Official AMD FX Bulldozer review thread!

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

Nobody optimised for Quad-core CPUs 5 years ago so meh, it takes time and stop being an idiot and saying "Beefdozer".

My point was that it does not "take time", most apps and games still don't make use of the quad and hex core CPUs we've have for years.

Why would I give the Bulldozer the respect of calling it by it's proper name when it insults me and everyone else by costing more than it's predecessor and performing worse?

[K007]

Originally Posted by Rollo

1. I said that his results were pointless because they don't test the CPU, much like running a game at 640X480 would not test modern GPUs.

2. Look at what happens when you test with two 6970s, as I suggested:

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/amds-...-arrives/all/1

Notice how in the games where they use a single 6970 the Beefdozer, i7s, Phenom IIs mysteriously score exactly the same? Then look at the CF benches next to them and the Beefdozer falls flat on it's face, just like it did in all the reviews that were not done by Linus where they didn't use settings that take the CPU out of the equation.

If I'm a "class A troll" this forum should hope more like me post here. You posted a meaningless and misleading (for gamers) review of Beefdozer, I pointed out why it's meaningless and misleading and then backed my argument with a link to an independent website corroborating my position.

thank god everyone is using xfire/sli system

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by K007

thank god everyone is using xfire/sli system

You're still avoiding the point.

The Beefdozer gets slaughtered by i7 at 16X10 gaming as well:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu..._10.html#sect0

Not everyone runs 1080P gaming with AA either.

So let's recap:

You think the Beefdozer is a fine value because at a setting that mainly tests the GPU by taking the Beefdozer out of the equation it performs about the same as a 2500K. You leave out that a cheaper Phenom II would do the same.

I show people that at single GPU settings that let the CPU be part of the equation, or multiple GPU situations that do the same, the Beefdozer is an inferior solution.

There's no reason for anyone to buy Bulldozers K7. Phenom IIs are cheaper and perform better. i7s are comparably priced and perform a LOT better. I'm not even going to go into the heat and power, or cache issues.

Friends don't let friends buy Beefdozers, and 99% of the independent reviews across the web confirm this. Only AMD apologists are frantically scouring the web looking for ways to obscure what is pretty obvious to the rest of the world.

What's next?

"The Bulldozer is a big chip and will be a superior paperweight when you're done with it!"

[K007]

Originally Posted by Rollo

You're still avoiding the point.

The Beefdozer gets slaughtered by i7 at 16X10 gaming as well:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu..._10.html#sect0

Not everyone runs 1080P gaming with AA either.

So let's recap:

You think the Beefdozer is a fine value because at a setting that mainly tests the GPU by taking the Beefdozer out of the equation it performs about the same as a 2500K. You leave out that a cheaper Phenom II would do the same.

I show people that at single GPU settings that let the CPU be part of the equation, or multiple GPU situations that do the same, the Beefdozer is an inferior solution.

There's no reason for anyone to buy Bulldozers K7. Phenom IIs are cheaper and perform better. i7s are comparably priced and perform a LOT better. I'm not even going to go into the heat and power, or cache issues.

Friends don't let friends buy Beefdozers, and 99% of the independent reviews across the web confirm this. Only AMD apologists are frantically scouring the web looking for ways to obscure what is pretty obvious to the rest of the world.

What's next?

"The Bulldozer is a big chip and will be a superior paperweight when you're done with it!"

[sillyeagle]

Originally Posted by Rollo

If I'm a "class A troll" this forum should hope more like me post here. You posted a meaningless and misleading (for gamers) review of Beefdozer, I pointed out why it's meaningless and misleading and then backed my argument with a link to an independent website corroborating my position.

Why would I give the Bulldozer the respect of calling it by it's proper name when it insults me and everyone else by costing more than it's predecessor and performing worse?

Just because somebody makes knowledgeable posts and insists on pressing a point doesn't mean they can't exibit troll like behaviour. I'm surprised you keep coming back to this thread to repeat all the same stuff again and again. I looked in here and thought "Wow, Rollo is still going on about his displeasure with beefdozer". Being emotionally wrapped around something like a cpu chip to such a negative degree can't be all that healthy. The fact you've been insulted by a cpu says a lot. My advice is don't take it personally. I know the cpu doesn't.

[Rollo]

Sniff...sob...the Beefdozer drank all my beer, had teh sex with my cat, took a dump in my boat, and called me Fatty Fatty Boombalatty.

Heh, mostly I just don't want people to watch Linus and and say "Wowee, I could save five bucks buying a Beefdozer and get the same performance as those SB chips! Lookit those graphs!".

[Viral]

Originally Posted by Rollo

1. I said that his results were pointless because they don't test the CPU, much like running a game at 640X480 would not test modern GPUs.

2. Look at what happens when you test with two 6970s, as I suggested:

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/amds-...-arrives/all/1

Notice how in the games where they use a single 6970 the Beefdozer, i7s, Phenom IIs mysteriously score exactly the same? Then look at the CF benches next to them and the Beefdozer falls flat on it's face, just like it did in all the reviews that were not done by Linus where they didn't use settings that take the CPU out of the equation.

If I'm a "class A troll" this forum should hope more like me post here. You posted a meaningless and misleading (for gamers) review of Beefdozer, I pointed out why it's meaningless and misleading and then backed my argument with a link to an independent website corroborating my position.

Quote from the article,

We also noted the exact same configuration when used with a Phenom II in place of the FX-8150 CPU gives slightly better CrossFire scaling in more than a few games and we have decided to reinstall Windows for our follow up article as AMD was unable to reproduce our CrossFire scaling issues.

Stop trolling.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by Viral

Quote from the article,



Stop trolling.

Oh. AMD says the Beefdozer doesn't have any scaling issues to the reviewer who found them.

I guess I was wrong.....not.

I've tested enough AMD vs intel multi GPU scaling, and seen enough reviews to know they lag behind intel at scaling.

It does not seem implausible to me that the Beefdozer would come in third at CF scaling, as it comes in third at 16X10 and lower res gaming often enough. Why would the weakest CPU have the best scaling?

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...re-review.html

I am fairly disappointed that crossfire scaling while good is severely hampered on the AMD cpu compared to almost every Core I series cpu

[Viral]

Yeah, you're probably right. It's just not a definite based off that one article just yet. Different BIOS's and the like have had a huge effect on BD, so I don't think we can condemn it for multi-GPU use off the one article. Would I recommend someone buying a BD for a multi-GPU system at this time? No, I wouldn't.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by Viral

Yeah, you're probably right. It's just not a definite based off that one article just yet. Different BIOS's and the like have had a huge effect on BD, so I don't think we can condemn it for multi-GPU use off the one article. Would I recommend someone buying a BD for a multi-GPU system at this time? No, I wouldn't.

I've got nothing against AMD and I was actually one of the guys that used them exclusively for years even while this meant having less performance. If I didn't always have multi GPU now I'd probably still have one of the three Phenom/Phenom II motherboard sets I bought.

Just can't look past them releasing a chip that doesn't even surpass their own last gen.

[Muppet]

The performance bracket that AMD's FX-Series desktop processors are delivering, apparently made Intel reconsider the prices of its Core i5 and Core i7 processors, which now seem to retail for higher prices than before Bulldozer was out.

Intel has seen AMD's inability to deliver a hefty competing product as an opportunity to increase the margins of its products.

Using the Geizhals.at price comparison engines, one of the largest of its kind in the world, Bright Side of News analyzed the prices of Intel's processors both before and after the launch of AMD's FX-Series CPUs.

This way, the Website has found out that pricing for the Core i7-2600K rose from €237.62 to €258.29 in the timeframe taken into consideration, which is almost a 9% increase in price.

According to the same publication, the change cannot be explained due to fluctuations in the USD vs. EUR exchange rate as this would have caused the chips to be cheaper by a few percent.

Furthermore, similar price changes were also spotted in other processors that were monitored, including the i5-2500K, and i5-2400, so this appears to be a general trend in the market.

AMD launched the first FX-Series processors based on the Bulldozer architecture the last week, on October 12, but despite being eagerly awaited by many PC enthusiasts the performance of the chips has disappointed.

In most tests that were run by reviewers, AMD's FX-8150, lagged behind the Intel's Core i5-2500K, while a few tests showed it coming behind even a last-gen Phenom II X6 1100T processor.

In order to fix some of these performance issues, AMD could be working on developing a B3 stepping of the Bulldozer architecture.

[nekrosoft13]

Originally Posted by Muppet

Intel has seen AMD's inability to deliver a hefty competing product as an opportunity to increase the margins of its products.

makes sence, sad sad release for AMD.