New Windows 7 Bulldozer Patches Available.

[seronx]

Guys this was a prerelease again you need to wait for the third patch which will increase performance by 400% in workloads that involve quantum unreality

[qubit]

Originally Posted by AphexDreamer

LINK PLEASE! This news is to new for google.
.

You're not seeing a direct link, because being a hotfix, it needs to be specifically requested from Microsoft - you have to click the link at the top of their hotfix page, called "View and request hotfix downloads". You then have to click Yes to an agreement and it then takes you to a page where you can request the hotfix, by giving them your email address and answering the captcha.

What a bother.

Alternatively, just grab it off Regeneration's link, which you've seen.

10% improvement might be quite disappointing, but still, it's better than nothing.

[neko77025]

Originally Posted by trickson

WOW a .1% increase ! Now you can play Crysis

its way more then just .1% 7.9 is max so ... .1 is alot

Originally Posted by NielsCnossen

I got 7.6 with a Phenom II 1055T

you refresh your score any time soon .. as new stuff somes out old stuff goes down.




On another note I am seeing some improvements but nothing big.
have 8150 @ 4400mhz

[JustaTinkerer]

I see 10% in all most nothing...10% must be the "but its up to " number.

I am re-installing and testing as Idid with the 1st part of the patch....novabench was 11% improvement BTW, just on messing about testing.

Lost 13% on PC mark right enough....a re-install and test will tell me more but truth be told it feels no faster, benchmarks mean little in the real world....will bench a few converting files and some winrar....real world stuff....I would do it now but re-installing is a pest

Originally Posted by trickson

I think BD is the Bigger Disappointment .

I get 7.5 on both CPU and RAM I don't see any thing extreme about it .

I get 7.7 on processor ...in fact 7.7 through the board until my SSD gives me 7.3.....raid0 soon right enough.

[JustaTinkerer]

How can you say such things....after my re-install I will be looking @ a 18.7 WEI, its not hard to see how great this patch will be.

If you have 8 cores working flawlessly together is must be better than sliced bread, Tricky me old son this patch is like a cure it all ....just wait, intels benchmarks are blown away by such a patch.

I mean it must be who can argue with hope.

My WEI is stock BTW, @ 5 GHz is gets 7.9, it would be more but AMD didnt want to frighten the intel lads.

PS anyone want to buy a super powerful FX 8120..... its almost as good as intel but without the "being good" part.
Cant argue with patches improving just about nothing, will swap for a cute micro pig and a plate of ham sandwiches.

[mtosev]

Originally Posted by Tweety

Windows CPU score went from 7.4 to 7.5... for free

my i7 930 has the same score and it's almost 2 years old

[erek]

both files @ http://www.ngohq.com/news/21092-amd-...ndows-7-a.html

[JustaTinkerer]

Originally Posted by erek

both files @ http://www.ngohq.com/news/21092-amd-...ndows-7-a.html

Direct links to a download...will thank you as soon as I can.....I have them but its worth thanking you

[mdbrotha03]

Originally Posted by mtosev

my i7 930 has the same score and it's almost 2 years old

I'm getting 7.6.

[qubit]

Heck, I'm getting 9 on my old E8500 and a cheap graphics card!

[HillBeast]

Originally Posted by mtosev

my i7 930 has the same score and it's almost 2 years old

I get 7.6 on my 930 @ 3.66GHz. And it's not 2 years old, we should consider when Nehalem came out (2008), so a 4 year old CPU is still trading blows with a '8-core' CPU. Bulldozer is still a massive fail. It's worse than Netburst.

[seronx]

Originally Posted by HillBeast

I get 7.6 on my 930 @ 3.66GHz. And it's not 2 years old, we should consider when Nehalem came out (2008), so a 4 year old CPU is still trading blows with a '8-core' CPU. Bulldozer is still a massive fail. It's worse than Netburst.

Well you have to understand Bulldozer was going to come out on 45nm....All 8-cores nothing disabled

and it shows somewhat....

http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/results/...121-19030.html
http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/results/...211-14447.html

O6238 @ 2.6GHz(2.9GHz ACTC) 24C/24T: SPECint_Rate: 414, 365(Base)
X5690 @ 3.467GHz 12C/24T: SPECint_Rate: 419, 389(Base)

http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/results/...121-19042.html
http://www.spec.org/cpu2006/results/...211-14445.html

O6238: SPECfp_Rate: 340, 318(Base)
X5690: SPECfp_Rate: 272, 265(Base)

In these benchmarks, this is comparing Interlagos 24C vs Westmere 24T both on 32nm(I can't compare Sandy Bridge-E to Interlagos yet because there is no Sandy Bridge-E 2P LGA2011 yet)

What happened was GlobalFoundries cut the plug for 45nm HKMG SOI and started rushing for 32nm HKMG SOI eSiGe

[Super XP]

We have a failure to communicate.
A for this 2 part patch, boosting L4D2 is all good.

[Damn_Smooth]

Can it play Starcraft 2? Or any other game that isn't GPU limited? And how are those minimum FPS doing?

Just kidding, I already know the answer. I would've put this board to use already if it could.

[johnspack]

I miss my K6-2 450......

[xBruce88x]

... i miss my k6-2 500 i had OC to 550. 768mb ram... a couple voodoo IIs... good times. also miss my athlon xp 2500.

[mtosev]

Originally Posted by HillBeast

I get 7.6 on my 930 @ 3.66GHz. And it's not 2 years old, we should consider when Nehalem came out (2008), so a 4 year old CPU is still trading blows with a '8-core' CPU. Bulldozer is still a massive fail. It's worse than Netburst.

just i know that the first lga1366 cpus came out in late 2008. we had lots of cpus i7 920, 920 D0, 930, 940, 950, 965, 980, 990my cpu isn't oced so that must be why i get a score of 7.5

[Covert_Death]

Originally Posted by trickson

I know one game it would choke on . Battlefield 3 ! That would kill the BD .. They will need 4 patches for the 2 patch patch to get the patch to work on BF3 !

lol i doubt that, my pII 955 runs BF3 on ultra. i think the BD would handle it too.

[n0tiert]

all i can say about the AMD FX-8150, it runs all current Programs / Games (max / ultra) fine, and if a patch could fix some compatible issues to the OS / thread handling thats also fine to me ........

dunno why all you guys bitchn about, now i can run "......."

[Frick]

The only benchmarks I run was the ones included in AIDA64 Extreme (1.85.1600) and there was no real difference there. Numbers attached if anyone is interested.

[Damn_Smooth]

Originally Posted by trickson

I know one game it would choke on . Battlefield 3 ! That would kill the BD .. They will need 4 patches for the 2 patch patch to get the patch to work on BF3 !

It actually handles BF3 fine. BF3 is GPU limited.

[qubit]

Originally Posted by Frick

The only benchmarks I run was the ones included in AIDA64 Extreme (1.85.1600) and there was no real difference there. Numbers attached if anyone is interested.

The patch makes no difference as far as your benchmarks.

[imitation]

Originally Posted by trickson

WOW a .1% increase ! Now you can play Crysis

First of all, 7.4 to 7.5 is not .1%. Secondly, the Windows score is non-linear. To gain 1 (one) point, you 50% more performance, according to Microsoft.
So the score indicates 0-10% more performance. Not too shabby for a patch!

[omagic]

Well i only had time to check Crysis CPU Benchmark
Before 47 fps
After 56 fps

So quite nice boost. Ill try some more games after the work

FX-8120 8GB RAM HD6870
1680x1050 all maxed

[mtosev]

Originally Posted by imitation

First of all, 7.4 to 7.5 is not .1%. Secondly, the Windows score is non-linear. To gain 1 (one) point, you 50% more performance, according to Microsoft.
So the score indicates 0-10% more performance. Not too shabby for a patch!

too bad for amd. intels cpus are still faster and cost less. amd screwed up good