Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
posted by takyon on Wednesday January 23 2019, @09:22PM   Printer-friendly
from the class-excavation dept.

Core blimey... When is an AMD CPU core not a CPU core? It's now up to a jury of 12 to decide

A class-action lawsuit against AMD claiming false advertising over its "eight core" FX processors has been given the go-ahead by a California judge.

US district judge Haywood Gilliam last week rejected [PDF] AMD's claim that "a significant majority" of people understood the term "core" the same way it did as "not persuasive."

What tech buyers imagine represents a core when it comes to processors would be a significant part of such a lawsuit, the judge noted, and so AMD's arguments were "premature."

The so-called "eight core" chips contain four Bulldozer modules, the lawsuit notes, and these "sub-processors" each contain a pair of instruction-executing CPU cores. So, four modules times two CPU cores equals, in AMD's mind, eight CPU cores.

And here's the sticking point: these two CPU cores, within a single Bulldozer module, share caches, frontend circuitry, and a single floating point unit (FPU). These shared resources cause bottlenecks that can slow the processor, it is claimed.

The plaintiffs, who sued back in 2015, argue that they bought a chip they thought would have eight independent processor cores – the advertising said it was the "first native 8-core desktop processor" – and paid a premium for that.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by shortscreen on Thursday January 24 2019, @10:51AM (1 child)

    by shortscreen (2252) on Thursday January 24 2019, @10:51AM (#791177) Journal

    But how many floating point or SIMD instructions can it execute in parallel?

    This could get very foggy. It's normal for some instructions to take multiple cycles. These are super scalar CPUs, which means it's also normal for multiple instructions to execute in one cycle (on one core). With the pipelined design, it's also possible for multiple instructions to be "executing" during a cycle even if none of them happen to finish on that cycle.

    I think it's reasonable to say that AMD's chip had eight cores, with pairs of cores having contention for shared FPU resources. Just like any multi-core chip has shared I/O and memory bandwidth. But chips with hyperthreading don't count the additional thread as a separate core, so another way to look at it would be to compare the functionality that is duplicated on one core with HT versus the two cores in AMD's module. (Since I don't know anything about HT I can't currently answer that)

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday January 25 2019, @08:22AM

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Friday January 25 2019, @08:22AM (#791668) Homepage
    Yeah, I'm with you. I think HT is like the question of what is alive. HT are viruses. Not cores, but containing enough such that if they get access to a core, they can do their job.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves