Fudzilla: Bulldozer performance figures are in

[sequoia464]

Apparently someone at AMD confirmed that Zambezi (Desktop Bulldozer) is being released in October:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlwIFFHrNW4&feature=player_embedded

JF_AMD seems to confirm that the video is authentic - he doesn't comment on the content however. Post 6420 - bottom of page.
...http://www.overclock.net/amd-cpus/791495-bulldozer-blog-live-642.html

 

[Majic 7]

Here is another comment from JF on [H]ard|Forums. Kind of through the looking glass considering what has come before from AMD on release dates. "the date we have is solid. the rumors are fluid.

I am not commenting on a rumor, simply that the date is locked, not fluid"

 

[RussianSensation]

If I'm AMD and has a 4850-esque BD chip that 90% good as a 2500K for the price of $150-165 I will be previewing the crap out it. The only reason why AMD didn't because they know it's going to disappoint.

Correct me if I am wrong, but so far rumors (slides) point to FX-8150 being the competitor to the 2500k/2600k (i.e., performance in the middle). It will be priced at $245, not $150-165. This chip has a Turbo of 3.9ghz for all cores. There is no indication at all that the $150-160 FX-41xx series will be able to compete with 2500k.

It looks like AMD is aiming to offer us a chip with slightly better performance for a bit less $. That's not taking into consideration other aspects such as overclocked vs. overclocked performance, power consumption in overclocked states, etc.

That's still good, but it's not going to be HD4850/4870-esque BD. HD4870 was faster than the GTX260 and cost $100 less. I don't think anyone expects the $205 FX-8120 to be better than the $317 2600k.

 

[formulav8]

I don't think anyone expects the $205 FX-8120 to be better than the $317 2600k.

This.

And I also think BD will compete with Intel much better in Server related purposes than Desktop tasks.

Either way I think there will be quite a few disappointed persons...

 

[AtenRa]

I don't think anyone expects the $205 FX-8120 to be better than the $317 2600k.

Against 2600K no, against 2500K Yes.

AMD FX8120 will be slower (10-20%) in single thread but faster (20-30%) in Multi-Thread, a little bit cheaper, both CPUs unlocked and the faster stable OC wins

On the Platform side, AMD has an advantage, more SATA-III ports and 2x 16 PCI-e lines at the same or lower price.

It could be the first time in a wile to have TWO competitive CPUs/platforms at the same price/performance/features after Core Duo era.

 

[Vesku]

Yeah, assuming the none clustered version of BD would have near Nehalem performance than the 8150 should be a bit slower in single threaded overall while being a bit faster in multithread overall.

8 (clusters) * .85 (BD to SB IPC ratio) * .8 (performance hit for clustering) = 5.44 (SB equiv MT)

4 (SB cores) * 1.3 (Gains from Hyperthreading) = 5.2 (SB equiv MT)

Allow for modest fudge factor in IPC ratio, performance hit from clustering and performance gain from Hyperthreading and you can see that with some clockspeed advantage the 8120 and 8150 should be a good alternative to the 4 core SB "K" series. Unless AMD pulled a real coup and a non clustered BD would have a theoretical IPC near SB level, seems quite unlikely though.

 

[grimpr]

With SATA 3.0 that works, 5.0ghz on air stable and fantastic temps, a cool chip, the 8120 looks like a hot deal.

 

[Neutralman]

With SATA 3.0 that works, 5.0ghz on air stable and fantastic temps, a cool chip, the 8120 looks like a hot deal.

If we plan on overclocking, whats the difference between 8120 and 8150 besides base speed?

 

[grimpr]

Price, about 50$ cheaper from the current rumours.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/report-amd-fx-release-date-and-prices/13604.html

 

[Vesku]

If we plan on overclocking, whats the difference between 8120 and 8150 besides base speed?

I'm hoping very little as I plan on OCing the 8120.

 

[trollolo]

so if i get a mainboard that supports 2 CPU's, can i have a 16-core system?

 

[Vesku]

Yes, 16 core 32 cluster system. Would need a dual G34 board that supports Interlagos.

 

[grimpr]

Look at those temps fully loaded.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aale7YSvhJk&feature=player_embedded

 

[Vesku]

He doesn't say what cooler he used though.

 

[grimpr]

I'd say AMDs stock. :sneaky:

 

[NostaSeronx]

I'd say AMDs stock. :sneaky:

:sneaky:
Now, all he needs to do is get that CPU to 6.5GHz

 

[RampantAndroid]

Against 2600K no, against 2500K Yes.

AMD FX8120 will be slower (10-20%) in single thread but faster (20-30%) in Multi-Thread, a little bit cheaper, both CPUs unlocked and the faster stable OC wins

On the Platform side, AMD has an advantage, more SATA-III ports and 2x 16 PCI-e lines at the same or lower price.

It could be the first time in a wile to have TWO competitive CPUs/platforms at the same price/performance/features after Core Duo era.

Do we have real numbers, or are we still talking theoretically?

Will Ivy Bridge on 1155 bring more PCIe lanes?

 

[Vesku]

Do we have real numbers, or are we still talking theoretically?

Will Ivy Bridge on 1155 bring more PCIe lanes?

Still theoretical, that's an assumption that they would match Nehalem IPC with a theoretical monolithic Bulldozer core. Some rumors are saying it doesn't even hit that level, roughly 10-20% slower. I can't be sure of actual performance but I expect AMD to price them competitively based on stock numbers. Even a doom and gloom 8120 would be interesting if priced at $150. ;p

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Against 2600K no, against 2500K Yes.

AMD FX8120 will be slower (10-20%) in single thread but faster (20-30%) in Multi-Thread, a little bit cheaper, both CPUs unlocked and the faster stable OC wins

On the Platform side, AMD has an advantage, more SATA-III ports and 2x 16 PCI-e lines at the same or lower price.

It could be the first time in a wile to have TWO competitive CPUs/platforms at the same price/performance/features after Core Duo era.

LOL, no. Everything keeps pointing to BD being either a very minor IPC improvement or pretty much the same. Don't expect higher-than-10% IPC compared to Phenom II. That's all I'll say. If you actually think AMD is in the business of giving us free performance, you're mistaken. They want high margins; they need high ASP.

 

[RobertPters77]

so if i get a mainboard that supports 2 CPU's, can i have a 16-core system?

No. Because Microsoft disallows multi socket systems in all versions of Windows Vista and 7. Even ultimate and enterprise. And don't even try forcing it. It's hard coded into the OS to only recognize one cpu socket.

So if you want 16 BD cores get a windows server 2008 license.

 

[MrTransistorm]

I thought the limit was two physical CPUs for Professional, Ultimate, and Enterprise.

 

[nonameo]

No. Because Microsoft disallows multi socket systems in all versions of Windows Vista and 7. Even ultimate and enterprise. And don't even try forcing it. It's hard coded into the OS to only recognize one cpu socket.

So if you want 16 BD cores get a windows server 2008 license.

Are you sure its multi socket and not just multi CPU? Could you use a 2 socket system and run only one CPU? If so, I can see how you might could get 16 cores in.

 

[PreferLinux]

I thought the limit was two physical CPUs for Professional, Ultimate, and Enterprise.

Correct, as far as I know.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

I thought the limit was two physical CPUs for Professional, Ultimate, and Enterprise.

It is. http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/...t-system/b4e847dc-670d-41d7-a8a9-109a146255c9

 

[mosox]

Is this guy posting in here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x4MHUgMlOI