Monday, June 16th 2008

AMD FireStream 9250 Breaks the 1 Teraflop Barrier

At the International Supercomputing Conference, AMD today introduced its next-generation stream processor, the AMD FireStream 9250, specifically designed to accelerate critical algorithms in high-performance computing (HPC), mainstream and consumer applications. Leveraging the GPU design expertise of AMD's Graphics Product Group, AMD FireStream 9250 breaks the one teraflop barrier for single precision performance. It occupies a single PCI slot, for unmatched density and with power consumption of less than 150 watts, the AMD FireStream 9250 delivers an unprecedented rate of performance per watt efficiency with up to eight gigaflops per watt.

Customers can leverage AMD's latest FireStream offering to run critical workloads such as financial analysis or seismic processing dramatically faster than with CPU alone, helping them to address more complex problems and achieve faster results. For example, developers are reporting up to a 55x performance increase on financial analysis codes as compared to processing on the CPU alone, which supports their efforts to make better and faster decisions. Additionally, the use of flexible GPU technology rather than custom accelerators assists those creating application-specific systems to enhance and maintain their solutions easily.

The AMD FireStream 9250 stream processor includes a second-generation double-precision floating point hardware implementation delivering more than 200 gigaflops, building on the capabilities of the earlier AMD FireStream 9170, the industry's first GP-GPU with double-precision floating point support. The AMD FireStream 9250's compact size makes it ideal for small 1U servers as well as most desktop systems, workstations, and larger servers and it features 1GB of GDDR3 memory, enabling developers to handle large, complex problems.

Driving broad consumer adoption with open systems
AMD enables development of the FireStream family of processors with its AMD Stream SDK, designed to help developers create accelerated applications for AMD FireStream, ATI FireGL and ATI Radeon GPUs. AMD takes an open-systems approach to its stream computing development environment to ensure that developers can access and build on the tools at any level. AMD offers published interfaces for its high-level language API, intermediate language, and instruction set architecture; and the AMD Stream SDK's Brook+ front-end is available as open source code.

In keeping with its open systems philosophy, AMD has also joined the Khronos Compute Working Group. This working group's goals include developing industry standards for data parallel programming and working with proposed specifications like OpenCL. The OpenCL specification can help provide developers with an easy path to development across multiple platforms.

"An open industry standard programming specification will help drive broad-based support for stream computing technology in mainstream applications," said Rick Bergman, senior vice president and general manager, Graphics Product Group, AMD. "We believe that OpenCL is a step in the right direction and we fully support this effort. AMD intends to ensure that the AMD Stream SDK rapidly evolves to comply with open industry standards as they emerge."

Accelerating industry adoption
The growth of the stream computing market has accelerated over the past few years with Fortune 1000 companies, leading software developers and academic institutions utilizing stream technology to achieve tremendous performance gains across a variety of applications.

"Stream computing is increasingly important for mainstream and consumer applications and is no longer limited to just the academic or engineering industries. Today we are truly seeing a fundamental shift in emerging system architectures," said Jon Peddie, president, Jon Peddie Research. "As the industry's only provider of both high-performance discrete GPUs and x86-compatible CPUs, AMD is uniquely well-suited to developing these architectures."

AMD customers, including ACCIT, Centre de Physique de Particules de Marseille, Neurala and Telanetix are using the AMD Stream SDK and current AMD FireStream, ATI FireGL or ATI Radeon boards to achieve dramatic performance gains on critical algorithms in HPC, workstation and consumer applications. Currently, Neurala reports that it is achieving 10-200x speedups over the CPU alone on biologically inspired neural models, applicable to finance, image processing and other applications.

AMD is also working closely with world class application and solution providers to ensure customers can achieve optimum performance results. Stream computing application and solution providers include CAPS entreprise, Mercury Computer Systems, RapidMind, RogueWave and VizExperts. Mercury Computer Systems provides high-performance computing systems and software designed for complex image, sensor, and signal processing applications. Its algorithm team reports that it has achieved 174 GFLOPS performance for large 1D complex single-precision floating point FFTs on the AMD FireStream 9250.

Pricing and availability
AMD plans to deliver the FireStream 9250 and the supporting SDK in Q3 2008 at an MSRP of $999 USD. AMD FireStream 9170, the industry's first double-precision floating point stream processor, is currently available for purchase and is competitively priced at $1,999 USD. For more information about AMD FireStream 9250 or AMD FireStream 9170 or AMD's complete line of stream computing solutions, please visit http://www.amd.com/stream.
Source: AMD
Add your own comment

54 Comments on AMD FireStream 9250 Breaks the 1 Teraflop Barrier

#26
Solaris17
Super Dainty Moderator
btarunrI sooo wanted the CELL to come to the desktop. If only Windows supported PPC, it would have been possible. Afterall, the CELL is based on the PowerPC machine architecture.
so did i i wish they actually sold it to people along ith the motherboards.....because suse fedora and ubuntu come with cell development tools for programs etc.....i might just pic up a ps3 mod it to have a huge HDD and use it as a desktop running linux.
Posted on Reply
#27
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Yes. Afterall, distro's such as YDL are based on PPC-supportive kernels. Close to every kind of OS supports (or did support in the past) PPC. IIRC, early versions of Windows did support PPC, they scrapped the support since Windows 98.
Posted on Reply
#28
Exceededgoku
Cell isn't X86 (is it???) and isn't an in order CPU so performance would suck in day to day tasks like games and windows :S......
Posted on Reply
#29
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
ExceededgokuCell isn't X86 (is it???) and isn't an in order CPU so performance would suck in day to day tasks like games and windows :S......
No, CELL is not an x86 CPU. It's an in-the-order CPU based on the PowerPC machine architecture. Linux supports PPC. (A distro supporting PPC should have the PPC-supportive version of the kernel).
Posted on Reply
#30
yogurt_21
RapidMind has reported a 55x speedup over CPU alone on binomial options pricing calculators. The comparison is versus Quantlib running on a single core of a Dual-Core AMD Opteron™ 2352 processor on Tyan S2915 w/ Win XP 32 (Palomar Workstation from Colfax)
Neurala comparison is against dual AMD Opteron 248 processor (using only a single processor for comparison) w/ 2GB SDRAM DDR 400 ECC dual channel and SUSE Linux 10 (custom kernel)
Mercury benchmark system details: Intel Core2 6820 @ 2.13 GHz w/ 3GB of RAM, FireStream 9250 stream processor
you know I wish the manufacturers would stop number stacking and provide actual resuslts. lol it's nice to see an evolution towards the future at half the price of the previous, but choosing peak numbers to showcase it isn't going to impress the people who run the research projects. they're not your average joe consumer.
Posted on Reply
#31
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
yogurt_21you know I wish the manufacturers would stop number stacking and provide actual resuslts. lol it's nice to see an evolution towards the future at half the price of the previous, but choosing peak numbers to showcase it isn't going to impress the people who run the research projects. they're not your average joe consumer.
The biggest evaluation of all this is the Folding@Home project. Since ages, F@H supported ATI's GPU's for GPU computing, and the numbers did translate to results.
Posted on Reply
#32
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
so with the 9170 costing more still even after this announcement, does that mean this new 9250 isnt as powerful? Congrats AMD on the breakthrough, but that is a tad steep price for a co processor. I can see Pharmaceutical and DNA/RNA Synthesis companies using these.
Posted on Reply
#33
lemonadesoda
For anyone following this thread, read www.rapidmind.net/pdfs/FinancialDataSheet.pdf
Basically, the 55x speedup quoted by AMD is:

1>> A single core Opteron running an opensource math library, COMPARED TO
2>> The FireStream running optimized math library SPECIFICALLY designed for financial math by RapidMind.



REAL COMPARISON
1./ Single core CPU, running inefficient C++ math library
2./ Replace math library with RapidMind, = 2x speedup
3./ Replace "single core" Opteron with "single core" Intel Core 2, = 2x speedup
4./ Replace single core with quad core = 4x speedup



So, actually, the REAL COMPARISON should be 55/16 = 3.5x speedup. At a price of $999.

OK, SO LETS USE A DUAL XEON SYSTEM ALTERNATIVE

5./ Upgrade to dual socket mainboard, one extra xeon, total $500, = 2 x speedup

That would give a net speedup of 1.75x to the FireStream but at a higher cost ($499), plus development time associated with using the SDK for FireStream and then having codethat could only run on the FireSteam. (THERE ARE GOOD SECURITY REASONS TO DO THIS... ESPECIALLY FOR PROPRIETARY FINANCE SOFTWARE).

IMO, 1.75x speed of a dual xeon workstation, is not all that impressive.

******

From looking closer at the hardware of FireStream, it seems to be essentially a GPU card with the "Video" bits removed. You could probably get a regular gaming card to do exactly the same. But I'm sure AMD will "lock" features within the BIOS, just like they do with the FireGL GPUs.
WarEagleAUCongrats AMD on the breakthrough, but that is a tad steep price for a co processor. I can see Pharmaceutical and DNA/RNA Synthesis companies using these.
I agree, too expensive
But its not much of a breakthrough. Its a GPU in wolfs clothes, with an SDK not dissimilar to CUDA concept.
Smoke and mirrors by AMD.
Posted on Reply
#34
imperialreign
Sure, it looks a little blown out of proportion as it is; but look at the target audience for this capability as well - they've been listening to the blown out of proportion claims of Intel and nVidia for how long now? AMD is coming along with something that does work better, they're just exaggerating it a bit - still, for it's market, it's highly competitive, and I think it's great to see AMD being able to bring the goods in at least one field right now.


I'm curious, though, has anyone else noticed that AMD seems to have drastically changed their marketing strategies over the last 3-5 months? It seems to me that they've become a lot more aggressive in their marketing and claims, compared to how they used to be.

They're finally adopting the ruthless attitude of all the other financially successful and stable companies.
Posted on Reply
#35
lemonadesoda
a lot more aggressive in their marketing and claims
Can you translate that to English please? Choose one of the following:

1./ Bullshit
2./ Lies
3./ Misrepresentation
They're finally adopting the ruthless attitude of all the other financially successful and stable companies
And that one too, please:

A./ No integrity
B./ No ethics
C./ Short term profit before brand reputation and customer loyalty, ala, fool the customer with 1, 2, 3
Posted on Reply
#36
imperialreign
lemonadesodaCan you translate that to English please? Choose one of the following:

1./ Bullshit
2./ Lies
3./ Misrepresentation


And that one too, please:

A./ No integrity
B./ No ethics
C./ Short term profit before brand reputation and customer loyalty, ala, fool the customer with 1, 2, 3
IDK about all that - ATI still at least provide some kind of basis for their claims, some representation of what they've tested to help support their propaganda - more than I can say for Intel, nVidia, MS, Creative, or any other market leader in the industry.

Sure, recently they might be 'twisting' the truth and stretching it as far as they can, but we're still given some kind of base to look at as well; unlike other companies who spit out propaganda that looks like they waved their voodoo stick over a spread sheeting while swinging chickens.
Posted on Reply
#37
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Dontforget Intel and Nvidia were doing that shit for years until the Other Companies started to step on their feet.
lemonadesodaCan you translate that to English please? Choose one of the following:

1./ Bullshit
2./ Lies
3./ Misrepresentation


And that one too, please:

A./ No integrity
B./ No ethics
C./ Short term profit before brand reputation and customer loyalty, ala, fool the customer with 1, 2, 3
Posted on Reply
#38
tkpenalty
AMD might as well retool their GPUs for CPU usage-GPUs have massve FP calc speeds and they have an x86 liscense anyway.......

if AMD used their GPUs for CPUs... Intel would be screwed.
Posted on Reply
#39
From_Nowhere
^ That would be interesting... my question is, "Can it be done?"
Posted on Reply
#40
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
From_Nowhere^ That would be interesting... my question is, "Can it be done?"
Yes. AMD Fusion is a CPU with a GPU embedded. GPU means stream processors.

Even if a GPU the class of a HD2600 XT (120 SP's) was embedded, theoritically it means an added 50 GFLOPs at least.
Posted on Reply
#41
lemonadesoda
Interesting discussion www.simbiosys.ca/blog/2008/05/03/the-fast-and-the-furious-compare-cellbe-gpu-and-fpga/

They (quietly) point out that the GPGPU are fantastic for massively parallel calculations. But for general purpose mixed math they are aweful. Why? Because the processing power and benchmarks we keep reading about are based on calculations that are scalable via parallelization, so that, e.g. ALL 320 stream processors are put to good use.

If you were using the GPGPU to "re-calculate an EXCEL table", then divide performance by 320, since you wont get parallelization there. In such situations a CPU's FPU will PWN the GPGPU.

The GPGPU comes into its own ONLY when using the math library and SDK designed for it... AND when doing things like vector or matrix math, of SIMPLE additions, subtractions and multiplications.

An FPU will PWN a GPGU at trig math, for example.
Posted on Reply
#42
tkpenalty
lemonadesodaInteresting discussion www.simbiosys.ca/blog/2008/05/03/the-fast-and-the-furious-compare-cellbe-gpu-and-fpga/

They (quietly) point out that the GPGPU are fantastic for massively parallel calculations. But for general purpose mixed math they are aweful. Why? Because the processing power and benchmarks we keep reading about are based on calculations that are scalable via parallelization, so that, e.g. ALL 320 stream processors are put to good use.

If you were using the GPGPU to "re-calculate an EXCEL table", then divide performance by 320, since you wont get parallelization there. In such situations a CPU's FPU will PWN the GPGPU.

The GPGPU comes into its own ONLY when using the math library and SDK designed for it... AND when doing things like vector or matrix math, of SIMPLE additions, subtractions and multiplications.

An FPU will PWN a GPGU at trig math, for example.
FPU is designed for maths anyway...
Lets hope Fusion will give phenom the well needed performance boost.
Posted on Reply
#43
lemonadesoda
OK, new news. www.tgdaily.com/content/view/37970/135/

Clearspeed's new math co-processor delivers 100 DP math (compared to Firestram 200 DP math) but with only 12W (compared to Firestream 150W).

Clearspeed CSX700 is the winner. It also has a better math library (faster) due to the CSX700 being a much more capable FPU than GPGPU (which is limited to simpler natives of plus, minus, multiply etc.)

Downside, $3000
Posted on Reply
#44
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
lemonadesodaInteresting discussion www.simbiosys.ca/blog/2008/05/03/the-fast-and-the-furious-compare-cellbe-gpu-and-fpga/

They (quietly) point out that the GPGPU are fantastic for massively parallel calculations. But for general purpose mixed math they are aweful. Why? Because the processing power and benchmarks we keep reading about are based on calculations that are scalable via parallelization, so that, e.g. ALL 320 stream processors are put to good use.

If you were using the GPGPU to "re-calculate an EXCEL table", then divide performance by 320, since you wont get parallelization there. In such situations a CPU's FPU will PWN the GPGPU.

The GPGPU comes into its own ONLY when using the math library and SDK designed for it... AND when doing things like vector or matrix math, of SIMPLE additions, subtractions and multiplications.

An FPU will PWN a GPGU at trig math, for example.
That's where the specialised SP's that handle both MADD/MUL come to play. 1 in every 5 SP's in the ATI Stream architecture are such. Of course, a GPU will never be able to perform out-of-the-order execution the way an x86 CPU does. A GPU requires you to send it instructions and data far more rapidly than you'd send a CPU (where the main memory and CPU staged caches pool data). We can put it this way, just as you have SIMD instruction sets (SSE and its successors), they might come up with an instruction set that lets apps exploit stream processors on a Fusion. Of course, other apps will have to rely on the CPU's FPU.
Posted on Reply
#45
lemonadesoda
imperialreignSure, recently they might be 'twisting' the truth and stretching it as far as they can, but we're still given some kind of base to look at as well; unlike other companies who spit out propaganda that looks like they waved their voodoo stick over a spread sheeting while swinging chickens.
ROFLCOPTERS
Posted on Reply
#46
MilkyWay
cell would be useless because you cant run windows or mac on it and then you have no compatible motherboard with pci ex slots for expansion even then things like memory controllers ect

i think that the cell would be useless because youd only be able to run linux and whats the point in having a powerfull cpu for linux if all you can run is doom 3 and quake 4
Posted on Reply
#47
MilkyWay
using gpus for cpu is stupid i dont know if it could compute everthing quite like a cpu

either way gpus are different architecture from cpus youd have to totaly redesign the gpu to include cache and memory controllers ect

im not sure why youd want a math co processor
co processors are useless if you have multi threading on a cpu and the software is programed to use it fully

id like to see physics done on a core of a cpu or have a full single graphics card for physics but be able to add in a cheaper graphics card o take advantage
Posted on Reply
#48
spud107
this is interesting, from amd,
ati.amd.com/technology/streamcomputing/faq.html#5
Will the AMD FireStream SDK work on previous generation hardware?
To run the CAL/Brook+ SDK, you need a platform based on the AMD R600 GPU or later. R600 and newer GPUs are found with ATI Radeon™ HD2400, HD2600, HD2900 and HD3800 graphics board.

Which applications are best suited to Stream Computing?
Applications best suited to stream computing possess two fundamental characteristics:
A high degree of arithmetic computation per system memory fetch
Computational independence — arithmetic occurs on each processing unit without needing to be checked or verified by or with arithmetic occurring on any other processing unit.

Examples include:
Engineering — fluid dynamics
Mathematics — linear equations, matrix calculations
Simulations — Monte Carlo, molecular modeling, etc.
Financial — options pricing
Biological — protein structure calculations
Imaging — medical image processing
Posted on Reply
#49
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
MilkyWayusing gpus for cpu is stupid i dont know if it could compute everthing quite like a cpu

either way gpus are different architecture from cpus youd have to totaly redesign the gpu to include cache and memory controllers ect

im not sure why youd want a math co processor
co processors are useless if you have multi threading on a cpu and the software is programed to use it fully

id like to see physics done on a core of a cpu or have a full single graphics card for physics but be able to add in a cheaper graphics card o take advantage
Try to read the complete thread, learn something about it all. As for the CELL BE part. Stop regarding the CELL as "that which drives PS3". CELL was/is touted to have general-purpose applications. Driving a console is just a part of it. What do you think drives the Sony Bravia? CELL finds applications in several other devices such as display panels, etc., it's a PowerPC based processor. Had Apple not ditched PPC for x86 , you'd probably have the PowerMac (now Mac Pro) running a CELL BE.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 26th, 2024 19:51 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts