The changes range from the CPU’s front end through the cores and into the cache subsystem, and no single change contributes much more than a 1% increase in throughput. Piledriver includes a collection of small tweaks to individual parts of the module intended to increase instruction throughput. We covered the enhancements made to the Piledriver modules in more detail here, but the highlights are pretty straightforward. Thus, AMD bills a four-module FX processor as an eight-core CPU, and we can’t entirely object to that label. These “modules” are a fundamental structure in AMD’s latest architectures, and they house two “tightly coupled” integer cores that share certain resources, including a front-end, L2 cache, and floating-point unit. The one big difference is the transition from Bulldozer to Piledriver cores-or, to put it more precisely, from Bulldozer to Piledriver modules. Vishera and Orochi share almost everything-both are manufactured on GlobalFoundries’ 32-nm SOI fabrication process, both have 8MB of 元 cache, and both are essentially eight-core CPUs. The chip that’s the subject of our attention today is code-named Vishera, and it’s the direct successor to the silicon that powered the prior-gen FX processors, which was known as Orochi. Are these CPUs good enough to carve out some space in the market against some tremendously formidable competition? You may be surprised by the answer.Ī picture of the Vishera die. That is, all things considered, a very positive sign. Now, roughly a year after the first FX chips arrived, revamped FX processors based on Piledriver are making their debut, more or less on schedule. The first of those incremental updates was dubbed Piledriver, a modest refresh that first hit the market this past spring aboard the Trinity APU.
AMD FX 8350 PROCESSOR OPENCL DRIVER SERIES
Alongside the FX processors, the firm announced a plan that included a series of updates to its CPU cores over the next few years, with promised increases in performance and power efficiency.
Once the first chips were out the door, AMD’s engineering task became clear: to do as much as possible to improve the Bulldozer microarchitecture as quickly as possible. When the FX processors not only failed to catch up to the competition from Intel but also struggled to beat AMD’s own prior generation in performance and power efficiency, some unpleasant fallout was inevitable. Still, Bulldozer was viewed by many as AMD’s next great hope, its first from-the-ground-up new x86 CPU architecture in over a decade. As techie types, we’re perhaps overestimating the role technology plays in these matters. Much of the turmoil can be traced back to one big, fateful event: the difficult, disappointing birth of the all-new CPU microarchitecture known as Bulldozer. These things have come against a backdrop of mounting financial losses and tough questions about the company’s future and direction. AMD has been going through some difficult times lately, with management changes, layoffs, and a steady drip of talent drain, as a host of familiar faces have fled for greener pastures.