Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > Rumor Mill

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-04-11, 08:24 AM   #37
Rollo
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,719
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazz View Post
http://guru3d.com/news/amd-fx-bulldo...l-core-i7990x/

Seems that Bulldozer is around 10% slower in games then gulftown clock for clock so not bad but no sandybridge.
AMD is DOOMEDXorz!

Heh- if those are accurate, that is good news indeed.

(kicks costly 990X, mutters, "Do more!")
__________________
Rig1:
intel 990X + 2 X EVGA 3GB GTX580 + 3 X Acer GD235Hz
3D Vision Surround

Rig 2:
intel 2500K + NVIDIA GTX590 + Dell 3007 WFPHC

[SIZE="1"]NVIDIA Focus Group Member
[B]NVIDIA Focus Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the Members.[/B][/SIZE]
Rollo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-11, 10:28 AM   #38
DiscipleDOC
 
DiscipleDOC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Alabama, Planet Earth
Posts: 5,993
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

This thread has been moved to the proper forum.
DiscipleDOC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-11, 11:25 AM   #39
Dazz
"TOON ARMY!"
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Newcastle, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,138
Send a message via AIM to Dazz
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Saw those numbers last week as well but it's not really informative.
At 2560x1600 with 8x AA, those tests were heavily GPU-limited.

DiRT 2 (that engine in general) likes fast CPUs and in that game, there is quite a large difference.
Not sure about HAWX 2. Usually flight games/sims also need fast CPUs.
I don't see it as a problem, if you have a high end CPU and TWO GTX580's in SLI you are not intending to play at 1024x768!! 2560x1600 with 8x AA would be the rez to play your games. I say that bulldozer is 10% behind due to the CPU limited games thats shows that Gulftown is still slightly faster clock for clock. Rather then 50% like the current K10 CPU's.

Consdering i play all my games at 8x, or 4x FSAA at 1920x1080 on a single GTX 470, at that rez the 580's in SLI is more then capable.
__________________
"Never interupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Processor: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition @ 4.25GHz
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3
Graphics: ASUS ENGTX470
Memory: 4GB Kingston HyperX Blu PC12800 DDR3
Monitor: LG E2260V-PN Full HD WLED 22" & DELL 20" 2005FPW,
Power: Coolermaster Silent Pro Modular 850w PSU
Sound: Logitech Z5500 Digital.
Cooling: Thermalright Silver Arrow.
1st Storage: Kingston V100 SSDNow128GB SSD
2nd Storage: Samsung Spinpoint F1 750GB
Dazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-11, 06:51 PM   #40
Rollo
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,719
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Sure, the scenario itself is very realistic.
But it doesn't give much info about the CPU performance.
Depends on the game. I'd be interested to see where games like Far Cry 2 score at 25X16 8X16X with SLi and a Bulldozer at 3.4 and the 990X at 3.4, as I just posted a 30% difference in scaling with that on the Phenom II vs 2500K.

You're correct in that they may need to add a third GTX580, or games like FC2 that are more CPU sensitive, to illustrate the CPU's actual performance.
__________________
Rig1:
intel 990X + 2 X EVGA 3GB GTX580 + 3 X Acer GD235Hz
3D Vision Surround

Rig 2:
intel 2500K + NVIDIA GTX590 + Dell 3007 WFPHC

[SIZE="1"]NVIDIA Focus Group Member
[B]NVIDIA Focus Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the Members.[/B][/SIZE]
Rollo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-11, 08:51 PM   #41
Viral
Registered User of Women
 
Viral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,523
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

LOL at original article. BS news delivers up the BS once again. Can't believe anyone would swallow that.
__________________
Q9550 w/ Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme | 4GB Team Xtreme Dark 800MHz CL4 | Gigabyte X48-DS5
ASUS Radeon 5870 | 240GB OCZ Vertex 2 | 1TB WD Green Power | BenQ V2400W 24" LCD
Corsair HX-1000w | LG GGW-H20L 6x DL Blu-Ray Burner/HD-DVD Reader | Coolermaster Cosmos S

Acer TravelMate 4002WNLCi: Pentium M 725 @ 1.6GHz | Mobility Radeon 9700/64MB | 2GB DDR400 | 15.4" WXGA
Viral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-11, 01:22 PM   #42
kam03
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 345
Send a message via MSN to kam03
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

BD fail threads are good, it will lessen the blow if it flops lol.
__________________
i7 3770K @ 4.5ghz, Asus P8Z77-V,
8GB 1866Mhz CL9,
Gigabyte 7950,
Crucial M4 128GB,
Seagate 3TB,
Enermax Galaxy 1000W DXX,
Windows 7 Ultimate x64,
NEC LCD2690WUXi,
Yamaha RX-V667 Receiver,
Monitor Audio Vector 5.1
kam03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-11, 09:51 AM   #43
ViN86
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,486
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

http://fudzilla.com/processors/item/...figures-are-in

Quote:
Outpaces Sandy Bridge in early tests
The donanimhaber.com crew has run an engineering sample of AMD’s new FX-8130P through its paces and the results are very positive.

Although the chip fails to keep up with Intel cores in the SuperPI test, as we have already seen, it pulls ahead in other tests. For example, in x264 encoding tests, Bulldozer scores 136fps in the first pass and 45fps in the second pass, whereas the Core i7 2600K manages 100fps and 36fps respectively.

Bulldozer manages to stay ahead in 3Dmark 11 tests as well. It scores P6250, while the 2600K hovers around the 6000 mark. In Cinebench R10 AMD’s new flagship pulls off a score of 24434 and outpaces the 2600K, but it ends up somewhat slower than the Core i7 990X.

Compared to the Thuban-based Phenom II X6 1100T, Bulldozer ends up about 50 percent faster in most tests, which is equally impressive.

It’s still too early to render a verdict, but at this point Bulldozer looks like a winner, especially if AMD manages to keep the price around the rumoured $320 mark. With Brazos and Llano doing fine, Bulldozer could be the last piece of the puzzle that turns things around for AMD in the high end. For the first time in years, AMD will truly have a competitive line up across its product range.
Review Link: http://www.donanimhaber.com/islemci/...-sonuclari.htm
ViN86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-11, 12:43 PM   #44
ViN86
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,486
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Since when is the $300 segment highend?

When a "8 Core" CPU doesn't beat an older 6 Core CPU in a typical multi-threaded test like Cinebench, it's not a winner in my book.
I agree $300 isn't highend. But AMD has been about price to performance ratio since Conroe topped Athlon64. It's AMD's highend chip.

I mean it really depends on what you're doing. For us gamers, you're not going to notice much difference between Intel and AMD chips.
ViN86 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 07-11-11, 05:19 PM   #45
Dazz
"TOON ARMY!"
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Newcastle, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,138
Send a message via AIM to Dazz
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

You need to think of Bulldozer as a 4C 8T (4 module), as it's not a true 8 core CPU the 2nd core runs at most 80% efficent but as it's not 100% it's not a true core. After all Intels 4C 8T the hyper treading is 30% efficent. So do you expect a 6C 12T CPU to be outpaced by a 4C 8T CPU which also has a higher clock speed? Then again the 2600K is also running 200MHz faster per core in them benchmarks too which comes to performing close to each other in muti treaded applications.
__________________
"Never interupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Processor: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition @ 4.25GHz
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3
Graphics: ASUS ENGTX470
Memory: 4GB Kingston HyperX Blu PC12800 DDR3
Monitor: LG E2260V-PN Full HD WLED 22" & DELL 20" 2005FPW,
Power: Coolermaster Silent Pro Modular 850w PSU
Sound: Logitech Z5500 Digital.
Cooling: Thermalright Silver Arrow.
1st Storage: Kingston V100 SSDNow128GB SSD
2nd Storage: Samsung Spinpoint F1 750GB
Dazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-11, 06:34 PM   #46
Viral
Registered User of Women
 
Viral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,523
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazz View Post
You need to think of Bulldozer as a 4C 8T (4 module), as it's not a true 8 core CPU the 2nd core runs at most 80% efficent but as it's not 100% it's not a true core. After all Intels 4C 8T the hyper treading is 30% efficent. So do you expect a 6C 12T CPU to be outpaced by a 4C 8T CPU which also has a higher clock speed? Then again the 2600K is also running 200MHz faster per core in them benchmarks too which comes to performing close to each other in muti treaded applications.
I don't think it's right to look at it like that at all. Just because Bulldozer shares some parts of a core between two integer cores does not make it like a 4C 8T chip. Yes it will likely have lower IPC in some instances that it would if this method was not undertaken but that doesn't mean it's not an 8C 8T chip.

IMO, the problem here is clock speed. 3.2GHz isn't all that fast considering all the changes they made to increase clock speed such as lengthening the pipeline. For Bulldozer to outpace Thuban by 50% while only having 33% more cores is pretty good considering. If they launch at faster clock speeds it will be even better.
__________________
Q9550 w/ Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme | 4GB Team Xtreme Dark 800MHz CL4 | Gigabyte X48-DS5
ASUS Radeon 5870 | 240GB OCZ Vertex 2 | 1TB WD Green Power | BenQ V2400W 24" LCD
Corsair HX-1000w | LG GGW-H20L 6x DL Blu-Ray Burner/HD-DVD Reader | Coolermaster Cosmos S

Acer TravelMate 4002WNLCi: Pentium M 725 @ 1.6GHz | Mobility Radeon 9700/64MB | 2GB DDR400 | 15.4" WXGA
Viral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-11, 11:58 PM   #47
Roadhog
Resident Alien
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,776
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

It's an ES chip which are severely gimped by AMD.
Roadhog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-11, 05:15 AM   #48
Viral
Registered User of Women
 
Viral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,523
Default Re: Sigh- Bulldozer fail prediction from AMD staff

Yes that too, could have a lower NB/L3 clock or crippled in many other ways as AMD ES chips tradtionally have been.

Can't believe some people on other sites think the 186w TDP is legit, too :P
__________________
Q9550 w/ Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme | 4GB Team Xtreme Dark 800MHz CL4 | Gigabyte X48-DS5
ASUS Radeon 5870 | 240GB OCZ Vertex 2 | 1TB WD Green Power | BenQ V2400W 24" LCD
Corsair HX-1000w | LG GGW-H20L 6x DL Blu-Ray Burner/HD-DVD Reader | Coolermaster Cosmos S

Acer TravelMate 4002WNLCi: Pentium M 725 @ 1.6GHz | Mobility Radeon 9700/64MB | 2GB DDR400 | 15.4" WXGA
Viral is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.