Kaveri and its powerful computing cores

[jordiqui]

APU KAVERI

AMD seems willing to bite off a piece of Intel's market share. The flexibility of this processor with its four **CPU** cores and eight **GPU** cores allows for efficient distribution of the workload.

Are we really talking about twelve cores integrated into these chips?
This Kaveri APU seems willing to eat into Intel's market share.
**What do you think?
**

Source

[whoololon]

Well, after reading and re-reading the source, I'm left with the impression: "Hello, I'm a new micro that needs 12 cores to get close to the performance of others with only 4 cores, but I'll be the favorite of manufacturers of laptops and pre-assembled desktop PCs."

…it hasn't gone unnoticed that I don't like the APU hype, right?:troll:

[Sylver]

The usual thing, to wait for real performance in tests and benches, we pass the buck to the wealthy of the forum :troll:

Greetings

[Twikzer]

Honestly, I think AMD is dedicating too much time to APUs, it's fine for the moment, but it seems to me that they are monopolizing their attention too much and neglecting the FX, for a clear example, it is because their 8 physical core processor, and 4.0 GHz, is surpassed by one with 4 physical cores and 3.5 GHz.

[Bm4n]

Of course Whoololon, it's an APU that has to compete with those of its size, the doubt I have is whether the market for these micros is disappearing, replaced by ARM... Although there are tablets and hybrids with x86 micros, for that I prefer these APUs over Atom, even so, we would have to compare consumption and battery life.

Sent from my iPad with Tapatalk HD

[cobito]

@whoololon:

Well, after reading and re-reading the source, I'm left with the impression: "Hello, I'm a new micro that needs 12 cores to get close to the performance of others with only 4 cores, but I'll be the favorite of manufacturers of laptops and pre-assembled desktop PCs."

…it hasn't been noticed much that I don't like the APU thing, right? :troll:

The APU thing is actually quite interesting, as is Intel's integration of their graphics into the micros, as they are offering very good graphics performance, at low prices and with moderate consumption. These micros have applications in any task with surprising performances, except for gaming.

How AMD catches up with Intel is irrelevant as long as they do it under the same conditions, that the available software can take advantage of the benefits and consumption is kept up to date.

@Bm4n:

The doubt I have is whether the market for these micros is disappearing, replaced by ARM…

From my point of view, clearly not. In fact, I see two clearly differentiated market segments, and when x86 tablets become popular, they will have users very different from those of ARM tablets. This AMD APU has no rival in ARM. If you put it to execute tasks that pull on the GPU like programs that make use of OpenCL, video encoding or any other GPGPU application, I think the AMD product will be very, very competent, light years ahead of the performance that the best ARM can offer.

Now, with higher consumption as well.

We are talking about a platform that can face practically any task (APUs) versus a platform whose purpose is to offer 4 basic services (ARM).

If there were a serious operating system for ARM with a rich repertoire of serious software, which would require focusing ARM on desktop environments, things would change.

By the way, here you have a comparison of Intel's product vs AMD's on Linux using free drivers. These results should be taken with a grain of salt because Kernel 3.13 has caused regressions in Hashwell's graphics and the free AMD driver for this range is still being polished.