[HN Gopher] The Rise, Fall and Revival of AMD (2020)
___________________________________________________________________
The Rise, Fall and Revival of AMD (2020)
Author : neogodless
Score : 82 points
Date : 2021-03-19 11:01 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.techspot.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.techspot.com)
| geocrasher wrote:
| I look forward to having the time to read this in full. My first
| PC was an AMD 286/12 with 1mb memory. Later on, the best CPU I'd
| owned to date was the AMD K6-450. In 2010, I purchased a Phenom
| II X2 BE, unlocked it to X4 and it served me well for 8 years! I
| finally replaced it in 2018.
|
| I avoided the bulldozer/piledriver series chips, and got a first
| gen Ryzen 5 1400. It's a fantastic chip, very fast especially at
| the price, and will last me years I'm sure.
|
| In the late 90's I also did good business selling computers based
| on the AMD 486 DX4/120's and 133's. Those things were _so fast_
| for the time.
| lnsru wrote:
| Got myself AMD FX-8350 a decade ago, used it daily with minor
| overclocking and replaced with Ryzen 3950X last year. This old
| FX-8350 went into dedicated Linux machine for things I weren't
| able to do with virtual one. I am curious how long will it
| run:-)
| gibspaulding wrote:
| Those FX series had a really bad reputation at the time, but
| it seems the extra cores have helped them age better than
| might have been expected. My old FX 6300 is also in a Linux
| box now hosting a Jellyfin server and it does quite well!
| jandrese wrote:
| Ha, I was just about to mention the FX-6300 I have running
| in a server that hosts 3 Minecraft instances. It's not the
| fastest thing ever but it gets the job done. I was going to
| replace it when it got too slow, but that hasn't happened
| yet.
| captswag wrote:
| My first computer was also an AMD? But that wasn't because I
| loved AMD or knew anything about processors. I believe my
| parents bought me that one because it was cheaper than Intel.
|
| Fast forward to today, my current desktop is an AMD Ryzen
| 3600X.
|
| Did you happen to own any AMD stocks back then?
| geocrasher wrote:
| My first computer was also purchased by my parents. Nope, no
| stock.
| deckard1 wrote:
| > the top-end version of the Am386DX launched in 1989 at 40 MHz.
|
| I had this CPU. 386dx 40Mhz. What a beast. It was my first PC
| that I purchased myself. It was also my first online purchase. I
| bought it off of FidoNet through a BBS. I'm still amazed that
| worked. Cash-on-delivery (COD). $50. Probably took an entire
| month getting to me via UPS.
| grey4228 wrote:
| Offtopic: Most might be thinking fully FLOSS is something that's
| only happened in software, or powerless hardware. But the thing
| is server and desktop grade powerful and fully FLOSS hardware
| with PCIe 4.0 and DDR4 ECC memory are available right now to
| customers and businesses. Not as powerful as AMD. AMD will never
| be open though. It's not x86. POWER9. FSF RYF certified.
|
| https://www.raptorcs.com/
|
| #talos-workstation on freenode IRC to chat with users.
| MaxBarraclough wrote:
| I like the idea of FSF-certified hardware, but aren't POWER9
| machines ten times the price of the average desktop?
| smcl wrote:
| Maybe not 10x but they're certainly more than a similarly
| spec'd dev workstation. I guess the idea is that developers
| are the target market and they have a bit more disposable
| income on average and are more likely to want to pay extra
| for something like this.
| grey4228 wrote:
| What 'smcl' commented, also all prices are in this link,
| scroll down:
|
| https://www.raptorcs.com/
| MaxBarraclough wrote:
| Thanks. Looks like their cheapest system goes for
| $3,404.59. It has VGA output, but no DVI/HDMI/DisplayPort.
| dragontamer wrote:
| Strange: the price on their systems seems to have gone up
| since the last time I saw them.
|
| I wonder if shipping issues have caused their prices to
| skyrocket recently?
| greggyb wrote:
| Doing a quick spec out of a Talos II that is similar[0] to my
| Threadripper 3970x workstation puts the price at ~2x.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| And a typical TR workstation is 2x the price of an "average
| desktop" so maybe a 4x multiplier?
| ksec wrote:
| Any news or update on POWER10?
| floatboth wrote:
| POWER10 switched to a serial memory interface (OMI), IIUC
| Raptor won't touch any of this stuff until there are FOSS
| memory modules, which there aren't currently.
| timw4mail wrote:
| As much as I enjoy the idea, I can not justify the price,
| especially considering the huge breadth of software NOT
| available.
|
| While it would work for my purposes as a server or a dev
| workstation, you still have to deal with a fairly niche
| processor architecture.
|
| Ironically, though, the development of software for more modern
| POWER systems has kept some of the Apple PowerPC systems more
| up to date (assuming they are running linux, like Void).
| ece wrote:
| > Imageon, the handheld graphics division of ATI, was sold to
| Qualcomm in a paltry $65 million deal. That division is now named
| Adreno, an anagram of "Radeon" and an integral component of the
| Snapdragon SoC (!).
|
| It would be hard to come up with a corporate story that didn't
| have such missteps. Now, Samsung has licensed Radeons to be in
| their mobile SoCs.
| mhh__ wrote:
| Intel are so lucky that their fab issues have come at a time when
| AMD physically cannot even dream of shipping enough chips to make
| them bleed.
|
| That being said I think Intel only have to get their act together
| once to get right back in there - they have dragged 14nm all the
| way, their uarchs can't be that bad.
| ohazi wrote:
| Does anyone know if AMD has any sort of strategy around
| Thunderbolt for their mobile chips? Are they stuck because of
| Intel IP issues?
|
| Their desktop lines are basically the best you can get (assuming
| you can find anything in stock), but even the latest 5000 series
| laptops conspicuously lack Thunderbolt. This makes them a tough
| sell for some, as Thunderbolt has become the defacto standard for
| modern docking stations...
| jordanthoms wrote:
| USB4 is essentially a more open Thunderbolt, so I think their
| strategy will be to implement that instead.
| floatboth wrote:
| Huh, TIL: the K6 came from an acquisition.
|
| > Graphics Core Next (GCN). This design would last for nearly 8
| years [...] still in use today as the integrated GPU
|
| And in desktop GPUs.
|
| The goddamn power of marketing! Even tech writers seem to assume
| that "RDNA" is some kind of revolutionary from-scratch change.
| It's still the same ISA!! Look at the drivers and compilers. It's
| simply the regular evolution, just with a rebrand.
|
| (upd: even later in this article they do say it's "a significant
| reworking of GCN"... well, why did the first mention sound kinda
| like it wasn't acknowledging this?)
| dragontamer wrote:
| > The goddamn power of marketing! Even tech writers seem to
| assume that "RDNA" is some kind of revolutionary from-scratch
| change. It's still the same ISA!! Look at the drivers and
| compilers. It's simply the regular evolution, just with a
| rebrand.
|
| GCN 1.2 changed the opcodes from GCN 1.0. If the machine code
| doesn't line up anymore, is it really fare to call it the same
| ISA?
|
| In the case of RDNA: its all 32-wide SIMD instead of 64-wide
| SIMD. That dramatic difference completely destroys the bpermute
| / permute / DPP assembly instructions
| (https://gpuopen.com/learn/amd-gcn-assembly-cross-lane-
| operat...), which have gone from 64-way permutes (in GCN) into
| 32-way permutes (in RDNA).
|
| GCN 1.2 was already looking pretty different from GCN 1.0, I'd
| say RDNA absolutely deserves the name "new ISA".
|
| After all, GCN 1.2 is about as similar to GCN 1.0 as 8080 was
| to 8086 (same assembly language and registers, but new
| opcodes). I think most people are willing to call 8080 and 8086
| different ISAs.
|
| RDNA is extremely different at a base level because of that 32x
| SIMD vs 64x SIMD.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Ever since I got to be the one who chooses the specs, I always
| tried do buy/build PCs with AMD processors. My logic is simple:
| always work against the most dominant player. Be it Intel with
| CPUs, Microsoft with OSs or Putin in russian politics.
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| It's easy to underestimate just how difficult processor design is
| and just how quickly it has advanced over the last few decades.
|
| First you have to design an incredibly complex custom hardware
| processor to implement your ISA of choice with various speed
| optimisations. Then you have to convert it to a gate-level model
| and simulate it to make sure it's reliable.
|
| Then you have to produce a physical/electromagnetic model which
| juggles capacitance, loading, switching transients, transmission
| line reflections, and interconnect length, and somehow still
| works for all possible conditions with good tolerances to
| maximise yield.
|
| _Then_ you have to handle all the visual /UV/soft X-ray optics,
| diffusion chemistry, and process management to build the wafers
| at scale.
|
| It's not a particularly clean or sustainable industry. But even
| so - the finished chips are the absolute pinnacle of many
| simultaneous engineering and management disciplines.
| amelius wrote:
| There is software for the synthesis and verification parts.
|
| For the fabrication, you contact your fab of choice.
|
| Yes, this is expensive, but designing a processor is not unlike
| designing a large distributed software system. It's all
| software, and the rest is already taken care of mostly.
| mhh__ wrote:
| You also have to be able to verify (at least the important
| parts) of the chip
| RamRodification wrote:
| It _is_ the coolest shit we have, right? Do we have anything
| else that is as advanced /complex/refined/whatever-you-wanna-
| call-it?
| jandrese wrote:
| It's certainly the highest precision manufacturing you are
| going to find in a consumer widget. It's hard to think of
| anything manufactured to sub-nanometer tolerances. Maybe some
| scientific instruments like large telescope lenses?
| setpatchaddress wrote:
| I can't get past this sentence:
|
| > From these humble beginnings, and a quick move from Santa Clara
| to Sunnyvale (Silicon Valley in California)
|
| Is the rest of the article better than this?
|
| For those outside the Bay Area: Santa Clara and Sunnyvale are
| physically adjacent, and I'm guessing all of the sites where
| AMD's HQ has been historically located are probably within 0.5
| miles of each other near that border.
| dlevine wrote:
| I was always intrigued by AMD processors in the 90s, although
| pretty much stuck with Intel.
|
| I built an Athlon 64 PC in 2004 - it was the first 64-bit
| consumer processor. Intel was going down the Itanium path, and
| AMD just added 64-bit extensions to X86, which ended up being the
| winning strategy. I remember writing an article about it for my
| job at the time.
|
| That served me well until I upgraded to a Phenom II X6 in 2010. I
| was super excited by the prospect of having 6 cores, even though
| I had no real use for that many. That PC lasted me for over 10
| years, although I did upgrade the RAM, added an SSD, and upgraded
| the GPU twice. Was still a competent PC at the end for both
| gaming and software development, and managed to part it out for a
| decent amount of money.
|
| Late last year I finally succumbed the the Ryzen itch and
| upgraded to a Ryzen 5600x. It's a fantastic platform, and
| hopefully that PC will last me another 10 years with only minor
| upgrades.
| ncmncm wrote:
| It is hard to understand today, but back then every manufacturer
| of a chip design _needed_ a "second source", a fully independent
| competitor who could supply a compatible chip. Otherwise it would
| be far too risky to design their chip into your product. What if
| they folded? AMD, by cloning the 8080 and other chips, gave Intel
| what it had to have to be a serious supplier for serious
| products.
|
| The 6502 succeeded by being 1/10 the price, and was designed into
| products of companies that embraced extreme risk.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| Second sourcing was a requirement imposed by the DoD.
| mjevans wrote:
| A simple, yet very powerful, weapon for ensuring a healthy
| economy. Having at minimum two potential sources for any
| component in the economy, with anything that can't afford
| that classified as a Utility and regulated as such.
|
| From the single or none fulfillment of broadband options in
| the US even in dense suburban areas, let alone rural areas,
| it is clear that there are places in dire need of similar
| government market regulation.
| ncmncm wrote:
| The DoD requirement enabled commercial customers to specify
| it, too. The supply-chain nightmares experienced by makers of
| modern equipment, with microcontrollers only just designed in
| dropping out of production, generates nostalgia for the power
| to require a second source.
|
| Portability of embedded-code source, standardized ISAs, and
| ability to turn around a new circuit board design in a week,
| and FPGAs all help make lack of second sources survivable.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-03-19 23:02 UTC)