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

[Idontcare]

Regardless of whether he was using AVX or not, those results are extremely poor.

For reference, my 2500K @ 4.7 GHz, using the same problem size in Linpack as the one used in the leaked benches.

Without AVX: 66.5 GFlops

And with AVX: 126 GFlops

And this is from a 4-core processor without hyperthreading!

Clockspeed versus Gflops using 14GB DDR3-1866 w/AVX and w/o HT:

^ cuts those in half for non-AVX results.

An 8core Bulldozer getting 40Gflops at 4.5 GHz is simply D: A 2600K would get that at 3Ghz.

 

[Tsavo]

Clockspeed versus Gflops using 14GB DDR3-1866 w/AVX and w/o HT:

^ cuts those in half for non-AVX results.

An 8core Bulldozer getting 40Gflops at 4.5 GHz is simply D: A 2600K would get that at 3Ghz.

Probably closer to 2.5 GHz.

😵

 

[AdamK47]

Not that anyone cares, but I decided to run LinX with 6 threads to see how it stacks up against Bulldozer.

Edit: 4 threads

 

[aphelion02]

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

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

Here it is. 2600k @ stock.

 

[Dadofamunky]

I gotta say, if the Russian benchmark screens are accurate, those results are very grim for AMD.

 

[Tsavo]

I gotta say, if the Russian benchmark screens are accurate, those results are very grim for AMD.

Some of them aren't bad, considering... but only if you don't look at the power meter when this thing is fully loaded.

 

[Stoneburner]

Every leak has consistently given the same story. This looks worse than Phenom. At least back then, AMD was sort of blind sided by intel and that was their first hiccup after a few years of being on top.

Bulldozer makes no sense. TO have this much time, and suffer so many delays, and to know damn well what you're up against and still ah heck it up?

 

[996GT2]

Some of them aren't bad, considering... but only if you don't look at the power meter when this thing is fully loaded.

"Aren't bad" if you compare BD to Nehalem, maybe...but this is 2011, not 2008, and BD's competition is no longer a 3 year old Intel architecture. If these results are anywhere close to real, you'd have to be crazy to buy BD for a new build.

 

[Tsavo]

Bulldozer makes no sense. TO have this much time, and suffer so many delays, and to know damn well what you're up against and still ah heck it up?

I don't hold them up to the same standard as Intel, because they are a fraction of the size and don't have any money. I'm surprised that they are kind of playing the same game as Intel, considering all this.

 

[CHADBOGA]

"Aren't bad" if you compare BD to Nehalem, maybe...but this is 2011, not 2008, and BD's competition is no longer a 3 year old Intel architecture. If these results are anywhere close to real, you'd have to be crazy to buy BD for a new build.

It will be interesting to see what the more diehard fans of AMD do here.

Do they penalise themselves?

It would be quite fitting to see them pay a price for their irrational world view. D:

Please speculate on the products and not the posters. Nothing good will come from this post.
-ViRGE

 

[NostaSeronx]

"Aren't bad" if you compare BD to Nehalem, maybe...but this is 2011, not 2008, and BD's competition is no longer a 3 year old Intel architecture. If these results are anywhere close to real, you'd have to be crazy to buy BD for a new build.

Ha

Very Selective with benchmarks I see

 

[aphelion02]

It will be interesting to see what the more diehard fans of AMD do here.

Do they penalise themselves?

It would be quite fitting to see them pay a price for their irrational world view. D:

Lol, have you been to AMDZone? They will maintain their world view just fine.

 

[996GT2]

Ha

Very Selective with benchmarks I see

I'm sorry, what benchmark is "not biased" to the diehard AMD fanboy who is still in denial about BD's performance?

Cinebench, Linpack, wPrime...every popular benchmark is called "Intel biased"...perhaps it's time to just accept that BD doesn't perform very well compared to Sandy Bridge and move on?

 

[notty22]

It will be interesting to see what the more diehard fans of AMD do here.

Do they penalise themselves?

It would be quite fitting to see them pay a price for their irrational world view. D:

LoL , what do you suggest, back lashes. 🙂

 

[NostaSeronx]

I'm sorry, what benchmark is "not biased" to the diehard AMD fanboy who is still in denial about BD's performance?

I'm a not a die hard AMD enthusiast

Passmark shows general performance

Cinebench, Linpack, wPrime...every popular benchmark is called "Intel biased"...perhaps it's time to just accept that BD doesn't perform very well compared to Sandy Bridge and move on?

Are you going to use Cinema4D R11.5 or are you going to use Cinema4D R13?
Are you going to render pretty pictures or render animated scenes?

Linpack doesn't equal all Floating Point operations

wPrime it would probably just be easier to use an application that uses AVX

 

[CHADBOGA]

Lol, have you been to AMDZone?

It is my favourite comedy site. 😀

 

[StrangerGuy]

Every leak has consistently given the same story. This looks worse than Phenom. At least back then, AMD was sort of blind sided by intel and that was their first hiccup after a few years of being on top.

Bulldozer makes no sense. TO have this much time, and suffer so many delays, and to know damn well what you're up against and still ah heck it up?

Even if there is a magical BIOS fix that increases the IPC by 20% it will only still be as efficient clock for clock per core as PhII, albeit one with 8 cores and clocked higher. But it goes against any precedent since that has never happened before.

Otherwise I'm already calling a release price cut.

 

[RussianSensation]

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

D:

Web browsing etc even a netbook can handle.

A lot of websites have flash (which Apples hates due to it using a lot of resources). Even my 6950 2GB doesn't help despite it supposedly having Adobe Flash acceleration. I have a secondary rig that I often do tests on. It runs Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4ghz with OCZ 60GB and I stick my videocard in it. It cannot handle 50-60 tab browsing across 3 web-browsers. I can easily hit CPU usage of 100%, and that's without watching 1080P content on youtube. Also, if you are going to bring up video encoding as the "only CPU intensive program that 'most' people use", then you can't dismiss the idea that a lot of people who do video encoding are converting video to their tablet or smartphone. Under such usage, QuickSync is actually superior since it doesn't sacrifice the image quality and performs much faster.

Also, when most people refer to "single core performance" they are not discussing running programs from 1998 that run 1 thread. Most programs today use 2-4 threads and outside of Arma 3 I can't think of a single game that uses > 4 cores. So in other words, if you are running 1-4 threads (i.e., most real world programs), then single core performance is critical.

Consider this, when Fermi GTX470/480 arrived some 6 months late, they were still 10-15% faster than HD5850/HD5870, respectively, and delivered far superior tessellation performance. On top of that, NV shipped those cards with 2-3 free games in a bundle (Mafia 2, Metro 2033, Just Cause 2). However, they were still deemed to be a "failure" by a lot of people. Here we have BD that is 9 months late vs. SB - a CPU that so far looks like it is barely faster than the X6 1100T in multi-threaded apps and barely beats a $220 2500k (which is only $179.99 at MC btw). But once you compared 2500k @ 4.5+ ghz, then not even an overclocked FX-8150 will be able to beat it (at least based on these benches). That's nothing to say about its power consumption either. Honestly, this is shaping up to be a far greater failure than Fermi ever was. If you are going to be late by 9 months, you need to be either faster or cheaper or both.

 

[NostaSeronx]

Even if there is a magical BIOS fix that increases the IPC by 20% it will only still be as efficient clock for clock per core as PhII, albeit one with 8 cores and clocked higher. But it goes against any precedent since that has never happened before.

Otherwise I'm already calling a release price cut.

This magical bios has to increase Integer Maths operations by 60%

This magical bios has to increase SSE operations by 30%

:sneaky:

AMD FX is on par with the Intel i7 2600K on: (These tests are completely serial meaning they represent IPC)
Compression
Encryption
Physics
String Sorting

AMD FX is faster than the Intel i7 2600K on:
Finding Prime Numbers(Faster than i7 2600K but slower than the A8-3850)
Floating Point Maths

AMD FX has abysmal performance on(It is slower than most CPUs that have been released after 2003 in these tests):
Integer Math
Integer SSE

The FX-8150 tested in this test was using F5
(Bulldozer-PC please use the new bios http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3880#bios :hmm🙂

http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/amd-fx-8150-bulldozer-preview
More here

 

[Elixer]

Hmm...
http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/amd-fx-8150-bulldozer-preview/7

For what it is worth,

And we can not even enjoy the fact that AMD motherboards are usually cheaper because Bulldozer requires a motherboard with a power floor very, very strong to cope with current consumed by the processor, so therefore quite expensive talking about models that bring the cost to a platform similar to the Intel platform.

Unfortunately for us Bulldozer was not what we expected, and the disappointment is even greater as this architecture marks five years since AMD has lost market leadership processors, and 5 years from the last iteration of the FX brand . As a user of the Athlon 64, I remember the aura of exclusivity now that benefited expensive FX series processors, which fully deserves its price but because they were able performance. 5 years later, we are dealing with the hurting memory of his ancestors FX, a significantly lower performance than the competition and significantly higher consumption. And, in this case the price really does not matter. We want to see $ 1,000 AMD processors able to fight alongside solutions from Intel, not cheap products that do not justify their price anyway

(from that preview)

 

[NostaSeronx]

Hmm...http://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/amd-fx-8150-bulldozer-preview/7
For what it is worth

Gross, I would never want $1000 CPUs

 

[AnandThenMan]

All signs point to a full on face plant by AMD. Let's all hope that is not the case, things will get very grim for consumers if AMD falls out of the x86 processor race.

 

[StrangerGuy]

All signs point to a full on face plant by AMD. Let's all hope that is not the case, things will get very grim for consumers if AMD falls out of the x86 processor race.

Now we know why AMD released those AM3+ boards 4 months early...

Otherwise no one would have bought them lol 😀

 

[Silverforce11]

Lab501 is pretty reliable, and indeed a pretty horrible results for AMD. The FX nomenclature is pure lies, it does not deserve "FX".

Unless they can pull of a launch day bios fix for whatever "rumored" problems with the chip, i am going to jump on the bandwagon and declaring this thing DOA.

 

[RobertPters77]

It will be interesting to see what the more diehard fans of AMD do here.

Do they penalise themselves?

It would be quite fitting to see them pay a price for their irrational world view. D:

I'm looking at abwx.


Lol all those months of praise and worship for amd and it's "sandy bridge killing bulldozer." Down the drain.

I'm looking at YOU
-ViRGE