Monday, July 11th 2011
AMD FX-8130P Processor Benchmarks Surface
Here is a tasty scoop of benchmark results purported to be those of the AMD FX-8130P, the next high-end processor from the green team. The FX-8130P was paired with Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 motherboard and 4 GB of dual-channel Kingston HyperX DDR3-2000 MHz memory running at DDR3-1866 MHz. A GeForce GTX 580 handled the graphics department. The chip was clocked at 3.20 GHz (16 x 200 MHz). Testing began with benchmarks that aren't very multi-core intensive, such as Super Pi 1M, where the chip clocked in at 19.5 seconds; AIDA64 Cache and Memory benchmark, where L1 cache seems to be extremely fast, while L2, L3, and memory performance is a slight improvement over the last generation of Phenom II processors.
Moving on to multi-threaded tests, Fritz Chess yielded a speed-up of over 29.5X over the set standard, with 14,197 kilonodes per second. x264 benchmark encoded first pass at roughly 136 fps, with roughly 45 fps in the second pass. The system scored 3045 points in PCMark7, and P6265 in 3DMark11 (performance preset). The results show that this chip will be highly competitive with Intel's LGA1155 Sandy Bridge quad-core chips, but as usual, we ask you to take the data with a pinch of salt.
Source:
DonanimHaber
317 Comments on AMD FX-8130P Processor Benchmarks Surface
Anyway, check out that TDP! 186W is that for real or just listed since its an es chip?
If it is dead on with SB and an equal price or less it is really all the more people should have expected.
3.2GHz Zambezi 8130P ES vs 3.4GHz Sandy Bridge-P1 i7 2600K
Zambezi wins
Fudzilla offers us a comparison to the i7 2600K
In reality, in order to be competitive BD should be anything from 25% to 50% faster than SB so as to differentiate from SB or Intel can always lower the price. And of course once SB-E and Ivy launch is game over once again. Insert coin.
And I'm not talking about who has the fastest cpu. Because I believe that is reserved for LGA2011, and I'm still not sure AMD can catch up with that.
The Bulldozer was 29.58 times as fast as a Pentium III 1GHz.
My Phenom II is 19.52 times as fast.
29.58/8 = 3.6975 @ 3.2GHz
19.52/4 = 4.88 @ 4GHz, or 4.88*3.2/4 = 3.904 (theoretical) if I was running at the same 3.2GHz clock.
9370 kilonodes per second on my Phenom, BTW.
So at least on this example, Bulldozer @ 3.2GHz is slower than Phenom II @ 3.2GHz per core.
Anybody with a Sandy Bridge setup want to run the benchmark? I ran it over LogMeIn from work and it took all of a minute, tops. Phenom II gets clobbered pretty regularly by Sandy Bridge. I have to think an i7 2600K would clobber both of these results on a per-core basis, though my guess is the extra 4 cores for Bulldozer will give it an edge overall.
Logical processors found: 8
Used: 8
edit: I do enough that can use multiple cores that I'll still upgrade to BD and try overclocking right around release. I already replaced my K9A2-CF (DDR2 board) with an M5A97 EVO based entirely on TechPowerUp's review of the board. I'm in this for the long haul. :D
The leaked AMD pricing seemed to suggest that the AMD Bulldozer FX 8130P (unlocked high-end) was expected to compete with the Core i7 2600k given its price equivalent (not undercut but equivalent).
Matching performance and price of a competitor is no small feat I’m sure but Bulldozer is somewhat late to the party and not cheaper. Intel managed to mangle Sandy bridge P67 chipset launch, recover from it and even launch a second chipset (Z68) all before AMD could come to market with Bulldozer.
Also keep in mind that Intel can simply drop prices on the current Sandy Bridge LGA1155 Core i7 2600k and launch a faster Core i7 (2700k !?!) at the same ~$320 price point thus marginalizing Bulldozers planned launch price / performance ratio.
I’m starting to think Intel delayed Sandy Bridge-E because they don’t want to compete with themselves at that performance level. After all Sandy Bridge-E would have to be significantly faster to justify its existence and Sandy Bridge-E CPU prices would start at ~about $300.
and for those saying Zambezi has weak core to core performance
It's a B1 Engineer Sample
Engineer Samples are to test functionality
B1 Engineer Sample =/= "B2" Consumer/Reviewer Sample
In performance
The scores will indeed go up from now to then when it releases