Thursday, January 13th 2011

Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II

Here, take some salt. AMD reportedly gave out performance figures in a presentation to its partners, performance figures seen by DonanimHaber. It is reported that an 8-core processor based on the "Bulldozer" high-performance CPU architecture is pitched by its makers to have 50% higher performance than existing processors such as the Core i7 950 (4 cores, 8 threads), and Phenom II X6 1100T (6 cores). Very little is known about the processor, including at what clock speed the processor was running at, much less what other components were driving the test machine.

Taking this information into account, the said Bulldozer based processor should synthetically even outperform Core i7 980X six-core, Intel's fastest desktop processor in the market. Built from ground-up, the Bulldozer architecture focuses on greater inter-core communication and reconfigured ALU/FPU to achieve higher instructions per clock cycle (IPC) compared to the previous generation K10.5, on which its current Phenom II series processors are based. The processor is backed by new 9-series core logic, and a new AM3+ socket. AMD is expected to unveil this platform a little later this year.Source: DonanimHaber
Add your own comment

424 Comments on Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II

#1
garyinhere
by: Paulieg
This. I have as much love/hate for AMD as I do for Intel. I just know that Intel has given me more to be excited about over the last several years. Marketing BS is just that, BS. I really don't understand any of the fanboy mentality or allegiance to any one company. Make decisions based on performance and your own needs, then spend your money accordingly.
Lol the only two bringing up fanboys is staff.:(
Posted on Reply
#2
kirtar
Competition drives innovation. 'nuff said
Posted on Reply
#3
Makaveli
by: garyinhere
Lol the only two bringing up fanboys is staff.:(
What was wrong with his post?

It seems pretty straight forward his loyalty is to his wallet not to a brand.
Posted on Reply
#4
garyinhere
by: Makaveli
What was wrong with his post?

It seems pretty straight forward his loyalty is to his wallet not to a brand.
Not saying the posts were attacking but if you mention a divorce to a women it's always a topic of conversation. You open a can of worms so to speak. Inviting flame wars!
Posted on Reply
#5
TheMailMan78
Big Member
I wonder if Bulldozer with its 50% increase in power will be able to keep threads on topic.
Posted on Reply
#6
Makaveli
I was expecting this thread to go off road. There are no concrete numbers to discuss just speculation.

As the news editors first post says take it with a grain of salt.

To your point I believe AMd will match intel's SB when it comes to watts used at idle and load with BD as its a complete new design.

What i'm more curious about is the chipsets. i've been less than impressed with most of the AM3 boards except for the ones coming close to the $250 price range.

For you guys with AMD systems how do you rate the boards and what improvements would you like to see if any in AM3+ ?
Posted on Reply
#7
Noy
by: newtekie1
It is laughable that AMD would even make a big deal out of this and not just hold their heads down in shame.
by: JF-AMD
OK, first off, let me start by saying that we don't comment on speculation. If people want to speculate on this, have at it. This is not an AMD article and I have no idea who this guy is.

We are in the middle of quiet period so you would never see AMD making a performance statement. I have no idea about the validity of the article because, amongst other things, I don't speak turkish.

To date the only performance statement we have made is around the server throughput of Bulldozer.
To be fair it doesn't look like they did. Though I agree.
Posted on Reply
#8
JF-AMD
AMD Rep (Server)
Yes, they did not but plenty of people are making that connection.
Posted on Reply
#9
inferKNOX
Wow, seeing the conversation bounce from AMD to Intel so much has gotten my brain feeling like a tennis ball in a Nadal-Federer match.
I think I'll just wait and hope that AMD not only brings out what we've been waiting for, for so long, but learns to properly market and manage themselves, and start stomping this constant over-hype rumours that leave us disappointed with the real product at the end of it all.:shadedshu

At the end of it all, this just seems like "leaked" hype to soften the blow to the stocks that losing Dirk Meyer seems to be causing, similar to what the announced Preliminary Fourth Quarter 2010 Results are no-doubt meant to do.
Posted on Reply
#10
JF-AMD
AMD Rep (Server)
I can tell you that it is probably not leaked because they know I will not approve leaks. Since we share a die they would need to ask me first
Posted on Reply
#12
KainXS
50% faster than the i7 950

and . . . . . .
Posted on Reply
#13
WitaminC
didnt read all pages, but what i have read in few articles is, that 50% server processor increase is compared to voltages that uses 12 cores Magny-Cours Opteron. no1 cares about i7, what u are all talking about, atleast amd didnt even compare new one to i7 (what all of u are doing)...

the basic difference from nowadays cpu's are that cores wont share only L2 and L3, its like they will be paired and both of them will be able to do same process and it will be faster than only by sharing L2 and L3 (compearing was - if 2 ppl will eat same piece of food, they will eat it faster than one of them, virtualy (aka sharing cache) they cant eat it both togeather at all)...

AMD thinks that if u place cores on 1 chip , and thats all, than its total waste of resourses, thats why they invented this system, what should be grate...

hope they will release it till i will get enought money for new PC, so i have more options to chose from!

cheerz!
Posted on Reply
#14
LittleLizard
by: TheMailMan78
Shut up with your damn logic. Let us have the fantasy dammit. Your like the guy in the strip club pointing out the fake boobs!
you dont have idea how much i LOLED at that :toast:
Posted on Reply
#15
LittleLizard
by: kirtar
Competition drives innovation. 'nuff said
Yeah, know a couple of examples of that. They're called World Wars
Posted on Reply
#16
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: LittleLizard
Yeah, know a couple of examples of that. They're called World Wars
its called a global conflict now thank you
Posted on Reply
#17
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
off topic posts will now receive 5 points. I REPEAT OFF TOPIC POSTS WILL NOW RECEIVE 5 POINTS!
Posted on Reply
#18
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: kirtar
Competition drives innovation. 'nuff said
Yes, and unfortunately AMD has been reather lacking in the competition front, which is why the industry has been rather lacking in innovation recently.

It is a lack of competition from AMD that allowed Intel to get away with releasing a new socket for no good reason. There is no reason Sandbridge shouldn't have been released on 1156 other than Intel being in the position to make their customers take it up the ass.

Simply matching last generation 6-core processors with next generation 8-cores, IMO, is not being competitive.
Posted on Reply
#19
Makaveli
So basically what intel said about all the internal changes to the SB was BS and they could have released it on 1156?

Not that I disagree but how can anyone outside of intel prove this?
Posted on Reply
#20
jmcslob
I still very much wish AMD would get these chips out by the end of Feb instead of in April or later as by then I may just go back to Intel since I'll be doing a NEW build with TAX money like I dunno most Americans and this is where I'm confused the most as well...

Ive been hearing about Bulldozer since last August and it's still nothing more than a rumor as far as I'm concerned....Intel placed SB on the market at what I consider a great time for the consumer...

Hope someone from AMD is listening...
If these chips aren't out when I have my tax return I'm going Intel and I'm about a 10000% positive a lot of other people will as well....

EDIT: or at the very least AMD needs to have some Reviews out by then...Feb,20ish,2011
Posted on Reply
#21
dna1x
Whoah!

This gave me chills! It's good to see AMD back in the game throwing big shots!
Posted on Reply
#22
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: Makaveli
So basically what intel said about all the internal changes to the SB was BS and they could have released it on 1156?

Not that I disagree but how can anyone outside of intel prove this?
I'm not saying all the internal changes were BS, I'm just saying that if they were pushed a little harder from AMD they probably could have got it to work on 1156.

I mean, I know SandyBridge was a change from Lynnfield, but it wasn't super radical. I mean 775 went from single core netburst based processors to quad-core processor using a completely different architecture, and it went through at least 3 chipset generations. Now we've got Sandybridge being a slight tweaking of Lynnfield, and only one chipset generation, and it needs a completely new socket. I'm not convinced it was necessary other than to get more money out of the pockets of the consumers that have no other option if they want the best performing processors possible.

The lack of competition is the same reason 775 is still on the market filling Intel's low end. That is 2 or 3 generation old tech still competing with AMDs latest offerings...
Posted on Reply
#23
Robert-The-Rambler
I may have just worked a 12 hour day but....

I think I can see it clear while drinking a strong cup of coffee. All that matters is that Bulldozer is simply faster core to core and then it doesn't matter what the hell we are running we will hope the chip is faster than all comparible products in its price range and enables us to do the things that we want to do. For me that is gaming of any type at solid 60 FPS no matter what the single, double, or multithreaded software may be. So I say this loud and clear.

Whether you want to encode videos as fast as possible, game all night long, or stream 50 pornographic videos at the same time @1080p or whatever else it is that floats your boat the proof is in the pudding and it is important not to get excited too prematurely. That may lead to the kind of dissapointment that lasts a bit too long. :p
Posted on Reply
#24
Makaveli
by: Robert-The-Rambler
I think I can see it clear while drinking a strong cup of coffee. All that matters is that Bulldozer is simply faster core to core and then it doesn't matter what the hell we are running we will hope the chip is faster than all comparible products in its price range and enables us to do the things that we want to do. For me that is gaming of any type at solid 60 FPS no matter what the single, double, or multithreaded software may be. So I say this loud and clear.

Whether you want to encode videos as fast as possible, game all night long, or stream 50 pornographic videos at the same time @1080p or whatever else it is that floats your boat the proof is in the pudding and it is important not to get excited too prematurely. That may lead to the kind of dissapointment that lasts a bit too long. :p
lmao that was good dude sounds like something I would say after a long day of work.
:toast:
Posted on Reply
#25
alexsubri


I believe that it will be 50% faster. Just think about it, Intel has been dominating for a while now, I would say since Core 2 Duo came out. That has given AMD enough time to reconstruct their architecture for the new Bulldozer Processor. Just remember who was king of the hill back then (2006) It was the AMD Anthlon64 FX. I believe their flagship processor was around $750-$800. That said AMD has been giving us hints (FX coming back, 50% Rumor, APU, etc...) so it's safe to say that AMD know's what they are doing and will bounce back. My only concern is paying $700-$800 for their enthusiast processor. I wouldn't mind playing $500, but I can pipe dream :) ...I wouldn't be surprised if Bulldozer's Enthusiast chip is factory clocked at 3.8-4.0 ghz
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment