Fudzilla: Bulldozer performance figures are in

[podspi]

Interesting days ahead indeed! Mid-October is really only a couple weeks away and all these speculations and rumors will finally be put to rest

Where have I heard that before? Hopefully it actually launches this time


It is going to be interesting to see if those FX-4xxx and FX-6xxx CPUs are unlockable.... If they are, once yields improve the FX-4xxx could be a ridiculously awesome deal (if you get lucky).

 

[Accord99]

PCWorld.fr reports that a French computer magazine in an upcoming review, found that the 8150 only is competitive with the 2600K in some media rendering tests and well-behind in games:

http://translate.google.com/transla...ateriel/cpu/cpu-bulldozer-fx-8150-amd/519649/

The 8120 is a decent bang/buck but is not fully competitive with the 2500K. Overclocking is good.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Where have I heard that before? Hopefully it actually launches this time


It is going to be interesting to see if those FX-4xxx and FX-6xxx CPUs are unlockable.... If they are, once yields improve the FX-4xxx could be a ridiculously awesome deal (if you get lucky).

[angry voice]NO![/angry voice]

WHEN will people learn? You don't buy AMD CPUs for the ability to unlock. It's a hit-or-miss, and the Quad-Core FX will probably be far behind the i5-2500K in performance. The only CPUs worth looking at are the FX-8120 and 8150 (that is, IF it demonstrated noticeable gains in overclocking headroom). With the Six-Core FX you'll probably only be looking at marginal gains over the Phenom II X6, which is why they're pricing so low.

 

[BlueBlazer]

I don't want to offend you, but if I were a professional in this industry and I saw your post I would have written you off as yet-another-troll and simply would have never wasted my time responding to it.

I can't speak for John but he may have arrived at such an impression on the basis of your post, complete with trollish-type embedded graphic, and opted to just "move on".

Regardless how he took it, if he even saw it, John is not obligated to respond to every post addressed to him, and him not responding to a post is surely not to be taken as him avoiding a question somewhere in the post.

I was merely expressing his stance on the subject (waving off all leaks), as well as possibly that we are not looking at correct/accurate results (changes can happen between steppings, after all its been months). After seeing all those leaks, I wonder if he still maintains that statement of IPC increasing.

Sadly, Motorola experienced similar proofs of the bountiful "synergies" that were to come from unlocking shareholder value by spinning off their fabs too.

Sanders, who definitely looks to be old enough to be in his grave, is surely rolling in his bed tonight.

Legacy of Ruiz.....

Go on Champ, let it all out.

This IMHO is one of the results >> Intel's Market Share Further Ahead of the Pack after Crossing Sandy Bridge. Its anyone's guess that possibly part of that tiny percentage increment is due to people (tired of waiting, and lack of information) jumping ship (part of the "2%" JFAMD mentioned). The rest could be supply issues (besides Llano, after iBuyPower I'm still not seeing big OEMs like Dell announcing AMD FX machines this close to launch). :hmm:

 

[Vesku]

Keep in mind that the newest of those listed CPUs is at least a year old. That Athlon II x3(4) is actually still quite a good value for me ~$80 with Fry's combo motherboard when they were still doing that unlocked to a quad OCed to 3.5GHz. Can't really top that with a cheap Sandybridge CPU even to this day especially when I don't mind that I might be paying an extra $2 to $3 a month in electricity. The Sempron was purchased because it was $25 and is as perfectly capable as any other CPU at sitting in a box waiting to be used to check hardware. Shame it didn't unlock to a dual core though would have considered using it as a second comp. So instead I hopped on another Fry's combo deal for the Phenom II x2 and that one was just OK since it worked as an x3 at 3.7GHz. But then I made the mistake of thinking that even a delayed Bulldozer would show up in August or early September and now I'm stuck with the Phenom II x2 on a 990FX board until the 8120 shows up.

If SB had been launched middle of last year I'd probably be running a 2500K right now.

The Athlon II X3 isn't all that hot now that the new Celeron Dual-Cores are out. They have 15-20% higher single-threaded performance and only lose by ~10-15% in multi-threaded. That, and they're more efficient and cost less. Sure, they can't be overclocked, but why would you want an Athlon II X3 that will consume more power than a Core i7?

The Phenom II X2 I'll simply say is the dumbest CPU to have come from AMD since the original Phenom. Unlocking is a hit-or-miss, and if it's a miss, you end up with a measly dual-core that gets trashed by the $57 Celeron G530 in both single and multi-threaded. The Phenom II X2 needs to be priced at $55 to make sense.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Why do I keep reading this response? AMD hasn't previewed the crap out of anything for years. They prefer to keep everything under tight raps until they are ready to release it. The reasons are obvious. They are worried that the information will help the competition. I don't know whether Bulldozer will be good or not, but AMD being tight lipped doesn't mean it sucks.

They may want to keep the public in suspense, but do you really believe Intel doesnt know what the performance of Bulldozer will be???

 

[BlueBlazer]

They may want to keep the public in suspense, but do you really believe Intel doesnt know what the performance of Bulldozer will be???

Futhermore Intel has "shown its cards" while Ivy Bridge is still months away. What else is there left?

PCWorld.fr reports that a French computer magazine in an upcoming review, found that the 8150 only is competitive with the 2600K in some media rendering tests and well-behind in games:

http://translate.google.com/transla...ateriel/cpu/cpu-bulldozer-fx-8150-amd/519649/

The 8120 is a decent bang/buck but is not fully competitive with the 2500K. Overclocking is good.

Fixed ^^^^ (French to English, not Chinese to English).

 

[Phynaz]

Sadly, Motorola experienced similar proofs of the bountiful "synergies" that were to come from unlocking shareholder value by spinning off their fabs too.

Sanders, who definitely looks to be old enough to be in his grave, is surely rolling in his bed tonight.

There goes AMD stock price tanking by 15%.

Thanks GF.

 

[RobertPters77]

or run some Linux/*BSD distribution and pay $0 for your OS. There's a reason that supercomputers don't run Windows.

I despised dealing with the linux tards in the advertising industry. More so than the macfaggots.

Windows 7 Pro and up supports 2 or more sockets, and every version of Windows 7 supports multi-core processors.

I never said anything about Multi-core. I know from first hand experience that Windows Vista and 7 did not support multi socket systems. I bought a dual socket LGA775 workstation, running windows XP pro when my place of worked closed. I could not for the life of me, get 7 pro to install.

 

[RobertPters77]

There goes AMD stock price tanking by 15%.

Thanks GF.

Thankfully I dumped all of mine last month.

 

[BlueBlazer]

There goes AMD stock price tanking by 15%.

Thanks GF.

After hours look more worse.... :hmm:

 

[RampantAndroid]

I have never understood why people get so emotional over things.

If the product is right for you, you buy it. Pretty simple.

That rant reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc

Err...not really. Like someone else said...the guy was attacking AMD. Before you can link to that video, you should make one where you scream, through tears, "LEAVE AMD ALONE."

In all seriousness, some people prefer AMD. Or cannot afford a Nehalem or SB based chip, and were waiting for AMD to release something that might be more affordable. Or fanboys. If you're going to write those people off, good luck with that.

It's hard to know if a product is even RIGHT when no benchmarks even exist out there right now. I'll freely admit I don't buy from AMD (my 5970 was the last straw...), but watching this whole launch from afar has been amusing to see how AMD is trying to ignore it, and the reaction people are having.

I honestly just want to see BD released, I'm sick of seeing people argue theoretical performance numbers.

HA! You forgot to to into account the position of saturn!
No, the age of this turtle offsets that!

 

[JFAMD]

If Interlagos is supposed to be shipping out, how come there are no benches for it? Still under NDA until end customers get it or what's the deal here?

Benchmarks at launch, like I said.

And I wasn't trying to say that BD won't perform well. Rather, I was just trying to explain that there is the possibility that some benchmark somewhere could suffer from the changes in architecture (I have no clue what will really happen).

I haven't looked at the leaked benches, I just don't trust them. Rather, I'm waiting for a REAL review from someone like anand.

I am pretty sure that when we launch, both sides in the fanboy war will gear up. Everyone will have their own pet benchmark that proves their point. A year after launch the fighting will still be going on. Not because it matters but because some people just love to argue.

Everyone can always find a benchmark to prove their point. Most of it will be noise - on both sides.

Err...not really. Like someone else said...the guy was attacking AMD. Before you can link to that video, you should make one where you scream, through tears, "LEAVE AMD ALONE."

Actually I am a lot more fun than people believe. I once dressed as elvis and sang happy birthday to one of our VPs in front of 500 people. And there are karaoke incidents that will stay locked away in korea because any evening that starts with beer, progresses to sake and ends with bourbon can not be good.

I'd do a video like that for grins, but there just isn't enough free time these days for fun things.

 

[bronxzv]

Indeed, and still waiting to see some SPEC benchmarks but alas none. AMD was shipping them to Cray mostly/exclusively (for supercomputer installations). The only glimpses of Interlagos can be found on Sisoftware website (possibly from motherboard testing and validation, like this MSI one). :hmm:

or this one
http://www.sisoftware.eu/rank2011d/...a994a187efd2e7c1b984b593f693ae9eb8cbf6c6&l=en

 

[StrangerGuy]

How long have you been a member here? You should know better than to believe faked, doctored up BS benchmarks. I'd expect that from a newbie. Not from you.

Hmmn, let's see, go off the BS links you believe in, or, perhaps this one? From an actual AMD event with B2F\G stepping and REAL benchmarks, not just the world record\gaming FPS one?

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...es-Bulldozer&p=4950183&viewfull=1#post4950183

Also note he doesn't just say "multimedia" machine.

He says GAMING machine.

Did actually even click on my links? Hint: All of them had nothing to do with BD. Thanks for exposing yourself as a brain-dead, potty-mouth AMD fanboy.

 

[mosox]

The Athlon II X3 isn't all that hot now that the new Celeron Dual-Cores are out. They have 15-20% higher single-threaded performance and only lose by ~10-15% in multi-threaded. That, and they're more efficient and cost less. Sure, they can't be overclocked, but why would you want an Athlon II X3 that will consume more power than a Core i7?

The old Athlon II X3 440 is about on par with the E3400 in what regards the performance/price:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html

Overclocked is a much better value.

Did you ever acknowledged the strengths of the AMD CPUs? Look at that chart, AMD is one generation behind and still dominates the chart. How come AMD with an old technology still offers better bang for the buck?

The only slot in which AMD lags behind Intel is the enthusiast one. On every single other price point, AMD is better value.

Saying that Intel is "the best" and AMD "is slow" is like saying that Volkswagen (who makes the Bugatti Veyron) is faster than BMW. No, only a car of theirs is faster, all the others are inferior.

 

[StrangerGuy]

The old Athlon II X3 440 is about on par with the E3400 in what regards the performance/price:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html

Overclocked is a much better value.

Did you ever acknowledged the strengths of the AMD CPUs? Look at that chart, AMD is one generation behind and still dominates the chart. How come AMD with an old technology still offers better bang for the buck?

The only slot in which AMD lags behind Intel is the enthusiast one. On every single other price point, AMD is better value.

Saying that Intel is "the best" and AMD "is slow" is like saying that Volkswagen (who makes the Bugatti Veyron) is faster than BMW. No, only a car of theirs is faster, all the others are inferior.

You might as well not mention a useless synthetic benchmark, and just say how even a 5-year old 1st gen C2D can run every "non-enthusiast" stuff well enough. And we really don't need the AMD whiteknighting, we enthusiasts here know price/performance by the back of our hand otherwise we won't have bought 2500K by the truckloads.

 

[mosox]

I run a PhII X4 and I'm perfectly happy. I bet that if someone stealthily changed the mobo/CPU of the 2500K owners out there with a Ph II X4 or C2Q platform the huge majority of them wouldn't even notice.

Those who know the first thing about price/performance don't upgrade from the i5 750, Ph II X4 or even the C2Q to the Sandy Bridge. The 2500K has a good price/performance only when compared to the 2600 or 2600K.

 

[OVerLoRDI]

I run a PhII X4 and I'm perfectly happy. I bet that if someone stealthily changed the mobo/CPU of the 2500K owners out there with a Ph II X4 or C2Q platform the huge majority of them wouldn't even notice.

Those who know the first thing about price/performance don't upgrade from the i5 750, Ph II X4 or even the C2Q to the Sandy Bridge. The 2500K has a good price/performance only when compared to the 2600 or 2600K.

Depends on what you use your computer for. On my system I was severely cpu limited when I was running a PhII with two 6970s. Upgraded to a 2500k and this was the difference in Metro 2033

Phenom II: 54/208/6 (avg/max/min)
Sandy 2500k: 75/247/13

Noticeable? I think so.

 

[StrangerGuy]

I run a PhII X4 and I'm perfectly happy. I bet that if someone stealthily changed the mobo/CPU of the 2500K owners out there with a Ph II X4 or C2Q platform the huge majority of them wouldn't even notice.

Those who know the first thing about price/performance don't upgrade from the i5 750, Ph II X4 or even the C2Q to the Sandy Bridge. The 2500K has a good price/performance only when compared to the 2600 or 2600K.[/B]

Because people who wanna build a new 2500K system magically gets a system handled to them free by God himself: "Don't buy 2500k, here's a i5 750 rig for you. Its not worth the money!"

Oh, and if 955 BE is good enough for most people then why would AMD even bother with BD. Duh.

 

[zlejedi]

I run a PhII X4 and I'm perfectly happy. I bet that if someone stealthily changed the mobo/CPU of the 2500K owners out there with a Ph II X4 or C2Q platform the huge majority of them wouldn't even notice.

Those who know the first thing about price/performance don't upgrade from the i5 750, Ph II X4 or even the C2Q to the Sandy Bridge. The 2500K has a good price/performance only when compared to the 2600 or 2600K.

And in contrast I'm perfectly happy after dumping 1055T and getting 2500K instead. Very noticeable upgrade in terms of min. fps.

Money well spent (though I had to spend them only because I fucked up year ago and bought X6 instead of slightly more expensive xeon 3440)

 

[3DVagabond]

When AMD stuff didn't sucked, we had these:

4850: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2553

Athlon XP: http://firingsquad.com/hardware/athlonxp/page12.asp

A64: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64.html

A64 X2:http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2005/05/09/amd_a64x2_4800/1

When AMD knew Phenom sucked we had a nice article Anand on how AMD tried to "persuade" him from making an unbiased, independent testing.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2378/3

Yeah, keep telling yourself that.

Keep telling myself? I said they haven't done it for years. You just said the same thing. :shrug:

The Radeon HD 5800 series was amazing when it came out, but I don't remember seeing any previews.

Exactly my point. No big pre-release fanfare. Certainly an excellent product.

 

[3DVagabond]

I'll let you in on a hint: AMD is putting so many cores and such high clock speeds because they NEED to.

Could also be just because they can?

 

[Riek]

Originally Posted by LOL_Wut_Axel
I'll let you in on a hint: AMD is putting so many cores and such high clock speeds because they NEED to.

That is because they designed it that way.... They relied on increasing clockspeed to increase the performance and not on massive ILP. it was a designchoice which was known from the start. Nobody expected lower frequencies than its competition... yet they release an FX8120 that is running its 8cores at a lower frequency then the Gulftown 980x..

So no its clockspeeds are not that high compared to the competition. I believe they originally expected higher frequencies (like 3.5GHz to be the lowest number and not 3.1 to be the lowest number).

Even their flagship (FX8150) has only a 100MHz advantage in extreme heavy >8threaded applications.

 

[BlueBlazer]

That guy was attacking AMD, not AMD's detractors.

The "Leave Britney Alone" video applies to AMDroids who demand that no criticism of AMD ever be uttered, like those fools on AMDZone.

You don't need to emphaize that often. Quite a number (at OCN) already questioning JFAMD's statements, like this example

Interesting days ahead indeed! Mid-October is really only a couple weeks away and all these speculations and rumors will finally be put to rest

And AMD has yet to publicly and officially announce any launch dates even though mid-October seems to be the most viable so far. :hmm:

Could also be just because they can?

Because AMD have to. Logically, if Bulldozer's IPC has increased then they do not require such high clock speeds and could have released them months ago. That is very obvious from early on. The IPC issue could come back to haunt Bulldozer in games performance.

or this one
http://www.sisoftware.eu/rank2011d/...a994a187efd2e7c1b984b593f693ae9eb8cbf6c6&l=en

Those looks like proper clock speeds (looking at the average clock speed) instead of the 2GHz on early Opteron 6282SE results.