AMD K8 E4 Stepping: SSE3 Performance
by Derek Wilson on February 17, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Final Words
Finding good SSE3 benchmarks wasn't as easy as we would have liked. Other encoding suites react the same way that DivX and AutoGK do. This seems to indicate that the K8 architecture is simply resilient when it comes to unaligned 128bit loads. In the case of Intel's NetBurst, the lddqu instruction may have more impact.As far as physics and graphics go, the added instructions show potential in our synthetic test. For DCC, CAD, scientific, and other workstation software, the E4 stepping could offer a bit of a performance boost.
In the consumer space, Athlon 64 may not see as much benefit from SSE3, especially since our encoding tests turned up so little performance impact. SSE3 can be used in games, but the impact of this will likely be minimal. As most games will likely remain graphics limited, improvements will have a hard time shining through. Of course, for those who like to use lower cost Athlon 64 processors in cheaper workstations, there could be some advantage.
When we take a look at the Opteron 252 in a workstation environment, we will be able to get a better view of what the total package has to offer. As our workstation tests will be in a DP environment, we'll be able to see how the higher bandwidth helps the Opteron shine.
We would like to have tested more applications in this report on SSE3 performance under the new AMD core. Of interest to us are LINPACK, FLOPS, STREAM, and various other tests that would require us to recompile them with proper SSE3 support. As the Intel compiler is designed to optimize for Intel processors, we haven't had a viable source for high quality SSE3 compilation. Hand optimizing these benchmarks for SSE3 on Opteron would take a little more time than this short investigation will allow. We may look into using GCC for this purpose in future tests. As for real world tests using SSE3, we haven't been able to find many suitable candidates beyond video encoders.
It will likely be the case that current SSE3 optimized code paths will also not show their strengths on Opteron/Athlon until the processors are in developers' hands for a while. The Intel compiler is also hands and feet above any resource AMD have up their sleeve. But since SSE3 offers more choices for optimization and code simplification, compilers may have an easier time generating efficient code. Hand optimized code is still important for tight loops in critical sections of performance oriented code. In this case, more powerful and simple options implemented in hardware will help programmers better optimize their own code.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
48 Comments
View All Comments
Icehawk - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
I've worked for several large corporations (Fortune 500) and none of them have AMD servers anywhere... it is unfortunate but it is like Macs in a DTP house - the old guard swears by it so nothing is going to change. AMD still is seen as inferior compared to Intel even years after the successes of Athlon by many.Plus most vendors only offer Intel boxes and large corporates like as small a vendor pool as possible (leverage) and as uniform an IT infrastructure as possible (ie, Intel shop).
At least that is my perspective on it.
I would have liked to see a wider array of benchmarks, these were slim pickins - but thanks for the quick review!
pxc - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
#26, that would't change anything. Look at the XviD S939/S940 FX-53 (2.4GHz) benchmarks here: http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dX...I don't believe XviD has any SSE3 enhancements. XviD is just an unlicensed MPEG-4 hack anyways, so it doesn't matter.
Umbra55 - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
Derek,Why did you use DivX and not Xvid?
It is well known that DivX has been “enhanced” by Intel (read: crippled for AMD).
I would like to see the latest Opterons compared to the latest Xeons under Linux.
Two reasons: Linux applications have not been “enhanced” by Intel and nowadays more server use Linux than Windows.
Umbra.
pxc - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
#22, from the DivX 5.2 release notes:DivX 5.2 now includes:
...
Encoder: Intel SSE3 (Prescott) Optimizations
The DivX 5.2 encoder features optimizations for Intel Prescott CPU's, improving performance by up to 15%.
...
mlittl3 - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
#7, bigpowIn addition to #14, Derek Wilson (the author of the article in case you didn't notice), stating that Anandtech uses Opterons in their servers, maybe you should pop over to www.top500.org and read through the top 500 supercomputer list. Some 30% of the computers use Opterons. I know you said you are from "one of the largest tech companies" but sounds like you guys aren't doing your homework. Who do you work for? Intel?
Also, for all of you guys who are asking about better gaming performance and overclocking, OPTERONS ARE SERVER AND WORKSTATION PROCESSORS!!!!! You guys have got to get some perspective. The PC world does not revolve around the number of frames per second you can get out of HL2 or Doom3. Servers are built for stability and usually come with 2d only built on 8MB video cards in 1U designs, etc. etc. Workstations usually use Quadros and FireGLs which are for designing 3d apps, running CAD software, etc.
Besides Opterons are meant to work with registered memory (some are getting around this). This is not the stuff for gamers and overclockers and regular desktop use. Let's get real. Anandtech will overclock and benchmark games until the cows come home when the Rev E. Athlon 64's and Athlon 64 FX's come out.
Everyone agreed.
pxc - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
Intel 3.4F results:SSE2
Math Solving fps: 591.7
Prerendering fps: 3554.9
Overall fps: 21.26
SSE3
Math Solving fps: 601.5
Prerendering fps: 3558.0
Overall fps: 21.35
I used the same default settings as Derek used. The Renderer set up does not have a SSE2 setting (only FPU+MMX, 3DNow+MMX, SSE+MMX and SSE3+MMX), but the model set up does have SSE2 and SSE3 options. I also tested 2 render threads, but the math solving and prerendering results seem to report only the first thread (overall fps are correct):
SSE2, 2 rendering threads
Math Solving fps: 509.8
Prerendering fps: 3428.8
Overall fps: 35.57
SSE3, 2 rendering threads
Math Solving fps: 516.2
Prerendering fps: 3424.6
Overall fps: 35.68
PetNorth - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
DivX 5.2.1 hasn't SSE3 support at all. 2-3% gain will be for some memory system improvement or for another reason.ceefka - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
Hey Intel, can we have SSE4 now?Ok, it will improve some benchies. I hope you can find gains for Opteron on SSE3 in your next articles on this one. Otherwise I agree with #9
#7 That's not funny. That's ignorant.
mickyb - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
I like the direct comparison by adjusting the clock, but I would have also included the 2.6 GHz benchmarks as well. I guess you are saving that for a bigger article.I thought there were a couple of games that took advantage of SSE3. Do HL-2 or D3 do anything?
Also, I would like to have seen the temperature when you underclocked it to see if there was any improvement or loss. I thought the E stepping had a better proccess to reduce leakage. I am also curious if SSE3 added anything significant in the way of load or temp. I would think that SSE3 would be negligable.
LoneWolf15 - Thursday, February 17, 2005 - link
#16 's comments are the ones I would have made if they weren't posted already. I'd like to know if the Opteron has the new memory controller that the Venice-core Athlon 64 is supposed to have, and what effects that has on performance.