AMD has a response to Intel Woodcrest server chips
"The first of these that we have heard about is the server variant, and
it will be a killer. It has 2x the floating point units, and sources
tell us that it will push about 1.5x the floating point performance of
the current chips in the real world."
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29890

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:51:35 -0500, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>AMD has a response to Intel Woodcrest server chips
>"The first of these that we have heard about is the server variant, and
>it will be a killer. It has 2x the floating point units, and sources
>tell us that it will push about 1.5x the floating point performance of
>the current chips in the real world."
>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29890

It all looks fine and well except for one thing. What the servers
need a killer FPU for? AFAIK, traditional server tasks such as
database, web, mail, etc. have very little dependance on the float.
Say "workstation", and the FPU is what matters most, but server...
Am I missing something?

NNN

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:51:35 -0500, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>AMD has a response to Intel Woodcrest server chips
>"The first of these that we have heard about is the server variant, and
>it will be a killer. It has 2x the floating point units, and sources
>tell us that it will push about 1.5x the floating point performance of
>the current chips in the real world."
>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29890

I assume that means 2xSSE3 units. I'm not sure how that really improves
the traditional server market - e.g. file serving, database/TP etc. doesn't
do floating point per se and I've not heard of SSEx being a big play
there... though that could just be my ignorance showing.:-)

There *are* high expectations in some quarters just now for application
servers to (finally) take off, which could in some apps benefit from
improved FP and SSEx, but I still see that as somewhat speculative.

I really think AMD needs more than 2xFP for a umm, "killer".

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

> >AMD has a response to Intel Woodcrest server chips
> >"The first of these that we have heard about is the server variant, and
> >it will be a killer. It has 2x the floating point units, and sources
> >tell us that it will push about 1.5x the floating point performance of
> >the current chips in the real world."
> >http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29890
>
> I assume that means 2xSSE3 units. I'm not sure how that really improves
> the traditional server market - e.g. file serving, database/TP etc. doesn't
> do floating point per se and I've not heard of SSEx being a big play
> there... though that could just be my ignorance showing.:-)

AMD AFAIK doesn't have SSEn units for any n. They just decode SSE ops
into scalar instructions and execute them on the traditional FPUs.

> There *are* high expectations in some quarters just now for application
> servers to (finally) take off, which could in some apps benefit from
> improved FP and SSEx, but I still see that as somewhat speculative.
>
> I really think AMD needs more than 2xFP for a umm, "killer".

Yup. It will help for HPC stuff though, where K8 is already quite
popular.

DK

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 22:38:03 GMT, "(E-Mail Removed)"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>It all looks fine and well except for one thing. What the servers
>need a killer FPU for? AFAIK, traditional server tasks such as
>database, web, mail, etc. have very little dependance on the float.
>Say "workstation", and the FPU is what matters most, but server...
>Am I missing something?

Assuming the report is reliable, I think you're missing the Marketing.

There are bound to be some hardcore gamers who will somehow put these
into gaming machines and throw up huge benchmarks putting AMD way
ahead of any Intel x86/64 equivalent at that time. Even though it does
not directly relate to server application, I'm quite sure it will have
some influence.

Also I'm not sure but wouldn't the FPU/SSE units be useful if
everything's being encrypted/SSLed?

--
A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven
Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations,
Lost to the world, Lost to myself

The little lost angel wrote:
> Also I'm not sure but wouldn't the FPU/SSE units be useful if
> everything's being encrypted/SSLed?

AFAIU, encryption involves mostly integer arithmetic.

George Macdonald wrote:

> Yousuf Khan wrote:
>
>> "The first of these that we have heard about is the server
>> variant, and it will be a killer. It has 2x the floating point
>> units, and sources tell us that it will push about 1.5x the
>> floating point performance of the current chips in the real
>> world."
>
> I assume that means 2xSSE3 units.

The K8 optimization manual states:

"Future processors with more or wider multipliers and adders will
achieve better throughput using SSE and SSE2 instructions. (Today's
processors implement a 128-bit-wide SSE or SSE2 operation as two
64-bit operations that are internally pipelined.)

The SIMD instructions provide a theoretical single-precision peak
throughput of two additions and two multiplications per clock cycle,
whereas x87 instructions can only sustain one addition and one
multiplication per clock cycle. The SSE2 and x87 double-precision
peak throughput is the same, but SSE2 instructions provide better
code density."

Maybe AMD plans to boost the throughput of 128-bit operations?

On 24 Feb 2006 16:52:32 -0800, "David Kanter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> >AMD has a response to Intel Woodcrest server chips
>> >"The first of these that we have heard about is the server variant, and
>> >it will be a killer. It has 2x the floating point units, and sources
>> >tell us that it will push about 1.5x the floating point performance of
>> >the current chips in the real world."
>> >http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29890
>>
>> I assume that means 2xSSE3 units. I'm not sure how that really improves
>> the traditional server market - e.g. file serving, database/TP etc. doesn't
>> do floating point per se and I've not heard of SSEx being a big play
>> there... though that could just be my ignorance showing.:-)
>
>AMD AFAIK doesn't have SSEn units for any n. They just decode SSE ops
>into scalar instructions and execute them on the traditional FPUs.

Hmm, "traditional" is a little misplaced don't you think? How things work
internally is not the important thing here but whether the SSEn, in
particular 2xFP, is a benefit in servers. OTOH, since it's the umm
Inquirer, it could also be that 2xFPs means that AMD will expand its
internal SSE FP ops out to a full effective 128bits.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> It all looks fine and well except for one thing. What the servers
> need a killer FPU for? AFAIK, traditional server tasks such as
> database, web, mail, etc. have very little dependance on the float.
> Say "workstation", and the FPU is what matters most, but server...
> Am I missing something?

Are you forgetting render farms? Those are all servers.

Yousuf Khan

David Kanter wrote:
> AMD AFAIK doesn't have SSEn units for any n. They just decode SSE ops
> into scalar instructions and execute them on the traditional FPUs.

I'm surprised everybody is taking the word "FPU" so literally here. It's
obviously not referring to the traditional high-level x87 FPU, it's
referring to the low-level FPU here. You know FPU as in the counterpart
to the ALU? Low-level sections of the whole CPU. The low-level FPU would
be common to all of them: SSE, x87, 3DNow!, etc.

These days everything in the x86 world are just interfaces to more
intricate structures below.

Yousuf Khan