Give me a reason to go AMD... I WANT TO BELIEVE.

[R0H1T]

Have any benchmarks from a reliable review site that show improved performance under win 8?

I guess you wouldn't take the word of a fellow user would you 😛

People have serious trust issues these days, WMD's anyone ?

 

[grimpr]

Have any benchmarks from a reliable review site that show improved performance under win 8?

I said where it performs best as a whole chip, including power consumption, thermals and aggresive turbo core which translates to better single threaded performance and shows in fx windows 8 benchmarks at toms and other review sites and not some harry potter ipc boost, the chip is more cooler in heat disipation on windows 8 which means it performs as it meant to be due to the new cpu scheduler as explained, Windows 8 understands AMDs CMT design and works the cpu different to HT.

 

[bononos]

Dangerous question on a very Intel minded forum. Here we have a saying: shooting the ball in an open goal(from socker). For me its obvious: I prefer my 8350 over my 3770K. But thats personal:biggrin:

Thats not true at all. If anything this forum was and arguably still is tilted towards favouring AMD.

 

[bononos]

Good and valid points, http://openbenchmarking.org/ is a great & reliable source for Linux benchmarking, you should take into account although that latest 64bit linux distros make good use of AMDs FX architecture due to the latest GCC compilers and overall the linux kernel, scheduler and memory management is superior to Windows. In windows software landscape things are more gimped and backwards compared to speedy & optimized linux, with the FX 8350 appearing on par with Core i5s wich is plain wrong, its a better chip for heavier workloads and multitasking.

I think its more of question of the type of benchmarking apps rather than the supposedly gimped scheduling of windows. Even under windows, code compiling benchmarks are winners for BD/Piledrivers.

 

[bononos]

Therefore the amazing performance i'm getting out of this FX, i could see a difference vs W7 but i thought it was due to the new install.

Have any benchmarks from a reliable review site that show improved performance under win 8?

After hearing things like amazing performance from the new scheduler I'd like to know too.

 

[bgt]

Thats not true at all. If anything this forum was and arguably still is tilted towards favouring AMD.

Sorry, I don't have the impression its favouring AMD at all. But it should not favour any brand anyway. It does not matter what brand you have as long as the CPU type suits your need. Thats why I have the 3770K and FX8350 to see what suits me best for my needs. And when the 4770K arrives....I will buy it to see if thats even better. As does the Steamroller once it arrives.

 

[bgt]

Windows 8 has the best cpu scheduler for FX, it packs threads to close modules/cores not like HT which parks half the modules, it uses Turbo Core more effectively, the cpu runs smoother and colder due to more aggresive and efficient scheduling and power optimizations from the OS.

Ahh..thats why my FX is so well performing on Win 8. I have both a Win7SSD and a Win8SSD drive in my PC and can start on either system. But its true....win8 runs much better than win7 on my FX.
I need a win7 system to help my clients with system related questions but for myself...never use 7 anymore. Its just a lesser experience with a FX.

 

[grimpr]

I think its more of question of the type of benchmarking apps rather than the supposedly gimped scheduling of windows. Even under windows, code compiling benchmarks are winners for BD/Piledrivers.

Thats a heavy i/o bound workload too, the extra threads of the i7 and the FX really help in speeding things up when loading or saving in parallel, everybody will tell you that the i7 and the FX loads Windows & Linux faster, games load faster etc, this alone makes for a snappier system and user experience.

 

[R0H1T]

Ahh..thats why my FX is so well performing on Win 8. I have both a Win7SSD and a Win8SSD drive in my PC and can start on either system. But its true....win8 runs much better than win7 on my FX.
I need a win7 system to help my clients with system related questions but for myself...never use 7 anymore. Its just a lesser experience with a FX.

That's because these patches were already a part of win8 when it was launched not to mention the scheduler was further improved upon & the added performance gains of piledriver just make so much more of a difference for AMD's sake that is ~
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2646060
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2645594

 

[beginner99]

Myself and an electrical engineer pal installed a large solar array on my roof last year that provides the house with power, and occasionally feeds to the grid.

So? Power costs. if you feed less to the grid you lose the money you would have gotten from that (assuming that is the case were you live) and due to the fact that solar is a lot more expensive the power consumption difference gets more important.

 

[Idontcare]

Ahh..thats why my FX is so well performing on Win 8. I have both a Win7SSD and a Win8SSD drive in my PC and can start on either system. But its true....win8 runs much better than win7 on my FX.
I need a win7 system to help my clients with system related questions but for myself...never use 7 anymore. Its just a lesser experience with a FX.

I'm not surprised either. I think Win8 runs better than Win7 on either CMT or HT based processors. I ntoiced Win8 runs really nicely on my 3770k too. Haven't installed it on my FX8350 but I'm glad to hear from the sounds of it I will see a nice improvement on the desktop PC there as well.

 

[bgt]

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2646060
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2645594

Thanx for the info😉

 

[grimpr]

This is the standard Intel HT behavior of the Windows 7 cpu scheduler on the FX, all modules are active and not power gated with light and medium workloads using all available module resources, turbo core doesnt kick in aggresivelly and the chips just wastes power, AMDs power gating works on the module level not on the integer cores.

 

[grimpr]

On Windows 8, the new cpu scheduler puts the typical workloads on the 1st two modules of the chip, power gates the others, turbo core kicks in more aggresively and the chip runs more cooler. Totally different behavior to Windows 7 and Linux and works very fast too between the cores and modules.

edited image*

 

[Phynaz]

Doesn't IDC's testing show that you get better performance on FX loading modules last?

 

[R0H1T]

Doesn't IDC's testing show that you get better performance on FX loading modules last?

Perhaps, but what can be seen above is that win8 scheduler doesn't arbitrarily distribute load across FX cores/modules, unlike win7, thereby utilizing the CPU in a better & more efficient way at the OS level. However app specific performance is different & partly dependent on how efficiently the software has been coded but with these common denominators(FX & apps) the win8 OS will undoubtedly give better performance than win7 !

 

[frozentundra123456]

I guess you wouldn't take the word of a fellow user would you 😛People have serious trust issues these days, WMD's anyone ?

It is not a trust issue at all. I work in research and the only way we can reach a conclusion is with statistically significant data. Theoretical expectations or undocumented personal feelings and observations are not sufficient.

 

[R0H1T]

It is not a trust issue at all. I work in research and the only way we can reach a conclusion is with statistically significant data. Theoretical expectations or undocumented personal feelings and observations are not sufficient.

The obvious problem here is that no "reputed" site has done this till now, I wonder if metro was too complex of an exorcise for those reviewers :hmm:

 

[Idontcare]

I've got an old APC SmartUPS that I've had for over a decade now, so the threat of power loss doesn't concern me. Nor am I overly concerned about power consumption. Myself and an electrical engineer pal installed a large solar array on my roof last year that provides the house with power, and occasionally feeds to the grid. I sincerely doubt going Intel will provide any kind of noticeable difference over the course of the year.

If you've gone to all the trouble of investing in solar panels, which do depreciate and do not have an infinite lifespan themselves, then surely you've gone to all the trouble of computing NPV and NFV costs for your electricity, as well as opportunity costs/profits for selling surpluses back to the utility company.

I mention this because there is a difference between the FX-8350 vs an Intel 3570K (or 3770K), a big difference that can cost upwards of $200 a year depending on your load rates, OC'ed clockspeeds, and utility rates for selling surpluses or buying deficits from the power company and given your specific situation you are the last person I would think would be willing to go to the up-front expense of installing solar cells (NPV vs NFV while amortizing that install cost).

http://www.electricity-usage.com/El...ice=&Watts=300&CostPerKWH=0.10&HoursPerDay=24

 

[Idontcare]

The obvious problem here is that no "reputed" site has done this till now, I wonder if metro was too complex of an exorcise for those reviewers :hmm:

Why is it that every time some new mythical performance advantage is fabricated out of thin-air for the benefit of AMD that it also must come with some level of implied collusion or conspiracy to keep the info out of the public's hands?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=34778960&postcount=39

 

[grimpr]

The obvious problem here is that no "reputed" site has done this till now, I wonder if metro was too complex of an exorcise for those reviewers :hmm:

Toms did an review of 8150 on Windows 8 and it proves the more aggresive turbo core on single threaded programs due to the new scheduler.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-8-bulldozer-performance,3289-5.html

 

[IntoxicatedPuma]

Intel E3 1230 v2, i7 performance for almost $100 less. Throw in a B75 or H77 hard drive and for $300 you have a combo that's pretty powerful without robbing a bank.

 

[R0H1T]

Why is it that every time some new mythical performance advantage is fabricated out of thin-air for the benefit of AMD that it also must come with some level of implied collusion or conspiracy to keep the info out of the public's hands?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=34778960&postcount=39

There is no conspiracy here, I dunno how you got that impression from my post, rather a mild remark as to why reviewers the world over skipped win8 !

I personally mailed a few of'em but apparently its(metro perhaps) too much of a hassle !

 

[desura]

I want to, also.

here's why to go AMD IMO

-- it's good enough. An AMD chip will run most all games out there at 60FPS. Meanwhile, the extra cores means that for things like handbrake encoding, there is a noticeable difference.

-- you need a space heater 🙂

-- price. the FX6300 looks comparable to the Core i3 but for slightly less money and with more computing power for encoding tasks.

-- Fusion line in a ITX case. If for whatever reason you want to make an ITX computer, IMO the fusion is pretty much the only viable way to go due to the small size of PSU's (200w) and the cramped space. There are larger ITX PSU's I"m sure but last I checked they were extremely expensive.

If I were building a computer today, I'd probably go with an FX6300. I do have a Core i5 ivy right now fwiw.

 

[R0H1T]

Toms did an review of 8150 on Windows 8 and it proves the more aggresive turbo core on single threaded programs due to the new scheduler.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-8-bulldozer-performance,3289-5.html

I'd expect an even greater diff in performance for piledriver(win7 -> win8) that's why I skipped that review, I've read it last year itself.