Found another one: Ukraine store accidentally ships FX-8120 and it gets tested!

[Black96ws6]

And unfortunately, the results once again do not look good:

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.overclockers.ua%2Fviewtopic.php%3Ff%3D2%26t%3D42451

Unless I am reading it wrong (it's hard to understand due to Russian translation), but here are some choice quotes:

Put the amount of 20,000, and then quite baldly 32gflopsa look

But even at this speed! Deneb 40 + Gflops issue at 3.5-3.8 GHz. Do bulldozer really so bad?

But these tests do not recognize. Judging by him, my 1055 at 4GHz faster absolutely everywhere, including in the Marche. It's obviously absurd.

Probably best to look after the results of normal BIOSes and firewood, and so on. Thanks to these (mystery remains a mystery), figs with him that the performance of one core is not better but as a phenomenon of 8 threads = 4 phenomenon is not clear, and eventually it loses six flow phenom in so much that the price of 8 be lower 4 Athlone.

Time will tell what it was but intel is just in front At least by the fact that the performance of one core is much higher.

My translation of the above: This is really a 4c\8t chip that loses to 6C Thuban clock for clock, and in single threaded performance, Intel demolishes it.

 

[Idontcare]

It is going to be really ironic if the successor to K10 literally does turn out to be a K9 (woof woof) instead of a K11

 

[Black96ws6]

 

[Black96ws6]

 

[grkM3]

211 watt? no wonder why they are boxin water cooling

 

[Black96ws6]

 

[Black96ws6]

 

[Black96ws6]

(Sorry for all the images, but I think this is really what everyone wants to see)

 

[Black96ws6]

 

[grkM3]

How did AMD even attempt to put this out? at some point didnt they test it out and see the performance and say wait a min,this thing sux.

Omg that mem bench is pathetic

 

[Black96ws6]

 

[Idontcare]

4.6 GHz, then 4.5, then 4.0...why is this guy bouncing all over the place with the clockspeed for these benches?

 

[Black96ws6]

4.6 GHz, then 4.5, then 4.0...why is this guy bouncing all over the place with the clockspeed for these benches?

In that gigantic thread, everyone is asking him to test a bunch of different ways, at least, that's sort of what I can pick out due to the Russian language translation :|

 

[Idontcare]

In that gigantic thread, everyone is asking him to test a bunch of different ways, at least, that's sort of what I can pick out due to the Russian language translation :|

I see, they are trying to get an idea of the IPC comparison to Thuban and 2600K.

I was worried it was because he couldn't get the chip to run stable at 4.6GHz for the other benches.

I feel saddened for AMD if this is true, they've waited four long years for this to deliver them and its not happening if these benches are legit.

 

[Black96ws6]

Could it possibly be a bad windows\scheduler\BIOS issue, in other words, would a better driver or perhaps a software patch improve BD's performance?

 

[StrangerGuy]

Quick! Anyone with a 2600K do the Winrar bench please at stock 3.4GHz.

I know my 2500K @ 4.3GHz is ~3800 KB/s.

 

[Black96ws6]

Quick! Anyone with a 2600K do the Winrar bench please at stock 3.4GHz.

I know my 2500K @ 4.3GHz is ~3800 MB/s.

Is all you need to do is download the latest version and run the built-in test? If so, I'm running a 1090T@3.8Ghz w\2600NB, I can compare mine as well?

 

[grkM3]

Here is a mem test vs a 2600k at same speed and timings

 

[StrangerGuy]

Is all you need to do is download the latest version and run the built-in test? If so, I'm running a 1090T@3.8Ghz w\2600NB, I can compare mine as well?

Yes. Once the result number stabilizes that will be the benchmark result.

 

[sangyup81]

Darn looks like CPU-Z can't detect BD's CPU-NB speeds!

 

[crisium]

Only a few more days 'til the real reviews. Maybe in real world tests it does a bit better.

 

[shabby]

Quick! Anyone with a 2600K do the Winrar bench please at stock 3.4GHz.

I know my 2500K @ 4.3GHz is ~3800 KB/s.

Im getting around 2300 on a stock clocked 2500k.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Im getting around 2300 on a stock clocked 2500k.

Hmm maybe yours is outdated? Or isn't 64-bit?

3875 with v3.93 64-bit

3921 with v4.01 64-bit

2500K 4.3GHz DDR3-1600

 

[Silverforce11]

Looks like its faster than 2500K and nearly as fast as 2600K, am i missing something?

Its priced below those.

 

[BlueBlazer]

That's much better than the previous one, by about 2.66%. Still slower than a stock Core i7 2600K though..... :hmm:

That's slower than both Core i7 2600K and Phenom II X6 1100T at stock speeds...... :hmm:

Quick! Anyone with a 2600K do the Winrar bench please at stock 3.4GHz.

I know my 2500K @ 4.3GHz is ~3800 KB/s.

The problem is that the test file parameter is unknown (file size, type and compression factor). As far as I can remember, the highest numbers I've seen are ~4.7GB/s on my friend's Core i7 920 @3.6GHZ, and ~4.5GB on Core i7 2600K @4.2GHz (with a 300MB high compression file).