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

Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Jan 13, 2011.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,553 (11.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,644
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Here, take some salt. AMD reportedly gave out performance figures in a presentation to its partners, performance figures seen by DonanimHaber. It is reported that an 8-core processor based on the "Bulldozer" high-performance CPU architecture is pitched by its makers to have 50% higher performance than existing processors such as the Core i7 950 (4 cores, 8 threads), and Phenom II X6 1100T (6 cores). Very little is known about the processor, including at what clock speed the processor was running at, much less what other components were driving the test machine.

    Taking this information into account, the said Bulldozer based processor should synthetically even outperform Core i7 980X six-core, Intel's fastest desktop processor in the market. Built from ground-up, the Bulldozer architecture focuses on greater inter-core communication and reconfigured ALU/FPU to achieve higher instructions per clock cycle (IPC) compared to the previous generation K10.5, on which its current Phenom II series processors are based. The processor is backed by new 9-series core logic, and a new AM3+ socket. AMD is expected to unveil this platform a little later this year.

    Source: DonanimHaber
     
  2. jmcslob

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,926 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    470
    Location:
    Internet Heaven
    To say the least if true Holy Shit!!!
     
  3. Melvis

    Melvis

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    3,581 (1.51/day)
    Thanks Received:
    524
    Location:
    Australia
    Wow if this is true, AMD will take the performance crown once again.

    Im sure these wont even be the FX version's ether?
     
  4. Lionheart

    Lionheart

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,051 (1.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    808
    Location:
    Milky Way Galaxy
    My have a big smile on my face now after reading this :)
     
  5. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,666 (13.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,059
    This is suprising news if true. A 50% increase in speed over what I currently have is finally an acutal worthy upgrade.
     
  6. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,622 (1.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    928
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    They just have to ship the stuff fast. AMD had bright ideas all along, but the time is what has drove them over each time. And Intel was "sitting" in it. I mean what good is it to have 50% better performance now when you suck on the actual hardware release day...

    So good luck to AMD and i hope they'll get the stuff out in time.
     
    kylzer and Roph say thanks.
  7. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,543 (1.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    939
    Let's not start the selective memory loss crap. We know how this goes. These things are always hand picked numbers from very specific instances, if not totally bs from some performance "simulation". Give a real chip to a bad asian plumber and maybe we'll see something to get excited about.
     
  8. Yellow&Nerdy?

    Yellow&Nerdy?

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    373 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    This is from AMD, so it might not be 100% legit. But it should be very close to the 980X, if not on par or better. Performance is surprisingly good, but this probably means that they won't be very cheap either. We'll see.
     
  9. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,561 (6.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,501
    Location:
    IA, USA
    I bet a hexa-core Sandy Bridge would beat the octo-core Bulldozer, not to mention handling 50% more threads. At least it is a significant improvement from Phenom II.

    The one thing AMD, for sure, has going for them is not drastically changing sockets like Intel has, yet again, made a habit of doing.
     
    psyko12 and wolf say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  10. blu3flannel

    blu3flannel

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    898 (0.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Location:
    NYU
    This will hopefully be a worthy upgrade from my i5 750, I want some new hardware to play with. :)
     
  11. random

    random

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    3,043 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    686
    I hope this is true, not to keen on staying with intel for too long since I'm really tired of having to switch platforms every so often.
     
  12. Volkszorn88

    Volkszorn88

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2010
    Messages:
    1,191 (0.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    312
    This will be an instant success. I can't even wrap my mind around 50% faster.
     
  13. gumpty

    gumpty

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Messages:
    744 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    134
    Location:
    Auckland
    Crikey doodle dandy. It would be cool if this is true.

    Hopefully they compete well in the price/performance & performance/watt stakes.
     
  14. T3RM1N4L D0GM4

    T3RM1N4L D0GM4

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    186 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    38
    Do want REAL bench....

    NOW!
    :rockout:
     
  15. 1Kurgan1

    1Kurgan1 The Knife in your Back

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    10,324 (4.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,371
    Location:
    Duluth, Minnesota
    [​IMG]

    Lets hope it's true. Though if it is, I expect it to be too expensive for my blood for a while, sadly.
     
  16. unknwn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    9 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    They need to be as fast or faster than intel at not fully threaded applications too (games, desktop apps) otherwise it won't be that good for casual users.
     
  17. Yukikaze

    Yukikaze

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,310 (1.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    481
    This needs to be taken with a mountain of salt, not just a grain of it. While I am all for AMD making a decisive comeback to drive prices in the high-end lower and lower (and make Intel drive forward faster), this reminds me of the pre-release nVidia slides for Fermi. After all the NV-hype was done, we were left with good cards, but nothing truly as revolutionary as nVidia would have us believe.

    Until I see a TPU review, this is all manuFUD.
     
  18. mcloughj

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    307 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    66
    Location:
    Dublin, Ireland
    Looks like I'll hold off on my new system for a little while longer... just in case!
     
  19. Zubasa

    Zubasa

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,980 (1.37/day)
    Thanks Received:
    457
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Actually this is not far fetched at all.
    Notice they say their Octa-Core (8) proc is 50% faster than the i7 950 Quad-Core (4).
    If both chips are running at the same clocks, that just means the Bulldozer isn't any/much faster IPC than a Nehalem.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2011
    psyko12, wolf and Wrigleyvillain say thanks.
  20. arroyo

    arroyo

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    393 (0.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    85
    Location:
    Bydgoszcz, Poland
    Zubasa, you made a point!

    That's true. They comparing 4 cylinder Intel engine with new V8 from AMD. Of course it would be faster than Intel!
     
  21. Yukikaze

    Yukikaze

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,310 (1.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    481
    This really depends on what they call a core:
    1. A real core.
    2. One half of their SMT arrangement.

    In the case of 1, I agree. In the case of 2, their octa-core processor is not a "true" octa-core. According to what I know about bulldozer every pair of cores is a hybrid between Intel's SMT approach (HyperThreading) and a true pair of separate cores. It is getting hard to define this architecture by the number of cores in the way previous generations could be, but on strict terms, this is a 4-core processor with AMD's flavor of SMT.

    In case 1, we're talking about nothing special. In the case of 2, we're talking about some serious processing power.
     
  22. Zubasa

    Zubasa

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,980 (1.37/day)
    Thanks Received:
    457
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    In case 2, Intel will finally have some serious competition I have been waiting for.
    On the other hand, we have yet to see how Intel's LGA2011 chips performs.
    Also remember that these are PR figures likely done with cherry picked applications in the second case.
     
    blibba says thanks.
  23. bear jesus

    bear jesus New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,535 (1.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    200
    Location:
    Britland
    When overclocked the i5 2600k can beat the i7 980x in some cases, what will the hyper threaded 6/8 core sandy bridge i7's do?

    To be honest this release is far from specific enough, 50% core for core would be amazing but I'm doubting that, an 8 core CPU that's 50% faster than a 6 core CPU does not exactly sound amazing unless the 8 core is clocked much lower but no details.

    I want to be impressed but until i see something more specific it's hard to be :(
     
    blibba says thanks.
  24. Bo$$

    Bo$$ Lab Extraordinaire

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    5,311 (2.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    867
    Location:
    London, UK
    this brought a tear to my eye, lets hope prices are decent around june/july time, so i can build an amazing PC
     
  25. bear jesus

    bear jesus New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,535 (1.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    200
    Location:
    Britland
    Using Google translate the one line i notice most is this "125 watts running at 3GHz + with 8-core"

    So if it were 50% faster core for core than previous 3ghz cpu's that would very much impress me as long it did not cost an arm and a leg.
     

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

Share This Page