AMD Trinity to launch on October 2nd

[NTMBK]

How is calling out BD's failures being a troll? It was garbage.

He wasn't pointing out any failures, he was just namecalling.

 

[Chiropteran]

FX chips performance is all over the chart, sometimes right up there with Core i5/i7 boys and sometimes down there fighting Pentiums.

It is. FX power usage is *ALSO* all over the chart- they have amazingly low idle power usage, and power usage during many benchmarks is not really out of line with similar process based CPU.

The x264 HD 2nd pass 3.03 power consumption benchmark is a worst case scenario, a scenario that doesn't even exist for many users, and not really relevant at all except to show how biased the poster who posts it is.

A more interesting power benchmark would be overall usage over 24 hours, given a typical real-world usage pattern, which I suspect would include a lot of idle time.

 

[Ancalagon44]

It is. FX power usage is *ALSO* all over the chart- they have amazingly low idle power usage, and power usage during many benchmarks is not really out of line with similar process based CPU.

The x264 HD 2nd pass 3.03 power consumption benchmark is a worst case scenario, a scenario that doesn't even exist for many users, and not really relevant at all except to show how biased the poster who posts it is.

A more interesting power benchmark would be overall usage over 24 hours, given a typical real-world usage pattern, which I suspect would include a lot of idle time.

If its a "worst case scenario" for BD, find me an Ivy Bridge benchmark in which it performs at the same level as older hardware while consuming twice as much power. Does any such benchmark exist?

 

[Greenlepricon]

Why do we have to keep going back to whether people liked Bulldozer or not? This topic is reaching the one year mark and either it's an acceptable chip or you don't like it. Keep that out of the threads. It's tiring looking for new posts and seeing it's just another bulldozer rant.

Anyway might as well pitch in about Trinity. I'm really considering building a new low end pc next year and I'm hoping this is the answer. If not I'll go with an i3 or i5 depending on the current prices, but it's hard to beat the built in graphics on llano for the price for light gaming, and I'm hoping AMD keeps the trend up. FM2 will hopefully stick around for some time though. I don't like upgrading my motherboard every year. It's just a hassle. Well I guess it's going to be up to the official benchmarks for me.

 

[NTMBK]

The x264 HD 2nd pass 3.03 power consumption benchmark is a worst case scenario, a scenario that doesn't even exist for many users, and not really relevant at all except to show how biased the poster who posts it is.

It's a "maximum utilisation" case- the fact that that benchmark is the same one which gives some of Bulldozer's best comparisons to the i7 is entirely related. That's a processor working flat out and using almost all of its resources simultaneously, which gives it good performance and high power consumption.

 

[Chiropteran]

If its a "worst case scenario" for BD, find me an Ivy Bridge benchmark in which it performs at the same level as older hardware while consuming twice as much power. Does any such benchmark exist?

No such benchmark exists for bulldozer either, what is your point?

It's a "maximum utilisation" case- the fact that that benchmark is the same one which gives some of Bulldozer's best comparisons to the i7 is entirely related. That's a processor working flat out and using almost all of its resources simultaneously, which gives it good performance and high power consumption.

Good? It destroys the 2500k and basically matches the far more expensive 2600k. It's amazing performance in that one singular unrealistic benchmark.

The problem is everyone loves to point out the power usage of the benchmark while ignoring the performance, and then they go on to assume that power usage is going to be the same for all scenarios.

 

[Roland00Address]

Can we get back to trinity, we don't know trinity power consumption and we won't know until we see reviews. Bulldozer is old news and is not what this thread is about.

 

[Mallibu]

No such benchmark exists for bulldozer either, what is your point?




Good? It destroys the 2500k and basically matches the far more expensive 2600k. It's amazing performance in that one singular unrealistic benchmark.

The problem is everyone loves to point out the power usage of the benchmark while ignoring the performance, and then they go on to assume that power usage is going to be the same for all scenarios.

That test has two graphs. You posted the 2nd one, here's the first:

 

[Ancalagon44]

No such benchmark exists for bulldozer either, what is your point?

The x264 HD 2nd pass 3.03 power consumption benchmark is a worst case scenario, a scenario that doesn't even exist for many users, and not really relevant at all except to show how biased the poster who posts it is.

Sorry what was that?

 

[inf64]

Yeah the first pass is not MTed . The one that is relevant is 2nd pass since all the cores are used in actual encoding work. AT article covers this and also it covers the AVX speedup that the new binaries bring to FX(and SB). In AVX enabled version, 2nd pass is the fastest on FX now while in 1st pass 8150 is 23% slower than 2600K (which is not bad at all).

 

[Phynaz]

That test has two graphs. You posted the 2nd one, here's the first:

Lol! Busted cherry picking :biggrin:

 

[Madpacket]

Nice Bulldozer vs Ivy thread.....

 

[AtenRa]

Nice Bulldozer vs Ivy thread.....

The weather in Athens Greece today was shiny with an air temperature of 28c...... Oohh this is the Trinity thread ??? :whiste:

 

[Chiropteran]

Sorry what was that?

You said:
If its a "worst case scenario" for BD, find me an Ivy Bridge benchmark in which it performs at the same level as older hardware while consuming twice as much power. Does any such benchmark exist?

No such example exists for bulldozer, so why should it exist for intel core? Bulldozer destroys i5 in the above benchmark, while using more power, an acceptable trade off. In some other tests, you can find examples of bulldozer using far less power, but also performing worse. In no case does it lose horribly AND use twice as much power, not in any single benchmark.

Of course, in bizarro world where you compare a worst case 8-threaded load power usage benchmark with a single threaded performance benchmark and pretend like they are the same test, you might have a point. Luckily that is not how valid comparisons are made in the real world.


Anyway, this is supposed to be discussing trinity. I tried to keep the thread on topic by moving the discussion to PMs, but you guys insist on trashing up the thread. Go spread false info in some other thread.

 

[Ancalagon44]

You said:
If its a "worst case scenario" for BD, find me an Ivy Bridge benchmark in which it performs at the same level as older hardware while consuming twice as much power. Does any such benchmark exist?

No such example exists for bulldozer, so why should it exist for intel core? Bulldozer destroys i5 in the above benchmark, while using more power, an acceptable trade off. In some other tests, you can find examples of bulldozer using far less power, but also performing worse. In no case does it lose horribly AND use twice as much power, not in any single benchmark.

Of course, in bizarro world where you compare a worst case 8-threaded load power usage benchmark with a single threaded performance benchmark and pretend like they are the same test, you might have a point. Luckily that is not how valid comparisons are made in the real world.


Anyway, this is supposed to be discussing trinity. I tried to keep the thread on topic by moving the discussion to PMs, but you guys insist on trashing up the thread. Go spread false info in some other thread.

It uses nearly twice as much! Not an acceptable trade off!

Plus compare it to the 2600k - it gets within a margin of error while still using much, much more power. And the 2600k is how much older than BD? To say nothing of IB. THIS is a worst case scenario - AMD's current best vs Intel's last gen best, and it performs middlingly while consuming much more power. How is that good?

I just take offense when I see the Bulldozer defense team come out. It really is a terrible CPU and it boggles my mind that anyone would defend it. I have owned an AMD K7-700, Athlon XP 2400+, Athlon X2 5600+, Athlon II X4 620, and now a Phenom II X6 1055T. So hardly an Intel fanboy.

 

[Atreidin]

I don't understand the people taking personal offense to the existence of a processor. So its worse, so what? Or someone else likes the processor, and this affects your well-being how exactly? Get on with your life and don't stress so much about it.

 

[Edrick]

As for Trinity, it will be the perfect chip to build a new desktop with. FM2 compatibility for Kaveri is icing on the cake.

Your definition of perfect is quite bias.

 

[Edrick]

And why does every thread have to turn into a BD bashing thread?

 

[frozentundra123456]

And why does every thread have to turn into a BD bashing thread?

Probably because a few posters very biased in favor of AMD seem to jump in the thread to try to make anything AMD sound like the greatest thing ever. Some people fell it is appropriate to refute those claims.

As a matter of fact, I used to be an AMD fan. The more cherry picked benchmarks I see that the amd fans use to try to promote Bulldozer just makes me like it even less.

 

[Idontcare]

And why does every thread have to turn into a BD bashing thread?

People bash things by nature, doesn't matter whether it is about sports (49'ers suck!), cars (Ford sucks!), countries (death to America!), religion (catholics suck!), politics (Rino's suck!), food (pork sucks!), clothes (skorts suck!), shoes (Nike sucks!), homes (McMansion's suck!), power generation (coal sucks!), healthcare (obamacare sucks!), etc...you name the topic and I guarantee you that mankind's diverse genepool has already spawned at least one vocal person who hates/despises/loathes it.

The thing to be scared of is the person who seemingly hates/despises/loathes nothing...ain't human that.

 

[beginner99]

And why does every thread have to turn into a BD bashing thread?

Because the 3 AMD Fanboys you see everywhere posting complete BS need to be kept in check so that users seeking advice won't buy a inferior product.

I really don't get them. either they are hardcore trolls just out to provoke (mabye same person?) or as misguided as religious extremists. Anyway they make 0 sense.

AMD is useless on desktop. You will get better performance from Intel in all price ranges.

 

[Chiropteran]

It uses nearly twice as much! Not an acceptable trade off!

Plus compare it to the 2600k - it gets within a margin of error while still using much, much more power. And the 2600k is how much older than BD? To say nothing of IB. THIS is a worst case scenario - AMD's current best vs Intel's last gen best, and it performs middlingly while consuming much more power. How is that good?

Well lets see. It performs basically the same, uses more power, and costs $110 less (newegg.com).

If you can show that the extra power usage will cost more than $110 in real world usage, you might have a valid point. I don't think it does. It's more like pennies a month, maybe $50 over the lifetime of the CPU, as most of the time the CPU is actually idle or underutilized.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_does_it_cost_to_run_a_100_watt_bulb

Supports my point, though of course it's just a gross estimate. There is about a 100W premium for the 8150 in exactly one possible situation. While idle, it actually uses less power than the 2600k, and in many other load scenarios it uses more power but nothing close to 100W more. Even if you ran a FX-8150 at full 8 thread load doing nothing but the silly x264 HD 2nd pass 3.03 benchmark, you would have to run it more than 8 hours a day for it to EQUAL the price of the 2600k after three full years.


TL;DR: cost of electricity is insignificant compared to the premium you pay for an intel inside sticker.

 

[AtenRa]

Because the 3 AMD Fanboys you see everywhere posting complete BS need to be kept in check so that users seeking advice won't buy a inferior product.

That makes you the three marketeers coming to the rescue of the King(Intel) ??

what a joke, get a life man

I really don't get them. either they are hardcore trolls just out to provoke (mabye same person?) or as misguided as religious extremists. Anyway they make 0 sense.

It was Intel Trolls derailing this thread not AMD fanboys, you really need to take off the blue glasses you wear. D:

AMD is useless on desktop. You will get better performance from Intel in all price ranges.

Next time i will come to an Intel thread and post the same sentence changing the company names, lets see how you will feel then when ill Troll in an Intel thread.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Post # 10 started the war lol
frozentundra123456 comes to every AMD thread just to say negative stuff. Let's be fair here guys. There are a few posters that will defend AMD at all cost but let's not pretend that the pro Intel ones are inocent.

Someone here said it well, this is a Trinity thread, let's talk about it.

 

[Phynaz]

Next time i will come to an Intel thread and post the same sentence changing the company names, lets see how you will feel then when ill Troll in an Intel thread.

You already do that.