kdevelop and kile (ok - I can't edit two files at the same time, so I switched forth and back).
    All 8 Cores pushed to 100%, and - filnally - editing became some sort of laggy! The Cursor needed a fraction of a second to jump when typing!
    But - hey - everyone knows kwin is not that performant (remember: Opening some windows on an AthlonII X3 + nvidia GPU and doing nothing stressful but editing some files in OOo made the UI laggy), so I disabled desktop effects, et voila, lags disappeared! Editing goes as smooth as everytime (still, kdevelop importing kdeibs, 15 threads compiling kdelibs+kernel on 8 cores, java running, many firefox windows/tabs). To give a minimum load on the GPU, I started the only game I own - xmoto Loading a replay, arranging windows so that xmoto is not covered (note: You must bring the cursor above the xmoto-window in order to start playback of the replay)- anything runs fine, no lag when typing in kile, kdevelop autocompletion comes down instantly, even xmoto runs smooth as if there was nothing!

    So I really can't understand how you could experience such lags with an intel-based system, even when using the iGPU).
    What kind of GPU do you use in your Bulldozer-systems?
    If you experience Lags on intel-systems when running the iGPU, just disable desktop effects (Or use a more performant window manager).

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    i for example i do not open up 1 browser windows i do have 60+ browser windows.
    you can beat any cpu only with the browser just open up 200 of them and do some stuff.
    What the hell do you need 60+ open websites (not talking about 200)? Watching websites for changes?!?
    Software engineers know: Polling is the most expensive way to watch changes.
    If you have the time to regularly watch those 60+ pages for changes - OK, I would like to have your job :/ Nevertheless I would recommend to let you notify by RSS or Mail.
    This is the exact opposite of the regular benchmarking (just running 1 app), and in the same way not usual.

    I usually have some documentation open in my browser, kdevelop and/or kile, not too often libreoffice. In the background often some compiling is going on. Sometimes I watch videos (with compiling in the background :P), and sometimes I play xmoto. That's why I wanted a system with iGPU. I was thinking to get a Llano-based system. When I said "now it's the time" they were not available anymore... Then I said "wait for Bulldozer" - as the NDA expired and the first benchmarks popped up, I said "no, not with that power consumption under load!" (BTW: until now, there is no AM3+-Board with on-Chip-GPU (BD-Ready boards with AM3-Chip don't count - they just make trouble with BD...).
    My i7 system uses ~30W on idle, 40-50W on average usage, and 120W on heavy load. I think this would not be possible with BD + discrete GPU.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmalzler View Post
    So I tried to test your experience with intel and amd systems. I own a Athlon64 3700+, used it until end of oktober. It had a nvidia 6600GT inside. Since then i have a i7 2600K (running the iGPU).
    Another PC in the room runs on an AthlonII X3 435 (3x2.9GHz) and a nvidia 220 GT.
    All PCs running kde4 (3700+: kde-4.6.5, the others kde-4.7.3)
    Running 5 Firefox-windows, some with dolphin, many OOo-windows made the UI quite laggy in the X3, my 3700+ even cried when running kile + one OOo + one firefox with 10 tabs.
    I never experienced any lag on my i7, so i opened firefox with 15 tabs, running several websites, including Flash videos. Opened 30 more FF-Windows, tvbrowser (java), kile and kdevelop.
    At this point, Desktop-Effects from kde4 were not that quick anymore - Alt-Tab needed a fraction of a second to show me the cover switch, but then, the windows switched smoothly.
    So, ok, I need to do something stressing the CPU...
    building kdelibs with -j10, building gentoo-sources with -j5, importing kdelibs into kdevelop, in parallel do edit projects with large files in kdevelop and kile (ok - I can't edit two files at the same time, so I switched forth and back).
    All 8 Cores pushed to 100%, and - filnally - editing became some sort of laggy! The Cursor needed a fraction of a second to jump when typing!
    But - hey - everyone knows kwin is not that performant (remember: Opening some windows on an AthlonII X3 + nvidia GPU and doing nothing stressful but editing some files in OOo made the UI laggy), so I disabled desktop effects, et voila, lags disappeared! Editing goes as smooth as everytime (still, kdevelop importing kdeibs, 15 threads compiling kdelibs+kernel on 8 cores, java running, many firefox windows/tabs). To give a minimum load on the GPU, I started the only game I own - xmoto Loading a replay, arranging windows so that xmoto is not covered (note: You must bring the cursor above the xmoto-window in order to start playback of the replay)- anything runs fine, no lag when typing in kile, kdevelop autocompletion comes down instantly, even xmoto runs smooth as if there was nothing!

    So I really can't understand how you could experience such lags with an intel-based system, even when using the iGPU).
    What kind of GPU do you use in your Bulldozer-systems?
    If you experience Lags on intel-systems when running the iGPU, just disable desktop effects (Or use a more performant window manager).
    The GPU is just a basic HD5450 running the FOSS drivers.

    If you experience Lags on intel-systems when running the iGPU, just disable desktop effects (Or use a more performant window manager).
    You've pretty much said it all, my friend. KDE is a steaming bucket of cack, I would thoroughly expect it to be laggy under all kinds of circumstances that a respectable DE wouldn't. There was a nice thread about it on here not too long ago, where Martin tried to convince everyone that the sky is green at night, and red during the day, despite many people claiming to have experienced the cack-ness of Kwin. In fact, Intel IGPs probably provide the best KDE experience, while providing the absolute worst experience in every other DE. You wouldn't even have to turn off the desktop effects if you weren't using KDE, I would invite you to try it with something like the latest Ubuntu and Unity, or even a Gnome2 or 3 distro.

    Aside from that, I'm having a bit of a hard time following what you're saying (English is probably not your first language), but I think a few things come into play:

    1. 8 cores: You don't have 8 cores, you have 4 real cores, and 4 not-so-real-cores, and if they are all at 100% then you're guaranteed to experience lag because it can only handle 4 real work threads at a time, see point 2:
    2. You actually had lag once you pushed it in a real world scenario(albeit not a very common one) , see point 3:
    3. I've still never seen any lag under any circumstances

    I suppose I could try to conjure up some unrealistic scenario like running:

    1. All of my developer stuff
    2. An entire virtual network of 6 servers and 6 clients
    3. Every single VM simultaneously creating a Twofish-AES-Serpent Truecrypt volume on a different VM

    , but what would that prove, as that is not a realistic load I'd ever want to run? Obviously at some point you could bog it down, the point was that even as an advanced power user, I cannot forsee a real world scenario that could bring my Bulldozer to it's knees, whereas you demonstrated that 3 simultaneous CPU-intensive tasks on your Intel CPU can grind the rest of your desktop to a halt. I can(and do) run my developer stuff and a whole slew of VMs, and I can even run a couple of CPU intensive tasks at the same time, mostly because Bulldozer is just a better parallel CPU that the equivalent Intel CPU, and yes, giving me twice as many real-ish cores for the same price helps a lot.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    401

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    i for example i do not open up 1 browser windows i do have 60+ browser windows.
    Have tried using tabs

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leeenux View Post
    Wow, what a sweeping generalization... and a very misleading one at that.

    How about something like:

    "Unless you're building a PC to run the Cinnebench single threaded benchmark, you're better off with a Core2 Duo."

    Bulldozer did have some regressions, mostly in single threaded benchmarks. However, it's also faster than the Phenom II X6 in many single threaded benchmarks, and almost universally faster in well threaded benchmarks.

    I'm posting from an FX8120, and it feels faster than any Sandy Bridge, Nehalem or Phenom II I've ever used. I have the following windows open:

    Eclipse(EPIC-Perl)
    Netbeans(PHP)
    Firefox
    A Virtualbox VM running an Apache/PHP/Postgresql test server
    A Virtualbox VM running a SVN server
    PGAdmin3
    Several terminals
    Gedit
    ...and a few more random windows

    , and not ever a hint of lag, despite running 2 craptastic Java-based IDEs at the same time. I can even do something CPU intensive like creating a Truecrypt volume or compiling the Linux kernel, and still no slowdown whatsoever. I hate to break it to you, but a quad core Sandy Bridge cannot do all of those things and still be perfectly responsive, especially if you're using it's IGP.
    No it is not a " a sweeping generalization" it is just plain fact. Your workload is nothing spectacular shouldn't show "lag" on any recent processor unless you have a real configuration problem. Heck I usually have a couple of VM's (in VMWare) going while doing video encoding to H264 while doing HD editing in another application with numerous other applications running in the background with no "lag".

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    No it is not a " a sweeping generalization" it is just plain fact. Your workload is nothing spectacular shouldn't show "lag" on any recent processor unless you have a real configuration problem. Heck I usually have a couple of VM's (in VMWare) going while doing video encoding to H264 while doing HD editing in another application with numerous other applications running in the background with no "lag".
    Your conclusion of Bulldozer is squarely at odds with the review done on this very website.

    This is starting to make a lot of sense:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15869683

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    316

    Default

    The Bulldozer chips do very well against the Intel chips in integer performance... You certainly get your money there. Things like compiling apps and general desktop multitasking is helped a lot by integer performance and it's why Intel tries to cram Hyperthreading into their CPUs wherever they can (ie: LGA-2011). You can see that in Dhrystone benchmarks done by every review site.. The Bulldozer FX-8150 chips are no more than 10% slower in Integer performance than a 2600k and the 2600K is 18% more expensive ($50).


    What most review sites show as Bulldozer lacking on is it's floating point performance. Bulldozer is a bit weak in floating point because of the shared FPUs. To make up for the shortcoming in floating point, AMD built these Bulldozer chips to support FMA4 accelerations, an optimization that isn't available until apps are compiled with such optimizations.. Those benchmarks that show Phenom II being anywhere near the performance of Bulldozer is because they're running apps that haven't been compiled with FMA4 accelerations, it's as simple as that. When FMA4 accelerations is compiled into the binary, floating point on Bulldozer goes up a solid 30% across the board leaving Phenom II CPUs a long way behind.. You're not always going to see that 30% comparing the compiled binaries of Open64 v5 to Open64 v4, but they show up when you compare Open64v4 to -O2 GCC or Open64v5 to -O2 GCC for floating point apps. In Open64v4, Pov-Ray jumped up a solid 30% and in Open64v5 you can see some other floating point apps that didn't jump up 30% in Open64v4 to get their 30% boost in floating point performance in Open64v5 instead.

    If people want to pay 18% more money for <10% more performance, then that's up to them. Intel has been targeting the enthusiast market for a long time and they continue to do so. With AMD, you continue to get more bang for your buck, as has always been true for many years. You might have to jump through a hoop or two to get that floating point performance on these Bulldozer chips up (recompiling floating point heavy apps with FMA4 accelerations), but really there's not much there to argue about. Especially considering with OpenCL, floating point apps should be pushing their floating point work to the GPU as it's over 1000x faster at it. Even the Fusion Integrated GPUs (ie: Radeon 6550D) are dozens of times faster at floating point than the fastest $999 Intel CPUs are. The days of doing floating point on the CPU are coming to an end. A modern GPU has got several hundred shader "cores" that can all process floating point calculations in parallel, there's no reason to run them on a 4 or even 8 core CPU.
    Last edited by Sidicas; 11-26-2011 at 08:37 PM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sabriah View Post
    Have tried using tabs
    i use tabs but no difference.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Heck I usually have a couple of VM's (in VMWare) going while doing video encoding to H264 while doing HD editing in another application with numerous other applications running in the background with no "lag".
    Are you running a Sandy Bridge chip? You know Intel doesn't put VT-X or other virtualization accelerations into their Desktop CPUs anymore? So it's pretty much a given that AMD CPUs would be better for virtualization compared to the Intel equivalents.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •