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

AMD Bulldozer Eng. Sample leaked, benched

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by twilyth, Jun 10, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,648 (7.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,971
    Location:
    some AF base
    yes and no if they are stuck in cool and quiet thats software and bios not talking thats how some of the chips react to incorrectly read p-states
  2. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,747 (4.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,782
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    ;)


    :respect:
  3. twilyth Guest

    Here are some more benches from Chiphell. Problem is, if you translate the page you can't see the images.

    They've added a few other things like Cinebench and Fritz Chess.

    http://www.chiphell.com/thread-210890-1-1.html

    Edit: OK, I think this page has been up since the 8th. Figured it was worth posting.

    edit2: More info - compares 2500k to BD. Also links to benching vids.

    edit3:
    Something is clearly wrong here.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 11, 2011
  4. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,777
    IPC is a derived value. Instructions per Clock. In other words, their performance in clock vs clock, core vs core against Intel is dismal according to those numbers. It's not big enough of an improvement.

    I'd bet money that's with CUDA on. If you want to use vantage to compare cpus, you should use CPU Test 1. It's uses no acceleration. My 980X did 5250 the last time I ran it stock. They skewed the test results on that page. Pretty dirty trick.

    See above. They aren't telling the entire story in his link. ;)


    All that said, I think these are fake. At least I sure hope so, because the showing in the OP is very poor.
  5. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    992 (0.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    218
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    The results are fake

    You are correct these are fake(not because they are poor showing mainly because it isn't showing the right codewords)

    Unknown CPUs in cinebench show up as

    AuthenticAMD
    GenuineIntel
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2011
  6. Heavy_MG New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    48 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Agreed.
    The ES B0/B1 stepping that chiphell tested has bad performance because the multiplier is off,so clocks are actually lower ,the turbo core is broken/disabled,and some cache was apparently disabled,there was even word that some cores were shut off to keep the TDP low. It was only designed for motherboard manufacturers to test for compatiblity.
    Only so much can improved in a new revision,however hopefully IPC improves with B2.
    Also IMO,it's silly to use Super Pi,which is optimized for Intel,to compare Intel to AMD.
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2011
  7. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    992 (0.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    218
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    It's fake

    Don't get your eye strings in bundle

    You do realize CMT has 80% more throughput in Intel optimized workloads(That is for servers but the same applies to Desktops)((30% more throughput is the lowest amount))

    SuperPi is also 1 core so it doesn't use SMT or CMT


    If it was real

    The most realistic result you will see

    is

    FX-4XXX - X < 9.345 seconds

    i7 2500K - 9.345 seconds

    Super Pi uses the x87 ISA(Which is AMD Optimized)
    (Reason why AMD has gotten lackluster superpi scores before is because they shot themselves in the foot I don't know how but they purposely reduced x87 performance by half which has been fixed in the Bulldozer Architecture)
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2011
  8. hellrazor

    hellrazor

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,569 (0.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Anybody else notice it's running @ .93 volts?
  9. inferKNOX

    inferKNOX

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Messages:
    899 (0.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    118
    Location:
    SouthERN Africa
    Those might be true for that sample, but I in no way believe that that's the same CPU AMD is going to sell us, so this thread has no point other than to show how fast a punctured bicycle can go.
    I have a feeling that Zambezi has been the sort of headache for AMD that Fermi has been for nVidia, or probably worse since AMD has the task of catching up to the competition on top of all it's stresses.
  10. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    992 (0.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    218
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    I wouldn't believe anything WCCF whatever publishes

    If there is a leak the only place I'll believe it is from

    Ars Technica

    I doubt it....It's mainly they are regretting going Fabless, This year is probably the only year(Full out) they will be able to go 32nm then next year GloFo announces 22nm 4D Transistors lol
    (GloFo expects to upgrade most of its Fabs to 20/22nm by 2012(end of 2012) and they are working with AMD to make a new fab process that should rival intels 22nm 3D transistors)
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2011
  11. pantherx12

    pantherx12 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    9,714 (4.81/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    ENGLAND-LAND-LAND
    The super pi scores are in line with phenom 2 scores.

    Silly fakers.
  12. user21

    user21 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    282 (0.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Location:
    Peshawar
    AMD showed their world's 1st slowest 8 core AMD FX processor and still cant get a better bench LOL
  13. Damn_Smooth

    Damn_Smooth New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,435 (1.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    478
    Location:
    A frozen turdberg.
    AMD didn't show anything. If these are real, they are from a chip that was never supposed to be released to the public and it was used to test compatibility at best.

    I'm not sure if you were attempting to troll, but if you were, that was pretty weak.
    Heavy_MG says thanks.
  14. Heavy_MG New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Messages:
    48 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Seriously?
    Read above.
    The bench test that was "leaked" is a Engineering Sample,a chip only for testing. It has bugs,and possibly certain things missing such as L2 and L3 cache,or the clock speed is capped,so the clock speeds are actually less than what is shown.
    AMD doesn't want true benchmarks leaked before the release of FX,thus the possible reason behind the broken L2 & L3 cache and capped clock speeds.
    However, there were some performance issues,AMD is currently working on a new revision.
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2011
    Damn_Smooth says thanks.
  15. Nesters New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Messages:
    121 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Nice trolling over there, still waiting for Bulldozer, i'm gonna get one. I will support AMD as long as it's reasonable to do so.
    xvi and Horrux say thanks.
  16. twilyth Guest

    What he said. We have pretty high standards around here before we grant anyone the status of "troll". You're really going to have to put your back into it if you expect to make as a troll round these parts. :cool:
  17. Horrux

    Horrux

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    735 (0.65/day)
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Same here. I think AMD will surprise by offering a very competitive product with BD.
  18. user21

    user21 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    282 (0.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Location:
    Peshawar
  19. Damn_Smooth

    Damn_Smooth New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,435 (1.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    478
    Location:
    A frozen turdberg.
  20. user21

    user21 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    282 (0.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Location:
    Peshawar
    and i dont see your getting the idea here! when intel made benches from their prototype they should promising results and so did amd in the past and now you all are talking about an AMD not finalized so y they did those benches anyway ? even the x6 is slower then intel quads, clearly i dont see a point mentioning a prototype and the the real thing is there! lol they didn't showed benches cause they know its slow hehe atleast from intel's extreme i7......if you dig in more you can actually consider the lga2011 platform with quad channel memory support x79 chip and running 8core processors then where would be this BULLDOZER be going ? x6 is slower then intel quad then what can be actually expected from an 8cored one
  21. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,066 (2.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    875
    What has AMD's current Phenom II X6's being slower than Intel's current Sandybridges got to do with AMD Bulldozer?

    Secondly.

    Why are you basing a argument on leaked benchmarks that could possibly be faked, wrong, inaccurate, doctored or tested without a proper methodology.

    Thirdly.

    Why are you basing your argument on a prototype. We don't even know if it's a prototype, it could be 100% fake.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 13, 2011
    Damn_Smooth says thanks.
  22. St.Alia-Of-The-Knife New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2011
    Messages:
    195 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    32
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    why is the product number blacked out on the pics

    however, i changed the contrast and brightness on the 5th pic and noticed that there wasnt any product number:confused: so why was it blacked out???

    [​IMG]
    xvi and Damn_Smooth say thanks.
  23. user21

    user21 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    282 (0.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Location:
    Peshawar
    you think e3 was a joke and it could be 100% fake i think your brain needs a reform here! if the x6 is slow the x8 might not be the best thats a forecast, if your obsessed with something slower then intel live up as you like mate

    http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22996-amd-officially-announces-fx-brand
    DOES THIS LOOKS FAKE TO YOU ?????


    and this is a bonus news
    http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22997-amds-zambezi-up-and-running-at-e3
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 13, 2011
  24. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,857 (8.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,417
    First off fudzilla? Really?!

    Second of all I have been to Pakistan pre 9/11. Not impressed.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 13, 2011
    Damn_Smooth says thanks.
  25. Nesters New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Messages:
    121 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Ok, so what's your point?

    If Bulldozer was that bad as you want it to be, there would possibly be AMD acquisition underway because shareholders wanted to get some money out of it while they can...

    ... and recent price cuts on PII lineup would insta-kill Bulldozer.

    It's true that Bulldozer is architecture for servers but it also means it's future proof for desktops.
    Bulldozer is going at least for entry high-end with S2011 considered as launched for sure.
    They still have Llano and Bobcat which both seems to get positive feedback from OEM's.

    AMD doesn't need top performer to make money and increase their sales volume.
    Damn_Smooth and Dent1 say thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page