Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > CPU's and Motherboards

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old April 8, 2010, 02:15 PM
geokilla's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,635

My System Specs

Default AMD Turbo Core Technology

AMD Turbo CORE Technology on Phenom II X6 CPUs - AMD Turbo Core Technology Introduction - Legit Reviews

Reading the article at the moment and seems pretty interesting.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old April 8, 2010, 02:55 PM
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 5,415

My System Specs

Default

This is literally the exact same thing as Intel's Turbo Boost. Nothing here is particularly surprising.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old April 11, 2010, 04:55 PM
Killswitch's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ontario
Posts: 839

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero82z View Post
This is literally the exact same thing as Intel's Turbo Boost. Nothing here is particularly surprising.
Actually you're wrong. They are similar, but VERY much different.

Intel's Turbo Boost tech for Gulftown can OC anywhere from one, to all six cores if needed. The speed increases range from +133Mhz to +233Mhz. Depending on how many cores are active.
http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/im...ulftown/39.jpg

Now, AMD's Turbo Core technology can only OC up to 3 active cores MAX...... but with an increase of up to 500Mhz. Also when Turbo Core is enabled, the CPU down clocks the idle cores to 800Mhz to compensate for heat, voltage, etc......

So, Gulftown doesn't down clock any of its cores AFAIK, but it's speed boost isn't as big in terms of Mhz compared to AMD's, but AMD doesn't allow all cores to be boosted.

The question here is...... "Who's turbo technology is better?"
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old April 11, 2010, 07:02 PM
clone63's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bellehole
Posts: 670

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Killswitch View Post
"Who's turbo technology is better?"
You'd have to get 2 equally benching cpu's when both boosting technologies are disabled, then bench them when enabled. I guess?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old April 11, 2010, 07:12 PM
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 5,415

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Killswitch View Post
Actually you're wrong. They are similar, but VERY much different.

Intel's Turbo Boost tech for Gulftown can OC anywhere from one, to all six cores if needed. The speed increases range from +133Mhz to +233Mhz. Depending on how many cores are active.
http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/im...ulftown/39.jpg

Now, AMD's Turbo Core technology can only OC up to 3 active cores MAX...... but with an increase of up to 500Mhz. Also when Turbo Core is enabled, the CPU down clocks the idle cores to 800Mhz to compensate for heat, voltage, etc......

So, Gulftown doesn't down clock any of its cores AFAIK, but it's speed boost isn't as big in terms of Mhz compared to AMD's, but AMD doesn't allow all cores to be boosted.

The question here is...... "Who's turbo technology is better?"
You've got a bit of a point there. AMD's tech is actually inferior because it lacks the granularity that Intel's has. Newer CPUs with Turbo Boost can actually give more than a 2x multiplier increase. As for downclocking, ever heard of Speedstep? It's been around since the Pentium III. AMD's downclocking tech is not Turbo Core, it's Cool 'n Quiet, which has also been around for years. The only thing that's changed here is that they are allowing a group of three cores to downclock instead of the entire processor; however, Intel introduced per-core dynamic clocking with the Nehalem architecture, so all i3, i5, and i7 CPUs can adjust the clock speed of each individual core depending on load.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old April 11, 2010, 07:20 PM
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: mtl
Posts: 12,694
Default

i have a feeling hard core overclocks may require disabling everything power saving or not :)
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old April 11, 2010, 07:35 PM
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 5,415

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _dangtx_ View Post
i have a feeling hard core overclocks may require disabling everything power saving or not :)
If it's properly implemented, you shouldn't need to disable a thing.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old April 11, 2010, 07:39 PM
Killswitch's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ontario
Posts: 839

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero82z View Post
You've got a bit of a point there. AMD's tech is actually inferior because it lacks the granularity that Intel's has. Newer CPUs with Turbo Boost can actually give more than a 2x multiplier increase. As for downclocking, ever heard of Speedstep? It's been around since the Pentium III. AMD's downclocking tech is not Turbo Core, it's Cool 'n Quiet, which has also been around for years. The only thing that's changed here is that they are allowing a group of three cores to downclock instead of the entire processor; however, Intel introduced per-core dynamic clocking with the Nehalem architecture, so all i3, i5, and i7 CPUs can adjust the clock speed of each individual core depending on load.
Yes I am aware of Intel's Speedstep, and I know that AMD's downclocking tech is called Cool 'n Quiet.

I was trying to point out that AMD's hex-core CPUs will be downclocking idle cores to 800Mhz to offset the power consumption and heat generation for the "boosted" active cores, which is how their Turbo Core works. When 3 cores or more are idle, is when the tech kicks in. Intel's Turbo Boost works much differently.

Here's a quote from the link in the OP in case you didn't read it.

"AMD's Turbo CORE is enabled on a six-core processor when three or more cores are not being heavily used. When Turbo CORE enables three of the processor cores get up to a 500MHz boost in performance, while the three at an idle state drop down to 800MHz. Turbo core mode doesn't disable Cool'n"Quiet, which means the cores can still throttle like normal. When Turbo CORE is enabled the increased voltage goes across all the cores, so no voltage gating is taking place on the remaining cores in an idle state. If you start using a multi-threaded application that calls for more than three physical processors then Turbo CORE disables and all six cores are run at the processors rated clock frequency. AMD informed us that running Turbo CORE keeps the processor within the advertised power envelope the entire time, so it is no different when it comes to power consumption than running all six cores at full clock speeds."
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old April 11, 2010, 07:46 PM
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 5,415

My System Specs

Default

I see. But although downclocking is not technically a part of Turbo Boost, Speedstep is still active, and when not all of the cores are being loaded, the ones that are will be boosted and the ones that aren't will reduce their speeds. So the end result is basically the same thing.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old April 11, 2010, 08:28 PM
Killswitch's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ontario
Posts: 839

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero82z View Post
I see. But although downclocking is not technically a part of Turbo Boost, Speedstep is still active, and when not all of the cores are being loaded, the ones that are will be boosted and the ones that aren't will reduce their speeds. So the end result is basically the same thing.
So Intel's tech does downclock idle cores when Turbo Boost is enabled? That part I wasn't sure of. All the info I've found so far was pretty vague in that department. I thought the cores were just stepped up and that was it, period.

So I guess you're right and they are basically the same, and AMD got lazy with their version. They decided to toss the active cores up ~500Mhz and call it a day instead of feeling out each one individually.

Hopefully they'll be good chips though. I wouldn't mind getting one as long as there's an updated bios for my M3A79T Deluxe.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Core i7 or AMD Phenom 2 Build insnekamkze86 New Builds 59 January 30, 2010 05:05 PM
AMD Announces 40W Six-Core AMD Opteron EE processor FiXT Press Releases & Tech News 4 August 31, 2009 01:43 PM
core i5 turbo gingerbee Overclocking, Tweaking and Benchmarking 5 April 30, 2009 09:28 PM
AMD Triple Core... Want or Don't Want? chibi_man CPU's and Motherboards 23 January 31, 2008 09:50 AM
Single core AMD --> C2D sswilson Overclocking, Tweaking and Benchmarking 10 April 17, 2007 11:44 AM