1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Bulldozer A Surprisingly Sell-Out Sales Success. Victims: Phenom II & Athlon II

Discussion in 'News' started by qubit, Dec 3, 2011.

  1. HumanSmoke

    HumanSmoke

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,190 (1.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Strong graphics performance is a prerequisite that potential MacBook owners look for? When did this happen? :confused:

    Mac gaming must have come a long way lately -both in game selection and acceptance in polite Mac society.
  2. Damn_Smooth

    Damn_Smooth New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,435 (1.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    478
    Location:
    A frozen turdberg.
    And that makes Apple relevant to the sales of the FX series? And now Intel has something to do with it too?
  3. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,648 (7.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,971
    Location:
    some AF base

    Performance isn't crap, performance just isn't better than Intel's offerings. This isn't like when netburst came out and performance was physically worse than P3's

    So thats why Intel is so popular so many people bought P4's! I understand now :banghead:

    To reiterate what do you classify as a bad product? Does bulldozer not accomplish the task that a computer is designed for? Does it fail in droves? Is it overly expensive? In all reality you could consider it a stepping stone. Phenom II's were still outperformed by Intel yet they were considered a "good" product, what makes Bulldozer different? It clocks well, power consumption is high, but I feel that is a first gen bug and will get worked out with new steppings, just like Phenom I and II. When someone points out a legitimate reason that Bulldozer is a "bad" product I will retract what I said, but until that point whats actually wrong with BD?


    Just to throw it out there Intel has had plenty of other "bad" products other than P4. They had there own TLB bug with i7, the 6 series chipsets, socket 423, the list goes on. Every company has fuck ups and in all honesty less the spectacular performance doesn't make a bad product in my book.
    Super XP, adulaamin and WarEagleAU say thanks.
  4. Vancha

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Messages:
    354 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    62
    I think the problem is more that BD wasn't what AMD said it'd be, so people consider it a failure because it didn't accomplish what it was "supposed to" (or at least, what people were lead to believe it was supposed to).
    WarEagleAU says thanks.
  5. Enmity New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    454 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    36
    Location:
    New Zealand
    AMD might be just 800 million transistors short of their original performance expectations perhaps? ;) could have made a decent difference if they really did have the full count quoted originally - but then again, power consumption is already through the roof at 1.2 Billion.
  6. PaNiC New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    40 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    8
    just say it. I GOT RIPPED OFF, you'll fell better and you wont be stuck buying under preforming trash. I'm currently running an AMD. So how am I a fanboy?
  7. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,648 (7.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,971
    Location:
    some AF base
    How so? I have owned chips from everything except 1155 and for the lift of me could not tell you the difference in everyday life from a Phenom 910@3.8ghz to a Xeon X3440@4.2ghz. I have run most different K10h based chips and never had an underperformance issue nor did I have an issues with my post C2D Intel parts. Maybe you should leave benchmarks to the big kids and enjoy what you have.
    Super XP and WarEagleAU say thanks.
  8. lukcic New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    7 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    With this article I got a suspicion that somebody wants to make this site to get more visits (with pissing off AMD or Intel fanboys and neutral people)....that's all :laugh:
  9. pantherx12

    pantherx12 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    9,714 (4.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    ENGLAND-LAND-LAND
    I don't feel ripped off ( cept a bsod I'm having but seems it's bios causing the issue)

    An fx8120 is £25 more or so than a 1100t, sure the 1100t is 10% faster clock for clock but bulldozer overclocks 10% further even if you don't try hard, if you're patient you can get 20% higher clock speed than 1100t max overclock at a lower voltage.


    So if you're an over clocker you're just paying for 2 extra cores really and the pricing is reasonable in that regard.
    Super XP says thanks.
  10. Fx

    Fx

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    497 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    I really love what they are doing with APUs. I almost just bought a mini-ITX mobo to build an XBMC box but the software support isnt quite there yet but it is getting close since openELEC has stepped up to the plate. they are doing a lot of good things for the HTPC audience

    the FM1 socket has plenty of power in it for the average joe that uses it for school, general usage. AMD is smart for putting more focus into these markets- it is already paying off and demand is only going to grow
  11. theoneandonlymrk

    theoneandonlymrk

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,329 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    544
    Location:
    Manchester uk
    pile on the dirt why dont ya, i got qubits cards maked as a fanboy these days simples and im startin to think TPU is gettin a bias to its news, sort it out mods, you cant just constantly berate a company on here, unless its rambus that is:laugh:

    to me with my recent loss of my quad and mobo to disease( ok 1.55 volts on cpu might a killed it eventually) 476english pounds would buy me a crosshair v fx8150 and mem with enough slots for xfire a pcie ssd and the bonus gt240 for physx in one pc that should rock (needs 4xpciex though) if i go intel id have to spend a lot more just for enough pciex slots and marginal game bench increases
  12. Magnum° New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    For some people, a bulldozer CPU might be an excellent upgrade coming from a phenom triple or quadcore?

    In the beginning of the year, I was in doubt : AMD/Intel. I finally bit the bullet and bought a core i2600K system. I haven't regretted it, my system hardly lost any value: it would cost you almost the same to buy a similar PC now, 9 months later. That's exceptional I think ;-)
  13. pantherx12

    pantherx12 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    9,714 (4.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    ENGLAND-LAND-LAND
    Came from a 1055t and it's an upgrade for me, only bad thing is power consumption IMO.

    Yeah it could be better but it's not shite.
  14. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,384 (3.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,085
    Yes well it's qubit. Most of his "news" posts does that.
  15. mik95xp New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    "AMD's new Bulldozer "FX" series of processors may be very lacklustre performers in reviewer's benchmarks "

    its not a lacklustre performer, as other people have noticed, it was able to beat intel's 2600k in some benchies, am i not right? you can only justify that it as a bad CPU if in every benchmark it performs under intel's 2600k, but to tell you, no they dont.... and those benchmarks are only in the reviewers point of view..

    and another thing, why you seem so sad dear author?? why you not like it bro?? do you like amd to sink and be bankrupt?? to tell you if that will happen, all hell will break lose.... be happy with it, it should result positively for amd.. more R&D budget=more competetion, dont you like it???

    peace out!
    de.das.dude says thanks.
  16. mik95xp New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    you nailed it sir... i bet those guys that reacts with BD being sold out are hmm.. can i say fanboys?? BD buyers are also for their good, if it doesn't sell out, what will happen to amd?? less R&D budget, they can drop client products if it wont sell out right and may result in to an intel monopoly, and its a bad thing for everyone... so i dont get it why people are over reacting... T_T
    Super XP and de.das.dude say thanks.
  17. de.das.dude

    de.das.dude Pro Indian Modder

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,474 (5.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,936
    what i thin AMD wants is, to take part in these growing markets, reap profits, and invest that in R&D for the mainstream. atleast that is what i would have done if i were the CEO.

    APUs have literally no competition in the market.
  18. theoneandonlymrk

    theoneandonlymrk

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,329 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    544
    Location:
    Manchester uk
    imho BD is only weak on single threaded apps and i just went from 4 to 2 cores for my main rig and my god single threaded performance matters not i got 2 threads of slow hell runnin its poo ,i want more cores simples. and now , I hope the intel bummers out there donnt succeed in gettin PD scrapped as BD is flyin off shelves and PD can only be better
  19. arthurs New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    I am thinking about upgrading to Fx 8120-8150 too.

    I have fx 6100@4,6 (H2O) in Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD7 with crossfireX4@HIS HD5750.

    AMD rules my rig :)
  20. qubit

    qubit Overclocked quantum bit

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,821 (4.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,479
    Indeed. Give or take a bit, most companies are all as bad as each other. :ohwell:


    Oh yeah, I really hate Rambus. You betcha!

    Dude, fill out your system specs! It's cool to share on TPU... and welcome to TPU! :toast:
  21. bpgt64

    bpgt64

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,416 (0.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    193
    Location:
    ATL, GA
    I think AMD realizes that the average user, and gamer isn't going to notice any difference. Some games are more CPU limited, but even then, the difference is marginal. It's a sizable margin by the standards of this board. But we tend to forget that AMD probably cares more about making there chips more profitable, than any performance crown.

    I mean really, there's about 1% of the CPU buying population that gives two shits that Intel has a super high end 1k dollar chip that's faster than everything else out there. Which makes a difference...never in the average users life.
  22. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,653 (6.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,830
    Ah, I see. So when Intel was in the lead and all the OEMs were using them, it was all down to shady business practices, but when AMD is in the lead the OEMs were just using them because AMD was in the lead? Makes sense...
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  23. Completely Bonkers New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,580 (0.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    516
    This is just a PR stunt. AMD fanboys are like Apple fanboys... tell them "less is more" (ie 600 million fewer transistors) and tell them it is selling out (ie buy now before queues get really long)... and sheeple will buy it like a Barista buys his iPad.
  24. Fx

    Fx

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    497 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    holy shit man! are you so quick to forget what Intel has been charged with and some cases found guilty of? selective memory maybe? here is some links that I pulled up on the first google pages since you are too lazy to investigate- take your pick:

    European Union
    http://www.economist.com/node/13649063
    http://seethirty.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/intel-found-guilty-of-criminal-sales-tactics-against-amd/
    http://www.fastcodesign.com/1280059/microsoft-and-intel-fight-eu-lawsuits-just-as-antitrust-policies-in-the-us-get-tougher
    http://www.osnews.com/story/21468

    New York Attorney General
    http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/04/technology/cuomo_sues_intel_antitrust/index.htm
    http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/new-york-ag-files-antitrust-charges-against-intel-alleges-bribery-coercion/26903

    South Korea
    http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/2007-09-11-270351916_x.htm
    http://www.telecomseurope.net/content/regulators-charge-intel-antitrust-violation-south-korea

    that is probably about half of it but it is a good start... you need to learn to look up some facts before going all out with assumptions...
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2011
    Super XP says thanks.
  25. pantherx12

    pantherx12 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    9,714 (4.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    ENGLAND-LAND-LAND


    You realise that it is actually a good thing right?

    2 billion transistor bulldozer = epic fail.

    1.2 billion transistor bulldozer = only slightly under performing.

    Pretty much puts it precisely in line with phenom architecture ( I.E phenomx6 + two more cores is 1.26 billion)


    The main problem is the IPC loss and crazy power draw. Hopefully both if which get fixed further down the line.
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2011
    Super XP and HalfAHertz say thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page