Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
AMD Faildozer patches that make it faster, hotter, eat more power
#1
KB2645594 (install this first)
This article introduces an update for computers that are running Windows 7 or Windows Server 2008 R2 and that have a processor from one of the following series installed:

AMD FX
AMD Opteron 4200
AMD Opteron 6200

Currently, the CPU scheduling techniques that are used by Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 are not optimized for the AMD Bulldozer module architecture. This architecture is found on AMD FX series, AMD Opteron 4200 Series, and AMD Opteron 6200 Series processors. Therefore, multithreaded workloads may not be optimally distributed on computers that have one of these processors installed in a lightly-threaded environment. This may result in decreased system performance for some applications.

KB2646060 (should only be installed after KB2645594)
This article introduces an update that enables the hotfix installer to selectively disable the Core Parking feature in Windows 7 or in Windows Server 2008 R2 if an AMD FX, AMD Opteron 4200 Series, or AMD Opteron 6200 Series processor is installed.

Currently, the CPU Power Policies that are used by Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 are not optimized for the dual core AMD Bulldozer module architecture. This architecture is found on AMD FX series, AMD Opteron 4200 Series, and AMD Opteron 6200 Series processors. This can result in decreased system performance with multithreaded workloads in lightly-threaded environments.

When this update is installed, Bulldozer modules will be less likely to achieve the C6 power state. This potentially results in increased power consumption in more lightly-threaded environments.
Reply

Sponsored links

#2
hmm any actual improvement ? Smile
Reply
#3
Do you have to name your threads that offending, Squall?
People here know it's bad and I think we can stop beating the dead horse.
Reply
#4
What do ya mean, "dead horse"?
Didn't you see the updates? The thing keeps kickin'! Laugh

(ok-- we'll stop pickin' on AMD)
Reply
#5
(01-12-2012, 08:35 PM)Rezard Wrote: What do ya mean, "dead horse"?


Beating a dead horse
kicking a man when hes down.

essentially pointless brutality when the end has already been achieved ;p

in this case, picking on bulldozer even though everybody with half a brain knows its crap already ;p

[Image: ref_sig_anim.gif]
Like our Facebook Page and visit our Facebook Group!
Reply
#6
All AMD needed to do was opt for "true cores" like the Phenom II x6 and not "modules" and it would of done so much better..
-Core i7 6700k @ 4.5 GHz
-GIGABYTE Z170X-Gaming 5
-G.SKILL Ripjaws V 16GB DDR4 2400 @ 14-13-13-30-1T
-EVGA GTX 970 4GB @ 1380/1853 MHz
-Crucial MX100 512GB, Silicon Power S60 120GB, Toshiba 2TB 7200 RPM
-PC P & C Silencer 750 Quad
-Windows 7 x64

-----

-Core i7 4710MQ
-16GB DDR3 1866
-GTX 965M 4GB @ 1127/1353 MHz
-Mushkin ECO2 240GB, HGST 1TB 7200 RPM
-Windows 7 x64
Reply
#7
I remembered when Intel first released their Quadcore CPUs, AMD said that Intel's quadcore is not a "real/true quadcore" because it's two dualcore slapped/glued together. Ironically, Intel's unreal/untrue quads best Amd "real/true" quadcore CPUs.
Reply
#8
(01-13-2012, 02:29 AM)gamerX1990 Wrote: All AMD needed to do was opt for "true cores" like the Phenom II x6 and not "modules" and it would of done so much better..

100% agree. on the micro processing level true cores are always better than shared resources. look at how HT improves. lol. the bd module architecture doesn't do better either, even tho it looks a bit more promising at the threading cache level but it's not fully optimized by anbody yet. can't help it. :/
Reply
#9
Even if the faildozers had "real core" it's still no match for Core i series. It all boils down to the architecture!
Reply
#10
I will praise Bulldozer on one thing

its the first AMD processor where SSE 1 and 2 are actually as fast as x87 FPU
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)