9.08.2006

AMD Creating a new Category of Enthusiast...


I wrote this article for the most recent edition of CPU Magazine. I was on the panel at the 4x4 launch and I got the general impression that AMD could potentially create a new category of enthusiast with 4x4. They certainly have the architectural advantage and their idea is sound, but there are still some challenges.

For the last few years, AMD has transformed itself from an underdog incumbent to a mainstream alternative with big OEM support. Under the management of Hector Ruiz, AMD was able to take the performance lead over Intel without any warning, which paved the way to where the company finds itself today.

AMD had successfully fought against Intel, and against all odds AMD has gained market share while producing solid numbers. In order to achieve this considerable feat, AMD had to build a better mousetrap, and that’s just what it did—but now it faces a challenge.

In late July, a bloodied and worn Intel finally released a desktop killer. The Core 2 Duo, otherwise known as Conroe, beats AMD’s Athlons in pretty much every major benchmark. Core 2 Duo is by far the best processor on the market right now for enthusiasts, and AMD is busy working to make up the difference.

Intel created a monster with Core 2 Duo by using similar DNA as its Pentium M processors. Yes it is true that Intel has a better platform, but in terms of architecture the company is still behind AMD and Intel’s people know this. By architecture I am referring to the scalability of the company’s current product line. AMD will scale better under multiple processors thanks to its integrated memory controller and HyperTransport, but Intel’s processors are now arguably more efficient as they draw less power and produce less heat.

As most of you are no doubt aware, AMD announced its 4x4 technology in July. Many questions have come up since the announcement regarding the potential real-world benefits for gamers and enthusiasts. With Intel Kentsfield around the corner and AMD 4x4 on the way, the concept of multithreaded gaming is becoming an exciting reality. Of course it’s not all about multithreaded gaming for AMD; there are many more benefits of 4x4 which may be realized thanks to the company’s flexible architecture.

With 4x4 we’ll be able to install two processors into a machine, each with its own dedicated bank of memory. So, for example, we could install two dual-core processors (or two quad-core processors, for that matter) with 2GB of RAM each for a total system memory of 4GB. What does this mean to the enthusiast? It means that you can run multiple instances of certain games under specific circumstances.

Consider, for instance, the World of Warcraft player who has multiple characters under different accounts. With a properly configured system it’s possible to load two instances of the game at once and trade items back and forth, or skin with one while killing with the other. I’m certainly not suggesting that this is what people want, but there are some extreme users out there who will appreciate such capabilities. Another great feature of dedicated memory banks is the ability to encode movies in the background while playing a game and not sacrificing one iota of performance. Or, even better, you can operate a dedicated server while playing the game and not even notice the difference. All of this will be possible with 4x4.

With the help of Nvidia, and others, AMD is creating an entirely new motherboard concept for 4x4. It’s not your standard-issue workstation motherboard; rather, it’s an enthusiast-class multiprocessor motherboard with support for unbuffered non-ECC enthusiast-class memory. AMD also promises to release three tiers of 4x4 in the box where processor kits will start “well under $1,000” and go up from there.

The problem that I see us potentially running into is that of power. AMD needs to be mindful that not many of us enthusiasts, let alone OEMs, want to use 1K PSUs in our machines. We aren’t interested in using loud cooling systems and effectively going backward for the sake of getting a few incremental sales. I am sure that AMD is looking at this fact, and if somehow it is able to get its EE low-power processors online, we’ll probably have a winner.

Either way I believe AMD is paving the way for a new category of enthusiast, and many of us will be supporting it. There are certainly some exciting times ahead.

19 blogger comments:

one43637 said...

quote
"The problem that I see us potentially running into is that of power. AMD needs to be mindful that not many of us enthusiasts, let alone OEMs, want to use 1K PSUs in our machines. We aren’t interested in using loud cooling systems and effectively going backward for the sake of getting a few incremental sales"

i agree wholeheartedly with this statement. i certainly do not want to put up with a cooler that sounds like a lawnmower or have a 1k PSU.

here's hoping that the major players in the industry don't lead us down that path.

Anonymous said...

I've been watching the trend of dualing and quading also, its become more of a mainstream option now as opposed to strictly residing inside a power-users rig.
You mention multiple accounts on games such as WoW which I find interesting, I play Eve Online and many people in my "corporation" are running multiple accounts simultaneously doing things very similar to what you mention. Sometimes I think a few of them could run a whole corporation on their own lol, all they need are a few of those quad cores on a 4 x 4
board :P Oh yeah and 4 monitors hehe

Eddie said...

Another good article from you, Mr. Sood, and thank you 4 the kindess of sharing it.

A question: Isn't it possible today with dual cores to do what you say 4x4 would enable? I have an AM2 3800+ X2 and I regularly transcode video. Not only that, but in my 4 Gb computer I do most of my work in VMWare virtual machines for security reasons, and I haven't experienced lack of responsiveness; as a matter of fact, my current computer has quenched my thirst for raw performance. Wouldn't it 4 cores be exceesive, either in dual socket or single socket configuration?

Anonymous said...

But what is the point in this?

Very few games today have have scripts that take advantage of two cores, and even fewer have full SMP enviroments enabled.

As shown on extremsystems.org where several users have gotten hold of the Quad core Kentsfield, the biggest and really only major improvement was in Cinebench.

Anonymous said...

Henri Richard, EVP and chief sales and marketing officer, AMD:
"We're now introducing AM2, and of course AM2 will be quad-core compatible.
[...]
And the fact that the AM2 socket allows us to have a seamless transition to quadcore tells me that I can buy a 4×4 platform, in the later part of this year, and then take it to eight cores sometime in 2007. And that's phenomenal.
[...]
Our plan is to have both dual-core and quad-core K8L-based processors within the same timeframe. The K8L development, from the ground up, is a quad-core development."
-- DigiTimes.com, Taipei [Wednesday 28 June 2006]



Brad Peebler, president and co-founder of Luxology :
(http://www.luxology.com/whatismodo/)

"Our users are incredibly power hungry, and when we started this company, we were betting on threading." Running the company's Modo application on the 4x4 systems, Peebler saw an extreme boost in rendering capabilities. "The end result is we get 90 percent boost as we add multiple cores to handle the rendering tasks. It is all about multiple CPUs. If your app is threaded properly, you'll see near linear rendering."
http://www.itbusinessnet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=53028




- Crysis will feature out-of-the-box 32-bit, 64-bit, DirectX 9, DirectX 10, and multithreading support.

- Crysis will also take advantage of 64-bit CPUs :
According to [Cevat Yerli, Crytek president and CEO], the 64-bit version "will bring a performance difference of up to 10 to 15 percent on each thread" compared to the 32-bit version.
http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/action/crysis/news.html?sid=6154899


City of Villains :
"Dual core performance is also something that has seen some changes since the Issue 7 beta, as the game is now capable of doing physics calculations on a separate core. As we'll see in a second, the game benefits tremendously from a second core,"
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2828&p=1

Anonymous said...

Rahul - what will the end system cost be for a 4x4. What is well under 1000$ for a processor kit? And how about the fact you need to also add two graphics cards. Is it in AMD's interest to sell lower end ATI graphics cards to keep 4x4 BOM costs from spiralling out of control when the GPU vendors have been more successful at not commodotising their market and keeping ASPs high. Are your comments relevant for the mainstream market or limited to the niche audience you serve? I mean really - how much success does AMD expect to gather from 4x4 or is it more a short term PR tactic to try and get the performance edge back from Conroe until K8L?

http://sharikou180.blogspot.com

Anonymous said...

After all that marketing paper launches... Do you know why 4x4 is delayed so long?

AMD lied and hyped away on their 4x4. Problem is that AMD desktop processors have SINGLE NON-ccHT link. 4x4 requires both processors to have at least 2 ccHT links.

Ask AMD whether current X2 and FX processors can be used on 4x4. How come no one ever questioned that?

By the time its launched, you'd probably need to buy new processors. Possibly modified Opteron 2xx series. Heck, their demo unit had RDIMMs and "engineering samples"?!

4x4 is a kludge too.

The board will be expensive, close to the prices of those 2S server/workstation boards. Imagine the board size! New bigger casing needed! And the extra power needed and consumed! You'll need a two pairs of RAMs!

Don't forget about the 86% scaling going to 4 cores on ccHT bus (based on 2S or 4 core Opteron scaling). That means each core will perform slightly slower, or roughly 12% slower!

Nothing's perfect. Next time before you swallow easily the glut of AMD's PR hypes, examine closely.

The future for ordinary consumers is not more sockets, but more cores in a single socket. Being "very close" together, speeds and scaling are much better. Larger shared caches are the way to go as it reduces bus contention between cores and less memory access.

Already engineering samples of Kentsfield already shown that. Despite being a "multi-chip package" on a bottlenecked FSB, its scaling is very impressive ~ about 90% or higher for 4 cores!

And Intel is going for 32 cores in a single processor in the future. This is an alternative route.

ET

Anonymous said...

Hasn't been launched, next year.

Don't understand the lie. AMD claimed K8L is compatable with AM2.
The $1000 kit includes cpu's, no one said a regular cpu could be used as a multi in 4x4.
Yes they answered, and it is one current AM2 can be used alone, but not 2.

Yes that's the point you seem to have missed.

Of course so is dual core. But it is the way things are going.

Are you having fun? At least the memory is cheap. This is an ethusiast platform, it's supposed to be semi affordable,not cheap.

Much better than the 50% of intel cores. Seriously, I think every one is aware of that.

I'm sure sensible people will do plenty of sniffing before bying. AMFD buyers are like that, that's why they buy AMD.

Yes 4x4 could be a waste of time and money, but it sure is fun!!! Like the 300A days!!

Anonymous said...

Seasonic has announced Energy+ 650W and Modular 700W parts. Only the 700W part has 4 PCIe power connectors. Do you really expect for 4x4 systems to outstrip the as yet unreleased PSUs that will become the top of the line for Seasonic?

Am I correct in assuming that you won't need dual power supplies and 50+ amps on the 12v rails should be enough to power just about any 4x4 system you'd dream up? If not what sort of 12v amps are you looking at?

When you say 1000w power supply are you talking about the form of lying found in the blue sidebar on http://www.silentpcreview.com/article28-page3.html or are you talking about an honest 1000w PSU?

muziqaz said...

I do not think power will be the problem with this platform [;
AMD is readying 65nm cpu, and two of them will deffinetly eat less power than one pentium d [;
for those who still can't see the usefullness of this thing-no one asks you to buy it.Stay with you pentium 2 on win 98 and everything will be nice and smooth :)
99% of the pc users won't need those 4 cores, but others will be very happy about 4x4 and kensfield [;
me, myself, if I had some money, would buy 4x4 then it would show up.because I like to rip dvd, fold, play game at the same time. :)
if you don't have much spare time, and want to rip dvd/cd and also want to play game, so you have to choose betwen those things, but with 4x4, o even kensfield it will be much more appropriate. :)

Anonymous said...

to that anynimous guy..
there have been 1000 wattage psus since a year ago, what world are you living? , go check tomshardware about the psus, they had a few 1000 samples, I wouldnt be surprised it more brand already went above 850watts.

Anonymous said...

Kentsfield previewed. A "drop-in" for Core 2 Duo!

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/

Other "4x4" comparisons...

http://www.tabsnet.com/index.php?option=com_benchmark&task=list&bid=6&sysid=2&bcount=73
Opteron 285 (2.6 Ghz dual core, 2 socket): Cinebench 9.5 CPU 1C= 380, 4C= 1197

..on the same page...

Intel Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz dual core, 2 scoket) on Mac OSX, 4C = 1604
Intel Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz dual core, 2 scoket) on Win SP2, 4C = 1564
Intel Xeon 5150 (2.6GHz dual core, 2 scoket) on Mac OSX, 4C = 1425

Steel Smack said...

Ask AMD whether current X2 and FX processors can be used on 4x4. How come no one ever questioned that?
I believe when one of the AMD execs (Hector or Henri, I believe) was asked if X2s would be supported, he said that AMD wasn't sure what all they were going to support in 4X4. I can't find the article now, of course. But it was basically asked and he danced around it not saying one way or the other. I guess if AMD feels it is necessary to support it they will, if they feel they don't need to to stay competitive, they won't.

Basically, I believe current X2s could be supported. But AMD has to think about their low end servers. If you could build a 4X4 with a couple of 3800 X2s and it would perform as well/faster than a low end server, why would anyone buy the low end server for a higher price? AMD would be kind to support low end X2s, but does it make financial sense for them to do so?

Also, I'm pretty sure the single non-ccHT link statement isn't entirely accurate. Saying that the X2s only have one link is correct - sort of. There are really three links there, but AMD only "reports" one of them. As a moderator on the AMD forums says here, AMD only reports one to avoid confusion.

The technology is there to support X2 on a 4X4 platform, it's just a matter of whether it makes financial sense for AMD. I guess if they end up supporting X2, we all should realize AMD isn't just after money, but is also looking to take care of its customers.

Anonymous said...

4x4 came out about the same time as AMD started talking about dynamicly reconfigurable/splittable HT links for Opterons. I suspect it's the same deal. I bet that what 4x4 _really_ stands for is the 16 bit single HTT link on a desktop processor, which will be able to dynamicly split in 4 bit increments between talking to the system and interprocessor tasks. 4 lanes of 4 bits each = 4x4.

Anonymous said...

Cinebench9.5

Dual Woodcrest 3 GHz
CB 32-bit : 1542 CB
CB 64-bit : 1562 CB
Gain : 1.3%

Dual Opteron 285 (DC 2.6GHz)
CB 32-bit : 1262 CB
CB 64-bit : 1389 CB
Gain : 10%

http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=5

Anonymous said...

Dual Woodcrest 3 GHz
CB 32-bit : 1542 CB
CB 64-bit : 1562 CB
Gain : 1.3%

Dual Opteron 285 (DC 2.6GHz)
CB 32-bit : 1262 CB
CB 64-bit : 1389 CB
Gain : 10%

http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=5


Does that mean
1. AMD is particularly bad at 32-bit processing or
2. Intel is particularly good at 32-bit processing or
3. Intel did not see too much gain from in going to 64-bits (due to spectacular 32-bits or plain bad 64 bits)?
4. AMD gets more performance from 32 to 64 bits (due to bad 32-bits or excellent 64-bit performance)?

TheKhalif said...

AMD lied and hyped away on their 4x4. Problem is that AMD desktop processors have SINGLE NON-ccHT link. 4x4 requires both processors to have at least 2 ccHT links.

Ask AMD whether current X2 and FX processors can be used on 4x4. How come no one ever questioned that?

By the time its launched, you'd probably need to buy new processors. Possibly modified Opteron 2xx series. Heck, their demo unit had RDIMMs and "engineering samples"?!

4x4 is a kludge too.

The board will be expensive, close to the prices of those 2S server/workstation boards. Imagine the board size! New bigger casing needed! And the extra power needed and consumed! You'll need a two pairs of RAMs!



Says you. How can a 2.6 X2\FX draw more power than two 2.6Opterons?

The cost of server\wksta boards comes from ECC, SCSI320, PCI-X, SoDIMM, Dual Gb NICs, higher quality control(more costly parts).

When you take all of that off, you have a $150 mobo. You can sacrifice the PCI for 4 PCIe x16 slots or 3 plus an HTX slot.

Also, the Opteron slows slightly because of more cache snooping and ECC overhead. FX+2 won't have that problem.

For developers who need to have VMs running and VS2005 and SQL and Office, 4x4 is a godsend. It will be a lot easier to convince IT buyers to get 4x4 at $1400 than Opteron or 51xx for $2000+.

For DIY folks it will be even cheaper (well not cheaper but the purchases can be spread out over a few months).

I do wish it held 8GB but 4GB under X64 Pro\Server will be BLISTERING. I have been begging for this.

All I want for XMas is my 4x4.

TheKhalif said...

Rahul - what will the end system cost be for a 4x4. What is well under 1000$ for a processor kit? And how about the fact you need to also add two graphics cards. Is it in AMD's interest to sell lower end ATI graphics cards to keep 4x4 BOM costs from spiralling out of control when the GPU vendors have been more successful at not commodotising their market and keeping ASPs high. Are your comments relevant for the mainstream market or limited to the niche audience you serve? I mean really - how much success does AMD expect to gather from 4x4 or is it more a short term PR tactic to try and get the performance edge back from Conroe until K8L?


The point is that you don't have to buy two or even one HIGH END GPU. Some people will do better with the exra cores only.

Some will want one 78xx\x18xx, some will want two, some will want one 7950GT (my hand goes up), some will want the full blown 2 7950GX2s. Lookign at power numbers fromt eh various sites, it will go from 550W - 1000W. Tha's like having 2 large refrigerators running (actual refrigerators).

This will also promote the more exotic cooling systems like Heatpipe and Phase change and even water\Nitrogen.

Again though I think that the increase in productivity will be well worth the higher electric bill.

Rosie said...

yes, i agree