AMD Officially Launches Bristol Ridge Processors And Zen-Ready AM4 Platform

Subject: Motherboards, Processors | September 7, 2016 - 08:08 PM |
Tagged: Zen, Summit Ridge, Excavator, Bristol Ridge, amd, A12-9800

This week AMD officially took the wraps off of its 7th generation APU lineup that it introduced back in May. Previously known as Bristol Ridge, AMD is launching eight new processors along with a new desktop platform that finally brings next generation I/O to AMD systems.

Bristol Ridge maintains the Excavator CPU cores and GCN GPU cores of Carrizo, but on refreshed silicon with performance and power efficiency gains that will bring the architecture started by Bulldozer to an apex. These will be the last chips of that line, and wil be succeeded by AMD's new "Zen" architecture in 2017. For now though, Bristol Ridge delivers as much as 17% higher per thread CPU performance and 27% higher graphics performance while using significantly lower power than its predecessors. Further, AMD has been able to (thanks to various process tweaks that Josh talked about previously) hit some impressive clock speeds with these chips enabling AMD to better compete with Intel's Core i5 offerings.

View Full Size

At the top end AMD has the (65W) quad core A12-9800 running at 3.8 GHz base and 4.2 GHz boost paired with GCN 3.0-based Radeon R7 graphics (that support VP9 and HEVC acceleration). These new Bristol Ridge chips are able to take advantage of DDR4 clocked up to 2400 MHz. For DIY PC builders planning to use dedicated graphics, AMD has the non-APU Athlon X4 950 which features four CPU cores at 3.5 GHz base and 3.8 GHz boost with a 65W TDP. While it is not clocked quite as high as its APU counterpart, it should still prove to be a popular choice for budge builds and will replace the venerable Athlon X4 860 and will also be paired with an AM4 motherboard that will be ready to accept a new Zen-based "Summit Ridge" CPU next year.

The following table lists the eight new 7th generation "Bristol Ridge" processors and their specifications. 

  CPU Cores CPU Clocks Base / Boost GPU GPU CUs GPU Clocks (Max) TDP


4 3.8 GHz / 4.2 GHz Radeon R7 8 1,108 MHz 65W
A12-9800E4 4 3.1 GHz / 3.8 GHz Radeon R7 8 900 MHz 35W
A10-9700 4 3.5 GHz / 3.8 GHz Radeon R7 6 1,029 MHz 65W
A10-9700E 4 3.0 GHz / 3.5 GHz Radeon R7 6 847 MHz 35W
A8-9600 4 3.1 GHz / 3.4 GHz Radeon R7 6 900 MHz 65W
A6-9500 2 3.5 GHz / 3.8 GHz Radeon
6 1029 MHz 65W
A6-9500E 2 3.0 GHz / 3.4 GHz Radeon
4 800 MHz 35W
Athlon X4 950 4 3.5 GHz / 3.8 GHz None 0 N/A 65W

Source: AMD

To expand on the performance increases of Bristol Ridge, AMD compared the A12-9800 to the previous generation A10-8850 as well as Intel's Core i5-6500. According to the company, the Bristol Ridge processor handily beats the Carrizo chip and is competitive with the Intel i5. Specifically, when comparing Bristol Ridge and Carrizo, AMD found that the A12-9800 scored 3,521.25 in 3DMark 11 while the A10-8850 (95W Godavari) scored 2,880. Further, when compared in Cinebench R11.5 1T the A12-980 scored 1.21 versus the A10-8850's 1.06. Not bad when you consider that the new processor has a 30W lower TDP!

With that said, the comparison to Intel is perhaps most interesting to the readers. In this case, the A12-9800 is about where you would expect though that is not necessarily a bad thing. It does pull a bit closer to Intel in CPU and continues to offer superior graphics performance.

  AMD A12-9800 (65W) Intel Core i5-6500 (65W) AMD A10-8850 (95W)

3DMark 11 Performance

3,521.25 1,765.75 2,880
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated 3,483.25 3,702 Not run
Cinebench R11.5 1T 1.21 Not run 1.06

Source: AMD

Specifically, in 3DMark 11 Performance the A12-9800's score of 3,521.25 is quite a bit better than the Intel i5-6500's 1,765.75 result. However, in the more CPU focused PCMark 8 Home Accelerated benchmark the Intel comes out ahead with a score of 3,702 versus the AMD A12-9800's score of 3,483.25. If the price is right Bristol Ridge does not look too bad on paper, assuming AMD's testing holds true in independent reviews!

The AM4 Platform

Alongside the launch of desktop 7th generation APUs, AMD is launching a new AM4 platform that supports Bristol Ridge and is ready for Zen APUs next year. The new platform finally brings new I/O technologies to AMD systems including PCI-E 3.0, NVMe, SATA Express, DDR4, and USB 3.1 Gen 2.

According to Digital Trends, AMD's AM4 desktop platform wil span all the way from low end to enthusiast motherboards and these boards will be powered by one of three new chipsets. The three new chipsets are the B350 for mainstream, A320 for "essential," and X/B/A300 for small form factor motherboards. Notably missing is any mention of an enthusiast chipset, but one is reportedly being worked on and will arive closer to the launch of Zen-based processors in 2017.

The image below outlines the differences in the chipsets. Worth noting is that the APUs themselves will handle the eight lanes of PCI-E 3.0, dual channel DDR4, four USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports, and two SATA 6Gbps and two NVMe or PCI-E 3.0 storage devices. This leaves PCI-E 2.0, SATA Express, additional SATA 6Gbps, and USB 3.1 Gen 2 connection duties to the chipsets.

View Full Size

As of today, AMD has only announced the availability of AM4 motherboards and 7th generation APUs for OEM systems (with design wins from HP and Lenovo so far). The company will be outlining the channel / DIY PC builder lineup and pricing at a later (to be announced date).

I am looking forward to Zen and in a way the timing of Bristol Ridge seems strange. On the other hand, for OEMs it should do well and hold them over until then (heh) and enthusiasts / DIY builders are able to buy into Bristol Ridge knowing that they will be able to upgrade to Zen next year (while getting better than Carrizo performance with less power and possibly better overclocking) is not a bad option so long as the prices are right!

The full press blast is included below for more information on how they got their benchmark results.

"New Mainstream & eSports–Ready Gaming PCs Powered by 7th Generation AMD A-Series Desktop Processors Debut Globally


  • “Bristol Ridge” APUs pair with the all-new AM4 desktop platform to increase productivity and enhance immersive and gaming experiences; HP and Lenovo design launches demonstrate readiness of AM4 platform for upcoming “Summit Ridge” CPUs —


SUNNYVALE, Calif. — Sept. 5, 2016 —  AMD (NASDAQ: AMD) today announced that the first OEM systems to feature 7th Generation AMD A-Series desktop processors are now shipping, paired with the new AMD AM4 platform supporting DDR4 memory and next-gen I/O and standards. Designs, initially from HP and Lenovo, with other global OEM designs to follow, deliver high-speed processing, smooth eSports gaming, and enhanced HD and UHD streaming capabilities, including the highest memory bandwidth to date for an AMD desktop platform.

“The consumer release of these new HP and Lenovo designs is an important milestone for AMD on two fronts. First, it marks a major increase in productivity performance, streaming video and eSports gaming experiences sought after by today’s consumers, delivered through our new 7th Generation AMD A-Series desktop processors. Second, because these new OEM designs also feature our new AM4 desktop platform, the motherboard ecosystem shows its readiness for our upcoming high-performance “Summit Ridge” desktop CPUs featuring “Zen” cores, which share the same platform,” said Kevin Lensing, Corporate VP and general manager of Client Computing at AMD.

Systems powered by 7th Generation AMD A-Series processors are productive, immersive, and energy efficient, with up to four “Excavator” CPU cores. 7th Generation AMD A-Series desktop processors consist of 65-watt and 35-watt versions, offering superior power efficiency and enabling flexible solutions in a wide variety of form factors. The new 7th Generation 65-watt A-Series processors deliver performance only realized at 95-watts with the previous generation. In addition, when compared to the Intel Core i5 6500, the new 65-watt processors offer up to equivalent productivity performance2 and up to 99% higher graphics performance3.

7th Generation AMD A-Series desktop processors (previously codenamed “Bristol Ridge”) also bring enhanced graphics capabilities and key video playback features that support up to 4K Ultra HD in both the popular H.264 and new-and-improved H.265 formats.4 These devices will also feature AMD Radeon Graphics Core Next graphics, with full support for Microsoft® DirectX® 12.

The AMD AM4 socket is a new unified socket infrastructure that provides compatibility between 7th Generation AMD A-Series processors and the upcoming high-performance “Summit Ridge” AMD desktop CPU. AM4 platforms feature DDR4 Memory and next-gen I/O and peripheral support, including PCIe® Gen 3, USB 3.1 Gen 2, NVMe, and SATA Express.


Supporting Resources

  • Learn more about the 7th Generation AMD A-Series Desktop APUs

  • Learn more about the exciting new AMD “Zen” core architecture

  • Learn more about how AMD computing and graphics power the products you love

  • Become a fan of AMD on Facebook

  • Follow AMD on Twitter

  • Join AMD on Google+


About AMD

For more than 45 years, AMD has driven innovation in high-performance computing, graphics, and visualization technologies ― the building blocks for gaming, immersive platforms, and the datacenter. Hundreds of millions of consumers, leading Fortune 500 businesses, and cutting-edge scientific research facilities around the world rely on AMD technology daily to improve how they live, work, and play. AMD employees around the world are focused on building great products that push the boundaries of what is possible. For more information about how AMD is enabling today and inspiring tomorrow, visit the AMD (NASDAQ: AMD) website, blog, Facebook and Twitter pages.


AMD, the AMD Arrow logo and combinations thereof are trademarks of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.  Other product names used in this publication are for identification purposes only and may be trademarks of their respective companies.



  1. 65W delivering 95W performance – Testing by AMD Performance labs. PC manufacturers may vary configurations yielding different results. 3DMark 11 Performance is used to simulate graphics performance, and Cinebench R11.5 1T Performance is used to simulate single threaded CPU performance; the 7th Generation AMD A12-9800 at 65W scored 3521.25 and 1.21 while the A10-8850 at 95W scored 2880 and 1.06 respectively. BRD-24
    System Configurations: 7th Generation AMD A12-9800: AMD “Myrtle” reference platform, 7th Generation AMD A12-9800 with AMD Radeon™ R7 Graphics, 2x4096 DDR4-2400 RAM, 228GB SSD Drive (Non-rotating), Microsoft Windows 10 Pro, Graphics driver 2016-04-11
    PRO A10-8850: ASUS A88X-PRO, PRO A10-8850B with AMD Radeon™ R7 Graphics, 2x4096 DDR3-2133 RAM, 228GB SSD Drive (Non-rotating), Microsoft Windows 10 Pro, Graphics driver 15.301.1201.0 2015-12-22

  2. PCMark 8 Home Accelerated:
    7th Generation AMD A12-9800 vs. Intel i5-6500: Testing by AMD Performance labs. PC manufacturers may vary configurations yielding different results. PCMark® 8 v2 Home is used to simulate system performance; the 7th Generation AMD A12-9800 scored 3483.25, while the Intel Core i5-6500 scored 3702 for a benchmark score comparison of 3483.25/3466.5 = 1.00X or 100%. BRD-6
    System Configurations: 7th Generation AMD A12-9800: AMD “Myrtle” reference platform, 7th Generation AMD A12-9800 with AMD Radeon™ R7 Graphics, 2x4096 DDR4-2400 RAM, 228GB SSD Drive (Non-rotating), Microsoft Windows 10 Pro, Graphics driver 2016-04-11
    Intel® Core™ i5-6500 CPU @ 3.20GHz: ASUS Z170-A, Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-6500 CPU @ 3.20GHz with Intel® HD Graphics 530, 2x4096 DDR4-2133 RAM, 228GB SSD Drive (Non-rotating), Microsoft Windows 10 Pro, Graphics driver 20

  3. 3DMark 11 Performance:
    7th Generation AMD A12-9800 vs. Intel i5-6500: Testing by AMD Performance labs. PC manufacturers may vary configurations yielding different results. 3DMark 11 Performance is used to simulate graphics performance; the 7th Generation AMD A12-9800 scored 3521.25 while the Intel® Core i5-6500 scored 1765.75, for a benchmark score difference of 3521.25/1765.75 = 1.99X or 99% more. BRD-5
    System Configurations: 7th Generation AMD A12-9800: AMD “Myrtle” reference platform, 7th Generation AMD A12-9800 with AMD Radeon™ R7 Graphics, 2x4096 DDR4-2400 RAM, 228GB SSD Drive (Non-rotating), Microsoft Windows 10 Pro, Graphics driver 2016-04-11
    Intel® Core™ i5-6500 CPU @ 3.20GHz: ASUS Z170-A, Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-6500 CPU @ 3.20GHz with Intel® HD Graphics 530, 2x4096 DDR4-2133 RAM, 228GB SSD Drive (Non-rotating), Microsoft Windows 10 Pro, Graphics driver 2016-02-01

  4. HEVC acceleration is subject to inclusion/installation of compatible HEVC players."


Source: AMD

September 8, 2016 | 12:44 AM - Posted by Tim Verry

Hmm looks like Eurogamer benchmarked the i5-6500 in Cinebench R11.5 single thread at 1.68. Their benchmarking rig is not identical though:

"So let's talk about our test system. We bought the Core i5 6500 ourselves from Amazon, running the system from an MSI Z170A Gaming M5 motherboard, with all tests run from a 512GB Crucial MX100 SSD. Our all-important DDR4 came in the form of two 4GB sticks of Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4, rated for 3000MHz. Curiously, using the XMP profile for these sticks applied a mild two per cent CPU overclock, so we overrode that and increased the RAM multiplier instead, giving us 3066MHz. Overvolting the RAM to 1.35v allowed us to go further, easily hitting a stable 3200MHz. These new modules would allow us to test a whole spectrum of DDR4 frequencies and to get an idea of how faster RAM impacts gaming performance on this i5 quad."

September 8, 2016 | 01:13 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

With the OEMs currently the only ones with AM4 and Bristol Ridge SKUs! One can imagine just how much Bristol Ridge will be gimped of performance potential in that hands of the very same OEMs that produced the wonderfully gimped Carrizo Laptop abominations of the first Excavator based designs, with all that single channel and low wattage limitations that really made Carrizo take to the sky and soar the way a brick does! I have very little trust any any OEM and AMD's latest product considering the past performance as a good indicator of what Bristol Ridge will receive in the hands of those OEM's! Color me Jade but I’m waiting for the home system builder market to maybe come to the rescue of Bristol Ridge in the interval before Zen becomes fully available without a long wait for the available Zen SKU supplies to meet demand.

OEM’s are why the PC market is in the crapper in the first place, that and the laptop market as of the past few years producing such overpriced/underpowered duds, and Windows 10 is not a big help also following on the heels of windows 8.

September 8, 2016 | 02:18 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

AMD is not without fault themselves. Only recently they started to fine tune their designs for power efficiency (for example cutting PCIe lanes to 8 which is still plenty for the segment their CPUs are in).

September 8, 2016 | 01:24 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

No, just No! The post you replied to does not deal with PCIe lanes, it Deals with OEM's and the lack of Trust when OEM's are using AMD's SKUs in their OEM PC/Laptop products. Thankfully there will be Bristol Ridge and AM4 SKUs for the home system builder market, at a later time! I hope that the home system builder market gets some BR/AM4 availability before the Zen SKUs are available, we all know that Zen will be limited in availability when first released! And the OEM's can Kiss my A$$, I'm building my own PC this time around. I'll just have to wait for a Zen/Polaris interposer based laptop SKU with at least one HBM2 stack of 4GB of HBM2 that no laptop OEM can gimp of channel capacity to hurt the APU's integrated Polaris Graphics performance!

September 8, 2016 | 02:24 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

"GCN 3.0-based Radeon R7 graphics (that support VP9 and HEVC acceleration)"
"HEVC acceleration is subject to inclusion/installation of compatible HEVC players."

What are the compatible players?
Intel at least said what power consumption we can expect playing VP9 Yutube videos using Chrome browser.

September 8, 2016 | 05:10 AM - Posted by JohnGR

These chipsets look like OEM chipsets. I am expecting BIOS option for limiting the graphics card at 4X and PCIe SSDs to use maximum 2 PCIe lanes if you want to have both of them AND a graphics card. And yes there is an Athlon in there that needs an extra graphics card.

September 8, 2016 | 09:06 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Look at the footnotes. What's going on here? Quote "...the 7th Generation AMD A12-9800 scored 3483.25, while the Intel Core i5-6500 scored 3702 for a benchmark score comparison of 3483.25/3466.5 = 1.00X or 100%...". If "Intel Core i5-6500 scored 3702" then that is 106% faster than A12-9800. The question is where does that "3466.5" came from?

September 8, 2016 | 11:07 AM - Posted by Tim Verry

Yeah I wasn't sure what they were going for there heh.

September 9, 2016 | 04:06 PM - Posted by devin w lane (not verified)

Morons.... 3702-3483=219.. 219/3483=.062 or 6.2% increase over the and, in that category, but amd posted a 99.4% increase compared with the i5 in the other benchmark. Not sure where they got the 3466 from, probably a key error, and not the only one on the page. But that flips. The comparisons. Should read that the amd performed 98.9% as well in pcmark and 99.4% better in 3dmark

September 8, 2016 | 09:16 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

AMD's "quad core" in APUs are not true quad cores, thus the performance is not even comparable to Intel's true quad cores from CPU performance point of view. Those slides are also misleading. AMD is comparing their new A12-9800 with Intel Core i5-6500 using PCMark8 "Accelerated" which uses OpenCL acceleration. This means its not a pure CPU oriented system test or benchmark. AMD's integrated Radeon GPU is generally quicker than Intel's HD Graphics (excluding Intel's Iris Pro) when it comes to Direct3D, OpenGL and OpenCL performance.

September 8, 2016 | 07:13 PM - Posted by anon (not verified)

cpus today are not pure cpus. they come with graphics. so why not take advantage of the better integrated gpu by running an accelarated benchmark? would it be wrong to compare the two processors in video encoding where quicksync works?

September 9, 2016 | 01:16 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

AMD has been touting integrated graphics acceleration for general purpose usage since the APU's inception, first thru OpenCL (mainly used in HPC nowadays) and then later AMD created HSA (which is still not in wide use at all because of hardware compliance requirements). The main problem is that a majority of everyday applications (office, legacy, productivity, etc) and even gaming software used by most PC consumers (average Joes) do not use OpenCL. Thus that is why this advertisement is misleading.

September 10, 2016 | 03:06 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

OpenOffice is used by (average Joes), even brain Dead Joe Six-Packs, and OpenOffice accelerates spreadsheets via OpenCL on the GPU. And Average Joe is not the one doing the programming for any of the applications that any average Joe/Jane uses in the first place. So WTF are you talking about. And HSA(heterogeneous system architecture) was not invented by AMD, it's been around in computing for decades with the mainframe computers using vector processors long before vector processors where taken and used to make GPUs, with GPU's having some extra specialized hardware added to accelerate geometry and raster operations. HSA is of great use to the programming profession who writes the applications that use the HSA aware OSs/API/Hardware that make use of the HSA compute on GPUs/DSPs/other processors that (average Joes) use, whether average Joe or Jane know it or not.

OS’s that utilize GPU/Other processor hardware that use OpenCL/other APIs(Vulkan, HSAIL) can all be said to have some form of HSA abilities, as all the acronym HSA really means is the ability of an OS’s/API’s and computing system hardware/drivers that designed to be able to are able to use GPUs, FPGAs, DSPs, etc. for all forms of compute. If you look at a GPU, well that GPU’s hardware does not Know that it’s a GPU, the GPU’s hardware can add, subtract, multiply, and divide, and do shift/other, operations on groups of binary ones and zeros when its op codes tell it to the work on the GPU’s processors(Shaders).

The GPU does not know that it has “shaders” it just knows how to execute the op codes that run on the shader(Processors), the software tells the shaders to what to do and the shaders(Processors) do the adding/subtracting/whatever! So what if the data that is executed on the GPU’s shaders was actually Ones and Zeros to be added and subtracted for a spread sheet and not an image, the GPU does not know the difference and its GPU shader processors just follow what the op codes tell it to do with the binary ones and zeros. That’s what HSA is it’s just doing any form of processing on the GPU, or DSP, Or other ASIC above and beyond that ASIC’s original intended usage. CPU’s can do rendering they are not very fast at rendering but still they can do rendering! CPU’s do not know that they are CPUs and not GPUs so what’s the big mystery about HSA.

Don’t let AMD’s marketing fool you into thinking that AMD invented HSA, as heterogeneous systems have been in use in computing for a very long time. AMD may have embraced the design tenets around what is called HSA today, but the membership of the HSA foundation should be an indicator that the Computing Sciences Ideas behind HSA have been around for decades and many more companies are using HSA than just AMD. Just because an APU/SOC does not comply with the HSA foundation’s “HSA 1.0” specification does not mean that any companies’ APUs/SOCs does not have any HSA ability at all, as even Intel’s SOCs since IvyBridge have had OpenCL enabled drivers, and there will be Vulkan ability there also to some degree on Intel’s integrated GPUs, as both Vulkan and OpenCL utilize SPIR-V, and SPIR-V has a lot of the very same/similar reach of the HSA foundations’ HSAIL specification. Hell even ARM Holdings, a founding member of the HSA foundation, is using SPIR-V more than HSAIL for ARM holdings’ GPGPU compute at the moment, and that new ARM Holdings Mali/Bifrost GPU micro-architecture is very async compute enabled compared to AMD’s GCN micro-architecture.

September 11, 2016 | 05:00 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Majority of ordinary folks use Microsoft stuff like Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. The only place where OpenOffice is used mostly is on systems using Linux and BSD operating systems where Microsoft Office is not available. Meanwhile most everyday applications besides Microsoft Office mainly does not use OpenCL or simply has OpenCL as an option only (disabled by default). That's because OpenCL support depends on the hardware, thus not every integrated GPU can support all OpenCL features. Example major flip flop there, Blender could not use Intel's integrated GPU and likewise Handbrake could not use AMD's integrated GPU. Additionally do not confuse "heterogenous" systems with HSA. Actually HSA was AMD's creation, while OpenCL was Apple's Creation. Why? Because AMD was the original HSA founding principle. Also because currently only AMD has the first compliant HSA hardware in the market and that was Carrizo (and probably Bristol Ridge also which was based on Carrizo). Meanwhile the rest of the HSA foundation members do not have it (you can try searching and you will find none, other hardware are mostly "heterogenous" thru OpenCL). This is why HSA is very rarely seen.

September 12, 2016 | 10:21 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

HSA is a marketing term for AMD's version of a heterogeneous system(HS), look at the old supercomputers that used vector processors they where HS, they had CPUs and Vector processors. The Vector processors(2) of old where made into the GPUs we see today. Any Blender SD work that requires high polygon count meshes chokes Intel's Integrated GPUs, I had to get an HP probook with an AMD GPU just to be able to work with high polygon count mesh modeling in Blender's 3d editing mode that uses OpenGL in the editing mode to render the meshes so I can edit them. Intel's graphics are tuned for low polygon count gaming scenes and can not handle any high polygon count 3d meshes without bogging down in the edit mode on Blender 3d. Only AMD's and Nvidia's GPUs have enough Shader cores to be able to handle High polygon count meshes in Blender’s 3D editing mode, while Intel’s low numbers of shader processors are only good for low polygon count meshes used in finished games. Intel’s GPUs are not good for game creation where things are done first on high polygon count high detail meshes to produce the high resolution textures and then skinned onto low polygon count gaming meshes to run on the games.

I’ll bet that you thing that Intel’s HyperThreading is a real thing when HyperThreading is just a fancy marketing Brand Name for Intel’s version of SMT(Simultaneous multi-threading), and Intel did not Invent SMT(1). The same goes HSA(heterogeneous system architecture), AMD did not invent the first heterogeneous systems, that was done decades ago. AMD’s Zen processor will have SMT abilities, but you really need to fine tune you marketing BS RADAR and learn the proper generic computing sciences for these technologies that have been around before there was an Intel or an AMD.


“Historical implementations

While multithreading CPUs have been around since the 1950s, simultaneous multithreading was first researched by IBM in 1968 as part of the ACS-360 project.[1] The first major commercial microprocessor developed with SMT was the Alpha 21464 (EV8). This microprocessor was developed by DEC in coordination with Dean Tullsen of the University of California, San Diego, and Susan Eggers and Henry Levy of the University of Washington. The microprocessor was never released, since the Alpha line of microprocessors was discontinued shortly before HP acquired Compaq which had in turn acquired DEC. Dean Tullsen's work was also used to develop the Hyper-threading (Hyper-threading technology or HTT) versions of the Intel Pentium 4 microprocessors, such as the "Northwood" and "Prescott".”(1)



P.S. Blender runs on Windows and Linux, and so does OpenOffice, Gimp, Krita, etc.! Pleease research before commenting! I'll be on Linux OS laptop come 2020 hopefully on a Zen/Polaris APU with plenty of Shaders to run those high polygon mesh models!

September 13, 2016 | 08:10 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You are wrong again and again. As mentioned earlier HSA requires compliant hardware and was created by AMD. Read quiote "Originally envisioned by AMD, HSA has been the cornerstone of their efforts to develop a fully functional ecosystem for heterogeneous hardware and software. Define a standard, make it easy(ier) for developers to create software around it, and, if all goes well, AMD’s big bet on GPU technology made almost 10 years ago will pay off.

However while AMD was the birthplace of what would become HSA, the standard as a whole has been about more than just one company. Which is why HSA has been under development of the HSA Foundation since 2012. " and quote "ARM for their part is following an OpenCL-centric software strategy for exposing the heterogeneous aspects of their hardware to developers. The interesting thing about the ARM implementation is that they have gone above and beyond the basic aspects of OpenCL 2.0, offering finer-grained sync that OpenCL requires at a minimum. Finer-grained sync that would otherwise be something better suited for HSA. As a result part of the HSA Foundation’s efforts are focused on showcasing the additional benefits of HSA over OpenCL 2.0, to entice hardware manufacturers and developers into using HSA.". Also quote "With yesterday's announcement of the HSA 1.1 specification, I went back to ARM to ask them whether the new specification impacts the company’s heterogenous compute plans at all, especially given that their architecture doesn’t support the 1.0 standard. As it turns out, ARM is going a route very similar to AMD’s ROCm platform: while the company isn’t utilizing the HSAIL – and thus in the strictest sense isn’t a complete HSA platform – they are using the HSA standard in the development of their hardware.

At a hardware level, the HSA specification standardizes a number of aspects of the hardware for common interoperability and easier programming purposes, including signals, queues, floating point number handling, and other, low-level minutiae about how heterogeneous execution should work. This is separate from the HSAIL, which is more concerned with the software aspects of heterogeneous programming, and though helpful, is not necessary for heterogeneous compute. As a result while Mali-G71 is technically not an HSA platform, in practice it is HSA hardware, using the HSA specification as a means to offer a common and well understood execution model for heterogeneous compute. So ARM is very much on-board with HSA – and is essentially supplying one of the first non-AMD HSA 1.1 hardware designs – even if they’re not using HSAIL itself."

September 8, 2016 | 02:11 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

AMD is predictable. Don't run the Convenience for the Akhalie because it shows their CPU to be very lacking in single core performance.

From this bench Skylake scores 1.83 vs AMD's 1.21. So the Skylake is up to a 51% better processor than the AMD. Silence from the AMD crowd.

As far as the pcmark8 goes the only benches listed on 3dmark site for a10 is the a10-7850k which averages around 4000 pts. A10-7850K

According to this a10-8850 is 100mhz faster and has igpu added.
Performance expected to be very similar.

So extrapolating scores 3483.25 vs 4000 for about 15% less performance than the a10-8850.

There I filled in the blanks that AMD didn't want filled in. Now you know why. If AMD is presenting their benchmarks in the best light only you should be very worried. Zen isn't all it's claimed to be.

September 8, 2016 | 02:24 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

Stupid Google autocorrect. Convenience for the Akhalie is supposed to be Cinebench for the Skylake.

Sorry meant to put if they start releasing Zen benchmarks with blanks not filled in just like with "Bristol Ridge", you should run away from it. Benchmarks are meant to expose strengths and weaknesses. By excluding results you find unacceptable, it is misleading the potential buyer.

September 8, 2016 | 03:19 PM - Posted by Tim (not verified)

ah heh I was like akhile comvenience? 0.o

Yeah I saw the 1.83 result but I was not sure how reloable thay site is/was. I posted above that Eurogamrr benchmarked it at 1.68. Hopefully Zen will be more competitive or even beat that number. I just wish Bristol Ridge had been what Bulldozer was not (ie BR was what we got as the first Bulldozer processors). They seem to have finally gotten the clockspeed issues sorted out just in time to retire this cmt line of designs. Better late than never i suppose heh.

September 8, 2016 | 11:45 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Bristol Ridge is not zen, it is still excavator cores. The upcoming summit ridge is zen.

September 10, 2016 | 03:44 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You have got to be one of Chizow's sockpuppets! And BR/excavator is NOT Zen, with Zen having way more Full Fat core resources and SMT! And Zen has no core module decoder/FPU sharing. That Zen 4 core complex is 4 Full Fat x86 SMT2 cores! Read and Learn:

"AMD Zen Microarchiture Part 2: Extracting Instruction-Level Parallelism"

September 11, 2016 | 07:26 AM - Posted by Kraaketaer

From my experience, there are few AMD fans out there (myself included) that don't readily accept that AMDs current architectures (the various lawnmowers and such) lag significantly behind Intel in IPC and single threaded performance. AMD itself of course needs to play to its strengths, and as such touts scenarios where they do well (anything GPU-assisted, as well as a few other measures).

OTOH, GPU acceleration is growing in relevance - for anything from browsers to video and photo editing to spreadsheets. Having a strong iGPU is a good thing, no doubt. If it wasn't, Intel wouldn't have made the strides they have in recent years. But at the same time, having a strong CPU to begin with is hard to beat.

Which is why AMD is working on Zen. They wouldn't be making an entirely new architecture if they didn't acknowledge that their current one is a bad fit for today's software. The 2 cores/1 module approach was a bet on software evolving alongside the architecture in a way it simply didn't turn out to do. That's not AMDs fault, but they need to adapt - and they are doing so in a big way.

September 11, 2016 | 12:52 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

These Bristol Ridge chips aren't Zen.

But that doesn't matter. You talked shit about AMD. Mission accomplished, congratulations. Do you feel better?

September 8, 2016 | 03:59 PM - Posted by Robert Beres (not verified)

I don't care if Intel is better or AMD. I will tell you this much my money will always go to the one that will save me money in the Electricity department. and still capable of running games without terrible ping issues or freezing while playing. so if AMD puts out a CPU capable of saving me the bottom line in money in all aspects well I guess Intel will learn that there are more people on a budget these days then there were 10 years ago. taxes are being raised, and forced to pay for crap you don't need. yep the democratic way has begun.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.