Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Home and Garden
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-02-2012, 08:17 PM   #51
Maximilian
Lifer
 
Maximilian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11,905
Default

lol ^
__________________
>2014
>sig line limit of 90 characters
Maximilian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 11:43 PM   #52
soccerballtux
Lifer
 
soccerballtux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lau808 View Post
i wanna see the 8150 ran as a 4m/4t at max oc (maybe it clocks higher than 4.8/4.9) vs a phenom x4 at max oc. maybe someone else could provide the phenom benches to compare...
+1. I can do Phenom2 x4 at 4ghz. When you limit to 4 threads it shouldn't be any worse than Phenom2.
__________________
4.0Ghz&2.6Ghz-CPU-NB Ph2-965BE || GA790X-UD4P 8GB DDR800 || Gigabyte GTX670 || Soyo 24" PMVA Heatware
soccerballtux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 05:32 AM   #53
lau808
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Pukalani Maui
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soccerballtux View Post
+1. I can do Phenom2 x4 at 4ghz. When you limit to 4 threads it shouldn't be any worse than Phenom2.
thank you
__________________
Main: Athlon II X2 3.0Ghz/4gb ddr3/500GB HDD
Work:I5-2400/4 GB ddr3/500GB HDD
Laptop: Asus A53U-E-450/750GB HDD/4GB DDR3
Next Rig: FX8350/NH-D14/Sabertooth 990FX/8GB 1866/OCZ Vector 128GB/HD7850/Antec 302/HCG-620
lau808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 04:46 PM   #54
polyzp
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soccerballtux View Post
+1. I can do Phenom2 x4 at 4ghz. When you limit to 4 threads it shouldn't be any worse than Phenom2.


Awesome man! I have a few requests for you then!

CPUMark99
Fritz Chess 4.3 - 1 core performance
Cinebench 10 - 1 core performance
Cinebench 11.5 - 1 core performance
TechARP x264 HD - first pass

would love to see how a single 4.9 ghz FX thread goes up against a 4.0 Ghz phenom II thread!

Thanks again man! Ill use your results in my next post! ^^
__________________
http://AMDFX.blogspot.com - My AMD FX 8150 @ 4.8 Ghz / 6990 Review

Join the Discussion here at Anandtech.com

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2225753
polyzp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 05:16 PM   #55
Ferzerp
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 5,366
Default

And there is the daily bump to make sure it never falls off the first page, just like clockwork!
Ferzerp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 05:17 PM   #56
boxleitnerb
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,529
Default

Paid by AMD, for sure. But hey, this way we will never forget what a lame duck bulldozer is.
boxleitnerb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 05:21 PM   #57
Maximilian
Lifer
 
Maximilian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11,905
Default

Ye this guys been a joke since day 1.
__________________
>2014
>sig line limit of 90 characters
Maximilian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 06:27 PM   #58
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11,339
Default

I wonder what cost him more by now. His faildozer or the powerbill it creates
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare
Competition is good at driving the pace of innovation, but it is an inefficient mechanism (R&D expenditures summed across a given industry) for generating the innovation.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 06:54 PM   #59
Hatisherrif
Senior Member
 
Hatisherrif's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Serbia
Posts: 226
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
I wonder what cost him more by now. His faildozer or the powerbill it creates
Well, at least he can always count on his heart being warmed by the heat of your Ivy
__________________
i5 2500K - 4.5GHz @ 1.320V|CM Hyper212 EVO|MSI P67A-C43 (B3)|8GB Kingston HyperX - 1600MHz 9-9-9-24|AMD Gigabyte HD 7950 - GPU:1150MHz GDDR5:1600MHz|CM Centurion|CM 500W|DVD-W/R|Seagate Barracuda 1.5TB|
Hatisherrif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 07:04 PM   #60
lau808
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Pukalani Maui
Posts: 217
Default

polyzp: maybe u can run 4m/4t at max oc and at 4ghz to compare vs the phenom x4?
__________________
Main: Athlon II X2 3.0Ghz/4gb ddr3/500GB HDD
Work:I5-2400/4 GB ddr3/500GB HDD
Laptop: Asus A53U-E-450/750GB HDD/4GB DDR3
Next Rig: FX8350/NH-D14/Sabertooth 990FX/8GB 1866/OCZ Vector 128GB/HD7850/Antec 302/HCG-620
lau808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 01:41 AM   #61
polyzp
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lau808 View Post
polyzp: maybe u can run 4m/4t at max oc and at 4ghz to compare vs the phenom x4?
Yes Im open to this idea. Im mostly interested in comparing single thread performance for this comparison.
__________________
http://AMDFX.blogspot.com - My AMD FX 8150 @ 4.8 Ghz / 6990 Review

Join the Discussion here at Anandtech.com

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2225753
polyzp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 03:52 AM   #62
lau808
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Pukalani Maui
Posts: 217
Default

thx
__________________
Main: Athlon II X2 3.0Ghz/4gb ddr3/500GB HDD
Work:I5-2400/4 GB ddr3/500GB HDD
Laptop: Asus A53U-E-450/750GB HDD/4GB DDR3
Next Rig: FX8350/NH-D14/Sabertooth 990FX/8GB 1866/OCZ Vector 128GB/HD7850/Antec 302/HCG-620
lau808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 11:53 AM   #63
Revolution 11
Senior Member
 
Revolution 11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: North America
Posts: 843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rvenger View Post
Put Balla, Chiropteran, and Axel in a room. Who will come out alive?
It would take an act of God to make it happen in the first place.
Revolution 11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 12:01 PM   #64
nyker96
Diamond Member
 
nyker96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,575
Default

the single core ipc for BD v Ivy in cinebench is at a 40% deficit running at about same speed. That's crazy poor.
__________________
Windows 7 64 bit || 2500K@4.2 with Mugen 2 || Biostar TZ68K+ || MSI HD 7790 1GB || G.SKILL Ripjaws 4x4GB DDR3 1600 || Samsung F3 1TB || HAF 932 || Enhance 5150GH 500W PSU || BenQ FP91G+
My Rig: All Niter
----
buyer/seller references: ebay
nyker96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 02:06 PM   #65
Chiropteran
Diamond Member
 
Chiropteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Arlington VA
Posts: 7,912
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyker96 View Post
the single core ipc for BD v Ivy in cinebench is at a 40% deficit running at about same speed. That's crazy poor.
But Ivy is at a 50% deficit on number of cores, so BD is actually faster when 8 threads are used. See how useless "ipc per core" is as a number?
__________________
http://writeangry.blogspot.com/
Chiropteran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 02:40 PM   #66
Phynaz
Diamond Member
 
Phynaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiropteran View Post
But Ivy is at a 50% deficit on number of cores, so BD is actually faster when 8 threads are used.
BS.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abwx View Post
I saw good resolutions pics of the so called lunar module, heck, that s quite a piece of garbage with badly jointed metalic and litteraly hammered plates, seriously, you think that this piece of metalic junk actualy landed on the moon..??
Phynaz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 03:34 PM   #67
Maximilian
Lifer
 
Maximilian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phynaz View Post
BS.
x2
__________________
>2014
>sig line limit of 90 characters
Maximilian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 03:38 PM   #68
Chiropteran
Diamond Member
 
Chiropteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Arlington VA
Posts: 7,912
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phynaz View Post
BS.
Which part? Do you dispute that bulldozer is 8 cores, or do you dispute that 4 is 50% of 8? Or do you disagree that bulldozer is 40% slower for a single core IPC?
__________________
http://writeangry.blogspot.com/
Chiropteran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 05:03 PM   #69
Dkcode
Senior Member
 
Dkcode's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 991
Default

That is one sexy board
Dkcode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 06:13 PM   #70
polyzp
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiropteran View Post
Which part? Do you dispute that bulldozer is 8 cores, or do you dispute that 4 is 50% of 8? Or do you disagree that bulldozer is 40% slower for a single core IPC?
Scaling for bulldozer isnt double the 2600k, but neither is IPC of ivy over FX (although in some cases it might be, generally it is not). When all threads are used it just about makes up for lost IPC per thread. FX is seen to fail most when all 8 threads arent taken advantage of.
__________________
http://AMDFX.blogspot.com - My AMD FX 8150 @ 4.8 Ghz / 6990 Review

Join the Discussion here at Anandtech.com

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2225753
polyzp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 06:24 PM   #71
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
 
LOL_Wut_Axel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: San Juan, PR
Posts: 4,273
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiropteran View Post
But Ivy is at a 50% deficit on number of cores, so BD is actually faster when 8 threads are used. See how useless "ipc per core" is as a number?
Incorrect. I guess you suddenly forgot that Hyper-Threading is a 20% improvement in MT.

And Cinebench is mostly floating-point code, and Bulldozer has four FPUs.
__________________
Pentium G3258 @4.3GHz | MSI Z87-G41 PC Mate | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB, Seagate Barracuda 3TB | Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 Boost Dual-X, PNY GeForce GTX 465 | 8GB Kingston HyperX Genesis DDR3-1600 | Corsair RM750 | Corsair Carbide 400R

HP EliteBook 2560p | Core i5-2520M, 6GB Crucial DDR3, A-DATA SP900 128GB, 1TB Toshiba 5400RPM
LOL_Wut_Axel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 11:31 PM   #72
soccerballtux
Lifer
 
soccerballtux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by polyzp View Post
Awesome man! I have a few requests for you then!

CPUMark99
Fritz Chess 4.3 - 1 core performance
Cinebench 10 - 1 core performance
Cinebench 11.5 - 1 core performance
TechARP x264 HD - first pass

would love to see how a single 4.9 ghz FX thread goes up against a 4.0 Ghz phenom II thread!

Thanks again man! Ill use your results in my next post! ^^
cb10-- 4275 1 core
4 core 15704

cb11.5-- 4.50

Results for x264.exe v0.58.747
encoded 1442 frames, 76.16 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 75.59 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 76.79 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 77.39 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 20.90 fps, 3952.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 20.71 fps, 3952.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 20.76 fps, 3952.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 20.94 fps, 3952.97 kb/s

Results for x264.exe v0.59.819M
encoded 1442 frames, 77.99 fps, 3889.34 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 78.29 fps, 3889.34 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 78.15 fps, 3889.34 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 78.14 fps, 3889.34 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.41 fps, 3962.75 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.11 fps, 3962.75 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.14 fps, 3962.75 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.06 fps, 3962.74 kb/s

Winrar-1855KB/s

I'm running 15.5x260 = 4,030mhz
__________________
4.0Ghz&2.6Ghz-CPU-NB Ph2-965BE || GA790X-UD4P 8GB DDR800 || Gigabyte GTX670 || Soyo 24" PMVA Heatware

Last edited by soccerballtux; 05-05-2012 at 12:19 AM.
soccerballtux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 01:23 AM   #73
Yuriman
Platinum Member
 
Yuriman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,897
Default

Power is only of no concern when money is not an object, and I would not get a bulldozer chip if money were not an object, unless it was to do a very specific workload that bulldozer excels in.

Unfortunately money typically is an object for most people, and even if BD is faster in a particular workload, it might be more cost effective over time to pony up for a dual Intel system.

I dislike the thought of Intel being able to sell their server chips at a much higher price despite having smaller dies, because companies will still save money over the product's lifetime compared with AMD chips.

Last edited by Yuriman; 05-05-2012 at 01:28 AM.
Yuriman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 05:46 PM   #74
polyzp
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soccerballtux View Post
cb10-- 4275 1 core
4 core 15704

cb11.5-- 4.50

Results for x264.exe v0.58.747
encoded 1442 frames, 76.16 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 75.59 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 76.79 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 77.39 fps, 3904.67 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 20.90 fps, 3952.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 20.71 fps, 3952.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 20.76 fps, 3952.97 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 20.94 fps, 3952.97 kb/s

Results for x264.exe v0.59.819M
encoded 1442 frames, 77.99 fps, 3889.34 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 78.29 fps, 3889.34 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 78.15 fps, 3889.34 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 78.14 fps, 3889.34 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.41 fps, 3962.75 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.11 fps, 3962.75 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.14 fps, 3962.75 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 22.06 fps, 3962.74 kb/s

Winrar-1855KB/s

I'm running 15.5x260 = 4,030mhz

Thanks man, is that tech arp x264 HD? the scores seem off

heres a link

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=520

and whats your single core performance in cb11.5?
__________________
http://AMDFX.blogspot.com - My AMD FX 8150 @ 4.8 Ghz / 6990 Review

Join the Discussion here at Anandtech.com

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2225753
polyzp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 07:24 PM   #75
soccerballtux
Lifer
 
soccerballtux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,316
Default

apparently not redownloaded and ran--

Pass 1
------
encoded 1442 frames, 103.23 fps, 3912.32 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 105.09 fps, 3912.32 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 105.57 fps, 3912.32 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 105.02 fps, 3912.32 kb/s

Pass 2
------
encoded 1442 frames, 25.10 fps, 3961.76 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 25.14 fps, 3961.07 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 25.22 fps, 3961.36 kb/s
encoded 1442 frames, 25.16 fps, 3961.01 kb/s
__________________
4.0Ghz&2.6Ghz-CPU-NB Ph2-965BE || GA790X-UD4P 8GB DDR800 || Gigabyte GTX670 || Soyo 24" PMVA Heatware
soccerballtux is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.