AMD Processors
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: AMD 6180SE vs AMD 6238 performance and price
Topic Summary: AMD 6238 has more Hz more cache and consume less power than AMD 6180SE; how could it be cheaper?
Created On: 12/02/2011 04:40 AM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
Answer This question was answered by Soroush, on Sunday, December 11, 2011 4:21 AM

Answer:
Thanks MU_Engineer, the prices make me think that I may miss performance not gain more of it with interlagos but, happily, seems miss of performance is not going to happen.
 12/02/2011 04:40 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Soroush
Lurker

Posts: 10
Joined: 09/29/2010

AMD 6238 has more Hz more cache and consume less power than AMD 6180SE; how could it be cheaper?

From http://blog.icc-usa.com/2011/1...ron-6100-value/


AMD 6180SE 12-Core 2.50 Ghz 12 mb Cache 140W $1655.45
AMD 6238 12-Core 2.60 Ghz 16mb Cache 115W $498.33

Edited: 12/09/2011 at 06:33 AM by Soroush
 12/05/2011 02:47 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
MU_Engineer
Dr. Mu

Posts: 1837
Joined: 08/26/2006

Originally posted by: Soroush

AMD 6238 has more Hz more cache and consume less power than AMD 6180SE; how could it be cheaper?



From http://blog.icc-usa.com/2011/1...on-6100-value/:



AMD 6180SE 12-Core 2.50 Ghz 12 mb Cache 140W $1655.45

AMD 6238 12-Core 2.60 Ghz 16mb Cache 115W $498.33


The Opteron 6200s are made on a new 32 nm manufacturing process node and they use a considerably different microarchitecture than the 6100s. The new process node allows for more transistors, which is where the cache increase comes from. The radical change in architecture is what gives the speed boost and the cost savings- 12 Opteron 6200 cores take up a lot less silicon real estate than 12 Opteron 6100 cores, so they are less expensive. The architecture of the 6200s is also designed for higher clock speeds and a lot of cores at the expense of per-clock and per-core performance. Thus, the 6238 is not going to be faster than the 6180 except in poorly-threaded tasks where the 6238's Turbo Core can kick in (the 6100s lack this feature.) Anywhere near fully loaded, the 6180 will be notably faster than the 6238.

-------------------------
 12/09/2011 06:33 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Soroush
Lurker

Posts: 10
Joined: 09/29/2010

Originally posted by: MU_Engineer
The architecture of the 6200s is also designed for higher clock speeds and a lot of cores at the expense of per-clock and per-core performance.


I am not expert and usually look at Hz, cache size and number of cores when considering a CPU but you mention something new to me regarding per clock performance; what specifications and terms which describe this, educate me please.

Does your comment hold true in comparison of older 61xx Opteron and new 62xx; I mean do 61xx give better performance than 62xx ones despite having more core, cache and turbo(and I think AMD say they have about 30% more performance)? for example when I check prices for 6172 it is about $1,000 but for 6272 it is less than $550, so why people buy 61xx and not the cheaper and (supposedly better) 62xx?

Thanks for your time and sorry if this is noob question but I am going to build a 4 CPU workstation for video encoding using x264 and seek the best performance for price and have to make educated decision.
 12/09/2011 10:54 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
MU_Engineer
Dr. Mu

Posts: 1837
Joined: 08/26/2006

Originally posted by: Soroush

Originally posted by: MU_Engineer

The architecture of the 6200s is also designed for higher clock speeds and a lot of cores at the expense of per-clock and per-core performance.




I am not expert and usually look at Hz, cache size and number of cores when considering a CPU but you mention something new to me regarding per clock performance; what specifications and terms which describe this, educate me please.



Does your comment hold true in comparison of older 61xx Opteron and new 62xx; I mean do 61xx give better performance than 62xx ones despite having more core, cache and turbo(and I think AMD say they have about 30% more performance)? for example when I check prices for 6172 it is about $1,000 but for 6272 it is less than $550, so why people buy 61xx and not the cheaper and (supposedly better) 62xx?



Thanks for your time and sorry if this is noob question but I am going to build a 4 CPU workstation for video encoding using x264 and seek the best performance for price and have to make educated decision.


The newer CPUs do have about 30% more performance in multithreaded tasks if you compare old vs. new on a dollar for dollar basis using common programs and OSes. The 6172 may perform similarly to the 6172, but the 6272 is half the price. The 6172's dollar for dollar competitor is the 6276 or 6282 SE, which is notably faster. The 6180 SE costs more than any current Opteron 6200 and as a result, no 6200 can outperform it by a huge margin- yet. The 6272's Opteron 6100 competitor would be something like the 6134, which will be notably slower. The newer Opterons really shine in single-threaded tasks compared to the older ones due to the Turbo Core feature.

You also have to remember than the 6200s are brand-new, radically-different CPUs that need the software to catch up to them and the silicon manufacturing process to mature as well. Experimental tests on Linux using bleeding-edge compilers and kernels show the 6200s performing much closer to the 6100s on a clock for clock and core for core basis. The added cores and clocks of the 6200s means that when they are properly optimized for, the 6200s will be considerably higher performers than the 6100s.

I wouldn't hesitate to build a 6200-based 4P machine. Note that x264 doesn't really scale well beyond about 12 threads- you really only get an advantage from a 4P setup in x264 if you want to encode multiple videos at the same time. However, the 6200s have decent single-threaded performance due to Turbo Core, something that those of us who have 6100-based systems we use for general workstation usage really wish we had. My 6128s are good at multithreaded work like encoding, but they are fairly poky in anything that's not very multithreaded. I'll end up replacing the 6128s with some Opteron 6200s eventually for that reason.

-------------------------
 12/11/2011 04:21 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Soroush
Lurker

Posts: 10
Joined: 09/29/2010

Answer Answer
Thanks MU_Engineer, the prices make me think that I may miss performance not gain more of it with interlagos but, happily, seems miss of performance is not going to happen.
 01/03/2012 10:23 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
BobCochran13
Lurker

Posts: 4
Joined: 01/03/2012

Dr. Mu, note that for the Asus KGPE-D16 board, which we both have, there is a BIOS update for it that supports the 6200 series processors. I've installed the update and it seems to work okay.
Statistics
112018 users are registered to the AMD Processors forum.
There are currently 0 users logged in.

FuseTalk Hosting Executive Plan v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.



Contact AMD Terms and Conditions ©2007 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Privacy Trademark information