Fudzilla: Bulldozer performance figures are in

[skipsneeky2]

Bulldozer will mostly appeal to me if a stock clocked quad can outperform my oced 2500k while using less energy.

 

[-Slacker-]

No you talk to intel and they will tell you straight out . They as a producer of CPUs as has yet to release its highend SB platiform Enthusiast if you insist . Until we see AMDS best against intels best your making a sensely debate . Apples to apples based on performance not cost . Since it is in FACT the performance that sets the PRICE. I asssure you Z68 SB 1155 is not Intels best. The 2011 socket and chipset are intels best . So many say lets wait for real results and thats what I will do wait for real results against AMDs best VS Intels best 2011 socket. Or aren't the reviewers going to bench the 2011 platiform. I may be annoying but I sure as hell won't overlook the fact that the bar for AMD was lower to mid high for AMD . Annoying yes, To some but true,

Hay fella . Forget it it not worth the effort.It doesn't matter to these guys if its true or not . There a lot more to all this than 9/11, JFK Hitler Napoleon Elenin All the underground bunkers being built threw out the world . But none on the east side of the mississippi, Lawyers running the government all 3 branches. Moral decay , The lack of news coverade on huge events , The coverage of news events that go on for weeks and months about unimportant events .
Don't knock yourself out . Their not worth the effort. instead prepare yourself and when the time comes face your fear and turn your back on them . Matter is decaying PROVEN SUN emmitting strange New particles . Proven . Radio active material breaking down Proven . When the time comes stand stong and unwavering Face what comes as these types here crumble in utter fear. Masive sworms of locust in Russia and asia spreading fast now . Allso dwon under massive locust sworms . When people are starving they will do anything and everthing . The next event appears in the heavens.

123

 

[Accord99]

Do you think SB-E, by adding 50% more cores, will yield a 50% performance increase?

It will in those areas where Bulldozer has greater throughput than the 2600K.

 

[hooflung]

Oh please everyone who really knows the industry knows. It started with AMDs capacity restraints and ends with them selling their fabs. Dell couldn't take on AMD because AMD couldn't and wouldn't garrentee a stocking supply to dell.

No. It actually started with Intel teeting the big vendors with deep coupon discounts, just like Microsoft did and was found guilty of, and then telling the vendors that they'd pull the teet back in the blouse if they bought AMD.

Every constraint placed on the company, bad decision or no, was magnified by Intel abusing their Monopoly. Let us not rewrite history and hang our arguments on AMD buying ATI and subsequently bleeding out. ATI is a much better graphics company now than it was and AMD has put out quality parts despite their wallet size.

While Intel has been able to placate any and all future injury because of the purse they grew through illegal practices. They also weathered the P4, one of the crappiest efforts in computing history, because of being durty.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Oh please. Everyone knows what 'almost destroyed' them, and it starts with illegal and ends with intel.

No, it starts with "inferior" and ends with "product".

 

[RobertPters77]

I want to believe.

 

[Kenmitch]

I'll hold judgement till release with multiple reviews to compare. But it would be nce if AMD brings some real competition to intel. To me it looks like AMD is getting it's ducks in a row currently.

This industry is driven by competition

 

[-Slacker-]

And, sometimes, anti-competition.

 

[pantsaregood]

AMD had some serious issues with OEMs during the Netburst era because Intel engaged in unfair business practices. That much is known. It had nothing to do with AMD producing an inferior product.

Also, on the note of me supposedly defending AMD irrationally: I am running a Z68 2500K system. I'm quite happy with it, and have no intention of using anything else. I'm extremely skeptical of these benchmarks, as implied by the "appears" qualifier. The benchmarks could very well be completely fake - I don't buy the CPU-Z screenshot for a second. I haven't heard anything about a CPU-Z release that supports Bulldozer.

Nemesis constantly rants about how amazing Intel is, and trolls (perhaps without realizing it) every topic mentioning anything related to AMD. This is someone who stated his mid-range Pentium 4 outperformed even the fastest Athlon 64s.

 

[Ares1214]

If that's true, then the release of Bulldozer would also be irrelevant for several reasons:

1) Why should we spend $300+ on a Bulldozer if the current X4 965 $119 or the $195 i5-2400 are fast enough for games? In fact it appears that a 2500k is everything we could want and more since at 4.5ghz+ it will be fast enough for any game for years to come.

It looks to me like an overclocked 2500k has the best IPC, still maintains reasonable power consumption while overclocked, and whoops everything this side of 2600k in most every day tasks (outside of video rendering and video encoding). All that available today for $220.



2) Following your logic once again, then whatever advantage Bulldozer may have over Sandy Bridge is also irrelevant then if Sandy Bridge is already fast enough for games. So why wait to buy Bulldozer since it won't matter anyway? In that case it's better to just purchase a SB platform right now and not wait, wouldn't you agree?

Of course I don't agree with the idea that AMD processors are good enough today; that's why I look forward to AMD producing a much faster processor. And if you thought a $120 965 Phenom II X4 was good enough, you wouldn't even care about how a $320 Bulldozer would do against a 2600k



If true when it launches with official benchmarks, :thumbsup::thumbsup:

You made my point, those things ARE true, a X4 955 IS good enough for gaming. The only real thing that matters for CPU's of this quality are benchmarks outside of gaming, like x264, encoding performance, rendering, Adobe, and so on.

 

[386DX]

Doesn't look much different than 1100T versus i7-860, AMD has a modest throughput advantage in some 3D rendering and video encoding applications but significant disadvantage if work load doesn't take advantage of all cores.

This was my exact prediction about BD in the other BD thread. Bulldozer just brings AMD back to where they were when the first Thuban CPU's were introduced faster in cinebench and encoding but slower in everything else. The only difference now is they need 8 cores to achieve this instead of 6 because the IPC gap between Intel and AMD has been getting wider. That is another reason why BD is going to come with high turbo clock speeds to hide the IPC disadvantage.

 

[ElFenix]

Also, on the note of me supposedly defending AMD irrationally: I am running a Z68 2500K system. I'm quite happy with it, and have no intention of using anything else. I'm extremely skeptical of these benchmarks, as implied by the "appears" qualifier. The benchmarks could very well be completely fake - I don't buy the CPU-Z screenshot for a second. I haven't heard anything about a CPU-Z release that supports Bulldozer.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/new_cpu-z_build_supports_amd_fx_bulldozer_and_llano


edit: 1.57 is the screenshot, which didn't support bulldozer. fake.

 

[frozentundra123456]

AMD had some serious issues with OEMs during the Netburst era because Intel engaged in unfair business practices. That much is known. It had nothing to do with AMD producing an inferior product.

I would not argue that Intel may have engaged in strongarm and/or illegal business practices. However, when AMD had the superior product during the Athlon X2 days, I dont think that they were in danger of going under.

It was only after Core 2 was released and updated twice while AMD kept the same (slower) architecture that they were in danger of going out of business. And although it might have been a good move in the long term, acquiring ATI at a hefty price put them in dire financial straights for a time as well.

And I am in no way a fan of intel. In fact my first and fondest memories of computer gaming were made on an Athlon XP system. I am just tired of AMD continuing to try to get buy on obsolete technology and whining about how mean intel is to them.

AMD needs to get competitive hardware out on time for a change. And I dont mean Llano for the desktop. For the laptop it may be competitive, but I see no real need for it on the desktop. I mean they need Bulldozer now, and they need it to be competitive.

 

[eyeofthetiger]

This was my exact prediction about BD in the other BD thread. Bulldozer just brings AMD back to where they were when the first Thuban CPU's were introduced faster in cinebench and encoding but slower in everything else. The only difference now is they need 8 cores to achieve this instead of 6 because the IPC gap between Intel and AMD has been getting wider. That is another reason why BD is going to come with high turbo clock speeds to hide the IPC disadvantage.

Created an account just to quote this guy because he hit it spot on.

Nothing has really changed. This is exactly what happened with AMD and the Phenom x6. More cores on the AMD evens the field, but ONLY in heavily multithreaded benchmarks.

Except this time it took 8 cores to get it done. In many ways this is a step down.

Intel is still winning this battle.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

Didn't read the entire post but my concerns also include power consumption and heat.

 

[Khato]

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/new_cpu-z_build_supports_amd_fx_bulldozer_and_llano


edit: 1.57 is the screenshot, which didn't support bulldozer. fake.

Nice catch - always have to love the little mistakes that those playing with photoshop make.

 

[RussianSensation]

You made my point, those things ARE true, a X4 955 IS good enough for gaming. The only real thing that matters for CPU's of this quality are benchmarks outside of gaming, like x264, encoding performance, rendering, Adobe, and so on.

I will say there is an argument to be made to take an AMD 955 + SSD + faster videocard over say a 2600k / $320+ Bulldozer + Mechanical drive + slower videocard as a result of the price difference.

However, at the same time I feel that because I use my computer almost daily and it lasts at least 2+ years before upgrades, to me the $100 extra spent on a processor is well worth it. Over the course of 2+ years, I won't have to upgrade as often. So I really think it will cost more in the long-term to buy a $120 processor that will be obsolete much faster and require an all new mobo again. So that's why I'd rather buy a 2500k right off the bat than go with 965 for example.

 

[richierich1212]

This was my exact prediction about BD in the other BD thread. Bulldozer just brings AMD back to where they were when the first Thuban CPU's were introduced faster in cinebench and encoding but slower in everything else. The only difference now is they need 8 cores to achieve this instead of 6 because the IPC gap between Intel and AMD has been getting wider. That is another reason why BD is going to come with high turbo clock speeds to hide the IPC disadvantage.

Different cpu designs. Like I've said before: Intel has bigger cores + HT. AMD has smaller, but more cores.

 

[Markfw]

Jeesh.....Why can't we find a real benchmark.. Why all these fakes ???????

 

[bridito]

Jeesh.....Why can't we find a real benchmark.. Why all these fakes ???????

I'm with you, brother. I've just about had it with these wild goose chases. Is that Dallas show this weekend still scheduled to have a live playable BD? Are there any chances of an unqualified and undeniably real benchy then?

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Jeesh.....Why can't we find a real benchmark.. Why all these fakes ???????

They're great at generating page views. Dolla dolla bill, y'all.

 

[Cogman]

They're great at generating page views. Dolla dolla bill, y'all.

That is the first thing that came to my mind.

 

[piesquared]

Oh please everyone who really knows the industry knows. It started with AMDs capacity restraints and ends with them selling their fabs. Dell couldn't take on AMD because AMD couldn't and wouldn't garrentee a stocking supply to dell.

If that really were the case, intel wouldn't have had to dish out $5 Billion in bribes now would they. (no, I don't need a link)

OT, Zambezi looks like an excellent foundation for things to come. If the rumoured price is true, once again it's cheaper than the competition for more performance. Good for enthusiasts, workstations and servers, and being designed with Fusion in mind from the beginning, Trinity and beyond should be even more appealing than Llano which is selling out according to some sources.

 

[FordGT]

Another fake, IMHO. There have been so many damn fakes that it is literally killing any excitement I had for Bulldozer.

 

[Arkaign]

Jeesh.....Why can't we find a real benchmark.. Why all these fakes ???????

I think this warrants a mandated change to incredibly invalid OP title.

Currently reads : 'Bulldozer performance figures are in'.

Should read : 'More faked BD figures are out'