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
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.
424 Comments on Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II
It seems pretty straight forward his loyalty is to his wallet not to a brand.
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+ ?
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.
and . . . . . .
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!
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.
Not that I disagree but how can anyone outside of intel prove this?
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
This gave me chills! It's good to see AMD back in the game throwing big shots!
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...
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
:toast:
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