I do admire AMD for trying something new in terms of innovation, but shit who was sleeping on the job? Can this be the reason why they canned Dirk Meyer? I think somebody else asked this question.

So I have the ASUS Crosshair V Formula, bought it for real cheap, on sale. After seeing all the reviews, I plan on waiting until FX prices hit super low for it to be worth an upgrade from my system right now.

Is there any reviews where they JACK UP the NB clock speed super high? Can Bulldozer benefit from this, seeing how the CPU increase does nothing :shadedshu

New CEO kicking someone in the nuts?

Am I missing something here? Don't you think a million dollar company and the only competing company for intel would have ran some tests and seen the performance? I think so too! So either AMD is F***ing retarted or they had a plan. I'm going with the second since as someone already stated earlier the benchmarks are not from retail samples. I also will reiterate my point. These benchmarks are useless without the final BIOS and program updates for the final release of the cpu. Even Windows has an update comming out for it. So before I dig my self too deep of a hole I ask again. Am I missing something here?:confused:

Super XPI do admire AMD for trying something new in terms of innovation, but shit who was sleeping on the job? Can this be the reason why they canned Dirk Meyer? I think somebody else asked this question.

So I have the ASUS Crosshair V Formula, bought it for real cheap, on sale. After seeing all the reviews, I plan on waiting until FX prices hit super low for it to be worth an upgrade from my system right now.

Is there any reviews where they JACK UP the NB clock speed super high? Can Bulldozer benefit from this, seeing how the CPU increase does nothing :shadedshu

Bought a Gigabyte 990FX-UD3 board in anticipation of Bulldozer, im staying with the platfrom but im going to wait for either the second generation or Bulldozer or i'll wait and see if they release some more first gen Bulldozer chips that actually perform decently(I'm hearing the FX 8170).

Until then im just gonna grab a GTX 570 and keep my X6 1055T.

Here is a great QUOTE off AnandTech...
. It's no longer a question of whether AMD will return to the days of the Athlon 64, it simply must. Otherwise you can kiss choice goodbye.

O.K. I heard AMD is having a problem with the Scheduler and/or the Crossbar via Bulldozer, it needs more time to tweak the design. How much time I don't know. Can we get confirmation about this new info?

CDdude55Bought a Gigabyte 990FX-UD3 board in anticipation of Bulldozer,

Snap!

Such a waste of money :laugh: £120 for a board that for now does nothing more than my £35 Asrock board.

(Having said that, I have been able to enable turbo boost with my core already at 3.64 so I can 3.9 for single threaded apps and the like)

Turbo core crashed the other board ( only 4+1 phase so couldn't hack it)

I'm still happy with my 775 board and q9550... does everything I need it to do

Da fuck is this www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.739582

pantherx12Snap!

Such a waste of money :laugh: £120 for a board that for now does nothing more than my £35 Asrock board.

Not true

It was cheap (only $150), Bulldozer ready/AM3+, 990FX chipset, Supports both SLI and Crossfire X which your board doesn't do, your board only has a single PCI-e slot that provides full bandwidth, and the other is only x4. Ive got SATA III you've got SATA II only, ive got multiple USB 3.0 ports and USB 2.0 ports, you have only have 4 full USB 2.0 ports and the list goes on.

And the best part is that it doesn't look like your board lol:



Not to be rude, just saying their different in many aspects.

tilldeathAm I missing something here? Don't you think a million dollar company and the only competing company for intel would have ran some tests and seen the performance? I think so too! So either AMD is F***ing retarted or they had a plan. I'm going with the second since as someone already stated earlier the benchmarks are not from retail samples. I also will reiterate my point. These benchmarks are useless without the final BIOS and program updates for the final release of the cpu. Even Windows has an update comming out for it. So before I dig my self too deep of a hole I ask again. Am I missing something here?:confused:

Do you really think AMD would provide samples to those sites for benchmarks if they were any worse than the retail models. Why would they do that? Why would they want the initial reviews to look so bad? They HAD to have known the performance levels. I am pretty sure it indicates exactly the same performance the retail over the counter chips will have.

I wouldn't cling on to the notion that the ES are total shit and the retail chips will magically be way more powerful. AMD would have held off on sending chips if that were the case I would think. Especially with all the hype surrounding this.

ShiBDiBI'm still happy with my 775 board and q9550... does everything I need it to do

Irrelevant to topic?

LAN_deRf_HADa fuck is this www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.739582

Its the "Here buy a board for a good socket and we'll include this $220 paperweight."

CDdude55Not true

It was cheap (only $150), Bulldozer ready/AM3+, 990FX chipset, Supports both SLI and Crossfire X which your board doesn't do, your board only has a single PCI-e slot that provides full bandwidth, and the other is only x4. Ive got SATA III you've got SATA II only, ive got multiple USB 3.0 ports and USB 2.0 ports, you have only have 4 full USB 2.0 ports and the list goes on.

And the best part is that it doesn't look like your board lol:

www.asrock.com/mb/photo/M3A770DE.jpg

Not to be rude, just saying their different in many aspects.

That's why I said for now dude :P

I have NOTHING that takes advantage of the new features :roll:

My computer is a little bit prettier but aside from that it's the same speed as before etc.

u found it

LAN_deRf_HADa f**** is this www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.739582

The secret of how they matched the 980x and how to unlock bd full potential

pantherx12That's why I said for now dude :P

I have NOTHING that takes advantage of the new features :roll:

My computer is a little bit prettier but aside from that it's the same speed as before etc.

Ahh, that's true. Skipped over the ''for now'' part lol. :o

LAN_deRf_HADa fuck is this www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.739582

You guys haven't heard? Intel released a socket bracket attachment so you can plug in a Bulldozer into an Intel mobo and call it a day.

Newegg.com cannot guarantee the compatibility of Combo items.

No really, Hardocp did a Clock for Clock gaming benchmark(s) and it seems Bulldozer looked like it was on par with Intel CPU's but only in high res gaming. Didn't show the Phenom II's performance though.
LINK:
hardocp.com/article/2011/10/11/amd_bulldozer_fx8150_gameplay_performance_review/1

Benchmarkreviews
benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=831&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=16

As I showed in the single-core section, the performance of a Bulldozer core is not significantly better than the performance of the older AMD Thuban core, and both are far behind a Sandy Bridge core, so AMD's banking on keeping all eight cores filled to get the best performance. And indeed the FX-8150 can return excellent performance in these cases, although the performance improvement is less than what you might expect given the extra cores. And if software vendors upgrade their products to use the new instructions AMD has integrated into Bulldozer, its performance will improve more.

AMD claims the Windows 7 thread scheduler doesn't make the best use of Bulldozer's architecture, and says that we can expect a 10-15% performance improvement when Windows 8 ships. Also, Bulldozer is just the first in a line of new processors: in the coming years we'll see Piledriver (2012), Steamroller (2013) and Excavator (2014), each of which AMD says will bring improvements in performance-per-watt and instructions-per-clock.

ShiBDiBIf only techtard's will die....

How does it performing badly when compared to older chips on the same software make it the softwares fault.. AMD went all in with a 7-2 off suit and their paying for it with awful performance.

I have openly stated that I am probably going Intel next build.
I am not an AMD fanboy, I am just pointing out some facts.
This product did suffer from a killer overdose of Hype. The fanbois were responsible for that.

And, it's not as bad as everyone thinks when you take a step back and look at the big picture. Sure, it's dissapointing that they didn't perform better. Even LOL-worthy in a morbid way how they actually lost IPC compared to their older product.

This CPU was built for heavilly multithreaded apps. Windows 7 and most consumer software and games are not optimized for heavy multithreading. Right now multi-core support is still in its infancy for consumers. That's not being an apologist or fanboy defending their sacred cow. That's a fact.

We likely won't see any improvements until they ditch XP, 32-bit, Xbox360 compatability and all other legacy garbage.

If you weren't so emotionally attached to one companies product, you would see that many of the users here have been pretty objective.

Well, I'll just skip AM3+ and wait for FM2. I survived many years on my C2D E4600 + X1950PRO rig, I think I can wait until next year with my current i3 build.

Hopefully the Bulldozer architecture will be more mature and supported in software by then.

Super XPYou guys haven't heard? Intel released a socket bracket attachment so you can plug in a Bulldozer into an Intel mobo and call it a day.


No really, Hardocp did a Clock for Clock gaming benchmark(s) and it seems Bulldozer looked like it was on par with Intel CPU's but only in high res gaming. Didn't show the Phenom II's performance though.
LINK:
hardocp.com/article/2011/10/11/amd_bulldozer_fx8150_gameplay_performance_review/1

I seen that earlier and thought hmmm Wow I can get a I2500k for $179 F&ck AMD at $279
and I now consider myself a reformed ex AMD FANBOI....not saying I wont buy their products cause I will.....but I'll never wait for em again.

Interesting....

We can hope that Windows 8 and upgraded applications and utilities that use the new FX instructions will make it more competitive, and I'd expect these things right about the time Ivy Bridge become available.

Pros:
+ First consumer eight-core processor
+ Officially supports 4GHz-plus turbo speeds and DDR3-1866 memory
+ An FX system has 42 PCI-E lanes as opposed to the 24 lanes of a Sandy Bridge system
+ 990FX chipset supports NVIDIA SLI. Finally.
+ AMD finally has a 32nm processor with good overclocking

Cons:
- Requires a new Socket AM3+ motherboard
- Single core performance has remained static
- Full performance requires Windows 8 system and applications that use its new instructions
- Overall similar performance to Core i5 2500K, but at a higher price

Ratings:
•Performance: 8.00
•Construction: 9.00
•Overclock: 9.50
•Functionality: 8.50
• Value: 8.00
Final Score: 8.60 out of 10.

benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=831&Itemid=63&limit=1&limitstart=17

TRWOVWell, I'll just skip AM3+ and wait for FM2. I survived many years on my C2D E4600 + X1950PRO rig, I think I can wait until next year with my current i3 build.

Hopefully the Bulldozer architecture will be more mature and supported in software by then.

Wee, a fellow i3 2100 user :D

*meanwhile, searches for some AMD Athlon64 FX vs Pentium 4 Extreme Edition tests >_>

CDdude55Meanwhile at Intel:

i.imgur.com/vNsgy.jpg

So much yummy fail thanks AMD you made my day.:toast:

It appears I will go with an AM3 setup instead of Bulldozer. What a shame :(

I think at this point AMD is just glad they are phasing them out at the end of 2012.

AMD seems satisfied to be second best. BUlldozer CPUs will drop in price in the next couple of months, making them more attractive to some people.