Puff

引用:

原帖由 qcmadness 於 2014-1-30 23:46 發表

SMT is not that useful in client processors.
And I would expect AMD will re-focus in client processors rather than server processsors.

I would say AMD always prioritizes servers over clients... But unfortunately their revenue is in an inverse way thanks to the epic Bulldozer. It is fairly easy to count what AMD would still stick to x86:

1. Scalable MP CPU for enterprise database, analytics, HPC and workstations
2. PC processors in desktop, notebook and ultra compact forms
3. Embedded systems requiring heavy visualization
4. Strong APUs for workstations, enterprise & scientific-computing in the future, requires HBM
5. Dense server for computing and media processing purpose

Seemingly they can all be addressed by a single core by scaling core counts, frequencies, voltages and uncore (L3$?).


[ 本帖最後由 Puff 於 2014-1-31 00:01 編輯 ]

Puff

引用:

原帖由 qcmadness 於 2014-1-31 00:01 發表

In the past: true

Except the success of Bobcat and Jaguar, both of which are low-power client architectures.

I would say they are more likely cost optimized instead of just "low-power client", and the chip designs were also at a cost optimized position in the first place. They are nice examples of carrying bunch of server features while still performing well. Putting efforts on server doesn't always make clients perform bad either.

Strategically they would still have servers prioritized over generic PC clients, I guess, as one would love a high margin business better. A single core may target both nicely, if they can pull the cost and TTM down from the highly-custom Bulldozer level to an optimal level that maybe achieved by a higher degree of automation.

[ 本帖最後由 Puff 於 2014-1-31 00:29 編輯 ]

Puff

http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/PC_Shopping/M.1391141082.A.4CB.html
http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/PC_Shopping/M.1351436294.A.845.html
http://images.anandtech.com/doci/6418/Screen%20Shot%202012-10-29%20at%204.55.05%20PM.png
http://gigaom2.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/amdroadmap.jpg

If AMD does want to play high-perf ARM (Vulcan- or Xeon-class)... it means no presence in x86-dorminant workstation market (AMD is nearly non-exist in this market already, btw, so unless it joints APPL... eh) & the <50% windows server market, so as the dominant commercial toolchain & codebase of x86. Thus, I still hold my own expectation based on all AMD projections published, which is that it would stick to A57- to Cyclone-class positioning and scale it from handheld to microservers with rich I/O & customization options (i.e. their SCBU), leaving high-perf and trad. market to x86. It may also attack comms infrastructure (BCOM/LSI?) in the future if it'd like to. All these new markets (to AMD) are open source friendly/ARM dormiant somehow, thus using ARM is not too problematic at all.


note: leopard -> zen
note2: hope that dual-core phones and tabs will make a return


[ 本帖最後由 Puff 於 2014-1-31 17:05 編輯 ]

Puff

http://venturebeat.com/2014/02/0 ... interview/view-all/



顯然呢篇 interview 只會係佔大路 ge "AMD to use ARM to f**k its own x86 in and out" 上燒多把火，我雙拳難敵四手。我只覺得係佢最少呢兩年內唔會有 x86 靚產品、同 ARM server 仲係半桶水嘅前提下，當然唔會倒自己米。但佢又無講錯，x86 摺唔摺全睇 Intel。

又或者 AMD 真係想整粒 ARM 版 E3 做 dense server... 又或者同 BCOM/LSI/Cavium 搶下 comms processor 油水。不過 mainframe, GP server 同 HPC 未來幾年依然係 Intel 佔大頭，dense server 形勢未明。老實講就算假設 AMD 要重新掠 mid to high-end server 水我會信佢地用 x86 多過 ARMv8，而且講咁多... 查實 ARMv8 唯一優勢就係多廠選擇同相對低成本。但 x86 又唔係完全唔可以 customize，主機果兩粒已經係例子...。真係搞，除非已經有 partner/客埋堆 (e.g. 生果全線麥金塔)，如果唔係機會無限趨 0

無乜野要補充啦。



Late Edit: 睇黎 AMD 真心想用 ARM 入 comms processor 市場...

[ 本帖最後由 Puff 於 2014-2-5 16:46 編輯 ]