- Joined
- Oct 26, 2008
- Messages
- 2,258 (0.39/day)
System Name | Budget AMD System |
---|---|
Processor | Threadripper 1900X @ 4.1Ghz (100x41 @ 1.3250V) |
Motherboard | Gigabyte X399 Aorus Gaming 7 |
Cooling | EKWB X399 Monoblock |
Memory | 4x8GB GSkill TridentZ RGB 14-14-14-32 CR1 @ 3266 |
Video Card(s) | XFX Radeon RX Vega₆⁴ Liquid @ 1,800Mhz Core, 1025Mhz HBM2 |
Storage | 1x ADATA SX8200 NVMe, 1x Segate 2.5" FireCuda 2TB SATA, 1x 500GB HGST SATA |
Display(s) | Vizio 22" 1080p 60hz TV (Samsung Panel) |
Case | Corsair 570X |
Audio Device(s) | Onboard |
Power Supply | Seasonic X Series 850W KM3 |
Software | Windows 10 Pro x64 |
The problem is that AMD made a design that was just hyperthreading with an extra integer unit thrown in. So technically, it is more capable than just having two execution states for one execution engine (containing an FPU and IU), since two threads can technically run at the same time, but if both threads need the FPU, then it is basically back to a multithreaded single core.
I think they may have a case in that early processors didn't even have an FPU, and were still processors. So it is technically an eight core integer CPU, and a four core floating point CPU. So you technically have eight cores that could run at once. It will depend on how much a modern processor design matters, as AMD didn't include any caveats in their marketing for the FX series to indicate that it wasn't always going to run 8 threads simultaneously. And in my personal opinion it was not correct to call them 8 core processors. They should have just called them 4 module processors, or made clear it was 8 integer cores and would perform at half speed for FP math. I wouldn't be surprised if AMD loses. I don't consider them 8 core processors since they aren't 8 core all the time.
Maybe the most damning thing is that AMD now sells 8 core processors that actually do have the FPU and IU per core, and 4 core processors with SMT that are 4 core/8 thread. In a way, that's admitting that the FX core terminology was a load of shit the whole time.
The code we ran was optimized with AMD's help. We were able to get the FPUs to operate as 2 in parallel. The problem is, most programmers don't wanna do the extra few steps or just use an Intel based compiler which views the FX series as a 4-core CPU and doesn't take advantage of any of its extra resources. The FPU in each Bulldozer module is technically 2x 64bit units but merged into using just 1 scheduler. You had to know how to code for Bulldozer to get the scheduler to run things that could utilize both.