Rumour: Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II.

[RyanGreener]

@Nonameo

I think the bulldozer will have better single threaded performance compaired to the phenoms, because of coreboost 2.0 makeing use of spared TPD when some cores are off, and because of the way everything is shared between "cores", thats bound to cost abit in the highly threaded performance, but payoff in the single treaded performance, when a single core has double the resources.

But yeah.. was kinda expecting a real 8 core cpu, to walk all over a 4 core one with HTT to do 8 threads.
Hopefully the Single treaded performance is much better than the phenoms

I heard the Bulldozer design improves IPC, so I don't see why it won't have better single threaded performance compared to the phenoms.

 

[Arkadrel]

It could be, especially when you consider that thuban is already in sandy bridge range when it comes to cinebench. Moreso when you consider the claim "50% more performance with 33% more cores"

8 core bulldozer should be 50% faster than thuban, which it sure doesn't look like in that benchmark.

Yeah thats actually good reasoning, so probably not a 8 core.
So either thats a 6 core bulldozer, or a 4core one is kicking the 2600k's behinde in Cinebench.

I think its most likely its a 6 core version.
Maybe they wanted to see how a 6core bulldozer did compaired to a 6core Phenom II.

 

[nonameo]

Yeah thats actually good reasoning, so probably not a 8 core.
So either thats a 6 core bulldozer, or a 4core one is kicking the 2600k's behinde in Cinebench.

I think its most likely its a 6 core version.
Maybe they wanted to see how a 6core bulldozer did compaired to a 6core Phenom II.

It may be a low clocked 8 core. We don't know anything, the CPU info is blotted out.

edit: scratch that, I think it is pretty safe to say some things that this is NOT a benchmark of.

I think it's pretty safe to say that this is NOT a real benchmark of a flagship production CPU based on bulldozer.
I also think it's pretty safe to say that this isn't a benchmark of a 4 core bulldozer.

 

[Abwx]

It could be, especially when you consider that thuban is already in sandy bridge range when it comes to cinebench. Moreso when you consider the claim "50% more performance with 33% more cores"

8 core bulldozer should be 50% faster than thuban, which it sure doesn't look like in that benchmark.

Should be even more since they also claim 82% more perfs
in the FP area , also with 33% more cores .

A score of about 11 would be more in line with such claims,
Cinebench using surely a lot of FPUs ressources..

 

[purefun1965]

could someone tell me what cpu that is? I would like to comment if i had more information. I know we have 8 core server cpu's. we have run cinebench.

 

[purefun1965]

ok nobody seems to have a comment. I only have server to test. I say based on the cpu's we have and the lack of info from those screenshots. Imho those shots are worthless.

 

[purefun1965]

Do any of you that have samples have the stones to post? I got read the riot act last time I posted and I still have my job! MY main argument was jf-amd and his posts and blog. AMD is allowing him this. I want to know what u have to say! I will share more if someone can tell me what cpu that is.:biggrin:

 

[jimbo75]

I'm guessing it's just another fake. Based on your comments I have to assume the 8 core scores a lot higher, so maybe it's not a fake but a quad or 6 core instead.

What version of cinebench did you run btw?

 

[purefun1965]

I'm guessing it's just another fake. Based on your comments I have to assume the 8 core scores a lot higher, so maybe it's not a fake but a quad or 6 core instead.

I dont want to spread FUD. I have benchmarks. I only have server side not desktop. same version of cinebench

 

[piesquared]

I'm curious about how many PM's you've gotten, by who, and how many you've answered.

 

[jimbo75]

That was 2 different versions though.

The 28k R10 score is almost identical to the 980X, whereas the 7.37 R11.5 score is a bit behind. That's why they don't make much sense to me.

 

[purefun1965]

I'm curious about how many PM's you've gotten, by who, and how many you've answered.

Surprising only one.

 

[jimbo75]

Was me then lol. But I did tell you not to risk your job over it, and I'd still say the same.

 

[purefun1965]

That was 2 different versions though.

The 28k R10 score is almost identical to the 980X, whereas the 7.37 R11.5 score is a bit behind. That's why they don't make much sense to me.

It was 11.5 cinebench. I have benchmarks with that on 3 different os's!

 

[purefun1965]

Was me then lol. But I did tell you not to risk your job over it, and I'd still say the same.

No worries AMD was on the phone.:biggrin:

 

[Elixer]

Do any of you that have samples have the stones to post? I got read the riot act last time I posted and I still have my job! MY main argument was jf-amd and his posts and blog. AMD is allowing him this. I want to know what u have to say! I will share more if someone can tell me what cpu that is.:biggrin:

I got the stones, just no samples... however, I can tell you what CPU that is, it goes by the codename Bulldozer or perhaps valencia!

Now, since I told you what CPU that was, start posting more info, a benchmark a week, for 4 weeks, and then it will be launch day, and then people will post about the next CPU iteration, trinity & terramar with more FUD, for another year or so !

 

[purefun1965]

I got the stones, just no samples... however, I can tell you what CPU that is, it goes by the codename Bulldozer or perhaps valencia!

Now, since I told you what CPU that was, start posting more info, a benchmark a week, for 4 weeks, and then it will be launch day, and then people will post about the next CPU iteration, trinity & terramar with more FUD, for another year or so !

I love humor. seriously I will say those benchmarks are worthless.

 

[Barfo]

Is there a set launch date already? I can't stand all the talk and rumors. I want real benchmarks.

 

[AtenRa]

. Moreso when you consider the claim "50% more performance with 33% more cores"

8 core bulldozer should be 50% faster than thuban, which it sure doesn't look like in that benchmark.

JFAMD clearly said that 4 Module 8 Core Bulldozer will have 50% more THROUGHPUT (not performance) with 33% more cores.

 

[purefun1965]

I am calling you guys that have samples out. Tell me what cpu that is and I will talk.:biggrin:

 

[purefun1965]

Is there a set launch date already? I can't stand all the talk and rumors. I want real benchmarks.

I have them server side.

 

[garagisti]

I am calling you guys that have samples out. Tell me what cpu that is and I will talk.:biggrin:

First of all, let me applaud you for braving it out... amongst hungry sharks for information... to admit you have chippery, fact that they are server parts... should ideally make you more of a target for seeking information. Let me also thank you... for the same reasons...

Secondly, if you would make someone speak, then NDA will not be valid anymore... information in public domain etc. Is that what you're counting on?

Nopes... i do not have the chippery... though i've been trying greedily to get one through the distributor of AMD May get a free chip or two but i guess it would be only post launch.

Last... I know that it was a BD quad...

 

[purefun1965]

Sorry people no takers. Thought so lol!

 

[purefun1965]

I will say this.Amd knows what I am posting.

 

[Elixer]

I will say this.Amd knows what I am posting.

While they may know what you are posting, the next question is, are they actively trying to find out who you are, then doing this behind the scenes...


Then again, you could be JF-AMD as well... :hmm: :ninja: :biggrin: