Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (268521)	10/12/2011 11:07:27 AM
From: fastpathguru	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

>No need to ask Elmer anymore. The reviews confirm it. Bulldozer is a flop. There is no surprise here. This was obvious for the last year or more. We tried to tell everyone but no one would listen. The important point here is not that I was right. The important point is how could so many people ignore the blatantly obvious signs that were staring them right in the face? So... Initial reviews are disappointing. Performance is often way behind SB. OTOH, there are a couple of spots where BD rises to, and even exceeds, SB: Some heavily threaded INT code, exactly the focus of the BD architecture. Should work better as a server part than it does as a desktop part. Cache architecture/performance is one issue that's been specifically pointed out as hurting performance. AVX is sometimes a win, sometimes a loss vs. SSEx. x87 sucks too, but who cares. It just seems quirky; but quirky can sometimes be cured. I'm looking forward to A) some deeper analysis of BD's performance, B) how FMA4/XOP helps, and C) seeing how it performs under Linux, which is all I actually care about. Elmer, yes BD in its first incarnation underwhelms. But what exactly were your great insights, besides observing ad-nauseum that BD was late and GF is behind Intel in process tech? fpg