AMD FireStream 9250 Breaks the 1 Teraflop Barrier

[eidairaman1]

Firestream seems to be a Highly Programmable Processor- what im saying is it can be programmed for just about anything, Since the CPU isnt programmed, it just sits there.

 

[Solaris17]

I 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.

 

[btarunr]

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.

 

[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......

 

[btarunr]

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......

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).

 

[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.

 

[btarunr]

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.

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.

 

[WarEagleAU]

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.

 

[lemonadesoda]

For anyone following this thread, read http://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.

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.

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.

 

[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.

 

[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

 

[imperialreign]

Can 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.

 

[eidairaman1]

Dontforget Intel and Nvidia were doing that shit for years until the Other Companies started to step on their feet.

Can 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

 

[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.

 

[From_Nowhere]

^ That would be interesting... my question is, "Can it be done?"

 

[btarunr]

^ 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.

 

[lemonadesoda]

Interesting discussion http://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.

 

[tkpenalty]

Interesting discussion http://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.

 

[lemonadesoda]

OK, new news. http://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

 

[btarunr]

Interesting discussion http://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.

 

[lemonadesoda]

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.

ROFLCOPTERS

 

[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

 

[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

 

[spud107]

this is interesting, from amd,
http://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

 

[btarunr]

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

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.