• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Vishera spotted running at 5GHz

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
AtenRa said:
The 5GHz is supposed to be doable with Water Cooling with all 8 CORES when the 8GHz was only possible with LN2 using only a single Module.
Click to expand...

Your point being. The orginal article. Did it say at 8 ghz only 1 core . I don't recall that it did . I was going to bring that up in my post but I hammer pretty hard so I slacked off. Surprizing to me that you pointed this FACT out. but that was in fact my point . trusting amd is not wise . look at its history reverse engineer intels cpu. buy ati and than have to sell its fabs. pay 5+ billion for ati when amd is now valued at 2.5 billion . amd is a major screw up of biblical size.
 
Eventhough I own a Bulldozer 8150 (along with 2 2500k rigs see below) I have and will continue to criticize AMD's circus-like stunt in claiming to overclock to Bulldozer to a Guiness world record, Dear Lord, they disabled 3 or the 4 modules, blasted the remaining module (2 cores) with Uber Nitrogen and excessive voltage long enough to set a record then shut it down. What really disturbs me is that most likely the "powers to be" knew the Bulldozer wasn't up to the SandyBridge chips little lone the the upcoming Ivy Bridgew chips, now out, but made a conscious decision to stage this "demonstration" to divert attention from the upcoming negative reviews of the 8150.

If only they had been honest and told the gaming community that the chip was a first generation stab at a new processor that might not be the fastest but gave the "average" Joe the ability to run 8 cores for a reasonable price. Oh well hindsight IS 20-20.

Ironically, I'm typing this on the 8150 rig which I'm starting to enjoy just as much as my 2500k rigs. Let's be honest, Vishera or whatever the name is won't be a big bump over Bulldozer. It won't be until Steamroller that we might see some serious improvement, that is if the last few days stock market "trashing" of AMD doesn't cause it to totally scuttle the Steamroller.:colbert:
 
Last edited:
tweakboy said:
How much is that quad socket mobo ,, 3k 4k or more ?
Click to expand...

lol 3k to 4k on a quad socket system with the amount of ram he has in it.

I think you should go back and read his other post or talk to someone actually does purchasing on a enterprise level.

I was going to guess 20k minimum.

Maybe 3k to 4k just for the all the processors. Add in RAM, motherboard, Backup power systems, Hard drives, Enterprise level support you won't be talking to someone in india when you need support from dell on this server.
 
Last edited:
It was Cinebench R13 and FX8350 @ 5GHz

41345feb_1249541-amd-cpu-vishera-et-virgo-idf-2012-2.jpeg


vishera_oc_cinebench0qqqj.jpg
 
The per core performance is still much worse than SB, this sucks.

EDIT - Maybe not, it says 4c/8t? Is that just the mdular cores or is it a type of HT? If its HT then AMD has an absolute winner.
 
Since it is completely useless to compare results between different versions of Cinebench, are there any results with other processors for this new version, so we can actually get some kind of idea what these numbers mean?
 
Atreidin said:
Since it is completely useless to compare results between different versions of Cinebench, are there any results with other processors for this new version, so we can actually get some kind of idea what these numbers mean?
Click to expand...


I looked, and was unable to find any info on that release. You can't download it, and no one is posting any benchmarks for other procs anywhere.
 
Smoblikat said:
The per core performance is still much worse than SB, this sucks.

EDIT - Maybe not, it says 4c/8t? Is that just the mdular cores or is it a type of HT? If its HT then AMD has an absolute winner.
Click to expand...

Windows sees the modules as hyperthreaded cores now. Piledriver is a slightly tweaked Bulldozer.
 
Atreidin said:
Since it is completely useless to compare results between different versions of Cinebench, are there any results with other processors for this new version, so we can actually get some kind of idea what these numbers mean?
Click to expand...
Better yet, release the new cinebench software version 13 and i'll run it on my 8150 @ 4.5 Ghz that scored 7.41Pts on Cinebench 11.5.😉
 
Thanks to smartidiot89 from XS we know that new engine is MUCH faster on FX8xxx series than on older X6 Thubans:
http://www.c4dcafe.com/ipb/topic/68439-amd-fx-610062008xxx-rendering-times-in-c4d-r13/#entry502532

FX render time = 2:51= 171 s.
Ph X6 render time = 4:00 = 240 s.
Click to expand...
FX8120 was running at 4.5Ghz while X6 at 3.8Ghz.
Difference is huge compared to C11.5 benchmark(an old engine comparison).

Note that this is an actual work being done by the render engine instead of generic benchmark. Maybe the new Cinebench version won't show as dramatic difference as the actual rendering would 😉 (like in the example above).
 
Pilum said:
Intel started shipping 4.4 GHz Xeons last spring. And of course IBM shipped 4+ GHz POWER6 five years ago. But hey, nice that AMD is finally catching up.
Click to expand...

that is so not fair...

4ghz 5 yrs ago is not 4ghz today.

Infact any modern processor now at 4ghz would spin circles arround any of my conroe's which did 4ghz without even breaking a sweat and asking it why its struggling.
 
aigomorla said:
that is so not fair...

4ghz 5 yrs ago is not 4ghz today.

Infact any modern processor now at 4ghz would spin circles arround any of my conroe's which did 4ghz without even breaking a sweat and asking it why its struggling.
Click to expand...

Bulldozer would try to do circles and it would tip over at that speed.:whiste:
 
Haserath said:
Bulldozer would try to do circles and it would tip over at that speed.:whiste:
Click to expand...
Haserath: Funny but not true. Look at my sig below. I make no bones about myt opinion that the Intel SB/IB chips are faster than the Bulldozer BUT the 8150 when OC to the SOLID 4.533 GHZ speed (21 x 216 1.4 v) I have it at runs smooth and fast and oh yes hasn't tripped once.😎 If you game played on rigs 1,2 or 3 below you won't see a notieceable difference. ONLY when you run benchmarks do you see a difference.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top