Thursday, January 13th 2011

Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II

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
Add your own comment

424 Comments on Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II

#1
cadaveca
My name is Dave
MAybe, but that is not good business strategy. IN today's economy, it is very easy to win over customers by offering the same or better for a much lower cost.


That said, Intel's SandyBridge is very competively priced, wit hthe 3.4ghz 2600K costing a merely $329 locally. Amd needs to beat the same performance, with less cost, in order to increase market share, so that is what they MUST do.

Any failure to do so only means that those in control @ AMD are not the right people for the job...it's not the time to sit back and rake in the profits...
Posted on Reply
#2
GSG-9
HTC said:
The prices only come down with competition and, let's face it, there has been no competition, which is why Intel can charge whatever they want. The same was true when AMD led in the FX days.
But when AMD did it back then they were innovating on new cores in the lower end still, there were quite a few cores I was so pumped when I got my first Venice to overclock.



cadaveca said:
That said, Intel's SandyBridge is very competively priced, wit hthe 3.4ghz 2600K costing a merely $329 locally. Amd needs to beat the same performance, with less cost, in order to increase market share, so that is what they MUST do.
$329 is hard to beat with the performance it gets with a mild oc, if they had not changed the socket you know what I would be upgrading to next...
Posted on Reply
#3
TheMailMan78
Big Member
cadaveca said:
MAybe, but that is not good business strategy. IN today's economy, it is very easy to win over customers by offering the same or better for a much lower cost.


That said, Intel's SandyBridge is very competively priced, wit hthe 3.4ghz 2600K costing a merely $329 locally. Amd needs to beat the same performance, with less cost, in order to increase market share, so that is what they MUST do.

Any failure to do so only means that those in control @ AMD are not the right people for the job...it's not the time to sit back and rake in the profits...
You are assuming AMD will market it properly. I agree less cost and better performance will increase market share but if Apple has taught us anything marketing a product is what matters. Not the product. ;) Intel markets their products well. They could have a crappier product and still out sell AMD. They have proven this in the past.

AMD needs hype. LOTS of hype. With hype comes market share.
Posted on Reply
#4
GSG-9
TheMailMan78 said:
AMD was not a household name before Athlon. AMD will charge what the market demands. Its simple. Here is an example.
They did not excel in the market until K8/Athlon64. K7 was a generation where AMD just existed, the Athlon XP chips were never taken seriously at least not by anyone I talked to about building and I myself waited for the Athlon 64s.
Posted on Reply
#5
cadaveca
My name is Dave
TheMailMan78 said:
You are assuming AMD will market it properly. I agree less cost and better performance will increase market share but if Apple has taught us anything marketing a product is what matters. Not the product. ;) Intel markets their products well. They could have a crappier product and still out sell AMD. They have proven this in the past.

AMD needs hype. LOTS of hype. With hype comes market share.
Sure, and now that Dirk is gone, I really believe that ANYTHING is possible from AMD.

Also, you cannot compare AMD and Intel as businesses, directly. They are completely different, with different goals, motives, and expectations.
Posted on Reply
#6
TheMailMan78
Big Member
cadaveca said:
Sure, and now that Dirk is gone, I really believe that ANYTHING is possible from AMD.

Also, you cannot compare AMD and Intel as businesses, directly. They are completely different, with different goals, motives, and expectations.
I can compare their markets and the rules of supply and demand.
Posted on Reply
#7
cadaveca
My name is Dave
Sure, but even thier markets are not exactly the same.

Intel has priced Sandbridge so low in an effort to cut AMD's nuts off, plain and simple. To me, that sounds like a SCARED INTEL, not an over-confident AMD.


The "budget" market has been AMD's for some time now. Intel hasn't had "performance" or "mainstream" products in direct price competition with AMD for YEARS.


So why now? I do not believe you are looking at this very subjectively...you really have to put your own thoughts and beliefs aside and emphatically dissect AMD first.

What YOU want is NOT what AMD wants. So ignore YOUR wants, and think about AMD's goals.
Posted on Reply
#8
DigitalUK
the athlon xp chips were taken seriously by builders, i built loads of systems back then with xp chips most popular was 2000xp palamino and the 3200xp barton (A64 didnt come for afew years after). only problem they had then was alot of silly people thinking mhz was everything so would by a p4 with higher mhz because they thought it was faster.

i also remember that the FX Chips were actutally cheaper at the time than intels highest offering but were still way out of my price range.
Posted on Reply
#9
GSG-9
DigitalUK said:
the athlon xp chips were taken seriously by builders, i built loads of systems back then with xp chips most popular was 2000xp palamino and the 3200xp barton (A64 didnt come for afew years after). only problem they had then was alot of silly people thinking mhz was everything so would by a p4 with higher mhz because they thought it was faster.

i also remember that the FX Chips were actutally cheaper at the time than intels highest offering but were still way out of my price range.
I honestly did not know there were 'FX' Athlon non 64 chips.
Posted on Reply
#10
DigitalUK
just realized how that was typed, as i put a64 didnt come for afew years i was talking about a64 era when i said about FX
Posted on Reply
#11
TheMailMan78
Big Member
cadaveca said:
Sure, but even thier markets are not exactly the same.

Intel has priced Sandbridge so low in an effort to cut AMD's nuts off, plain and simple. To me, that sounds like a SCARED INTEL, not an over-confident AMD.


The "budget" market has been AMD's for some time now. Intel hasn't had "performance" or "mainstream" products in direct price competition with AMD for YEARS.


So why now? I do not believe you are looking at this very subjectively...you really have to put your own thoughts and beliefs aside and emphatically dissect AMD first.

What YOU want is NOT what AMD wants. So ignore YOUR wants, and think about AMD's goals.
But thats somewhat of a contradiction. If their markets are not the same then what would Intel have to be scared of? Anyway I digress. Has Intel had mainstream products that could compete with AMD for years now? No. And yet they dominate the market share of OEMs. Why? Well some would say because of the lawsuit reasons. Others would say marketing. I think its a mixture. I feel AMD will play to market demand rather then take the long term route of low price/high performance. I guess time will tell. I have a rule of never underestimating greed.
Posted on Reply
#12
cadaveca
My name is Dave
Right. But how do they win over the OEMs? Remember that us, as a market, is jsut a drop in the bucket compared to the OEMs.



Seems to me you are considering this from the perspective as a cpu buyer/system builder, rather than an OEM. AMD doesn't sell US chips..they sell them to retailers and OEMs. Both of those tend to push products that give them the best profit.


you are right, greed palys an important role, but not AMD's greed..the greed of the real AMD cpu buyers is what is important.

;)
Posted on Reply
#13
DigitalUK
per unit cost/performance and shed loads of tv adverts so the sheep know AMD is just as good.

i build systems to this day and i still get stupid things like, i recommend an AMD to customer and they say no because there friend said AMD's dont do internet, then have to explain its a complete load of rubbish but still want intel because they know the name.
Posted on Reply
#14
TheMailMan78
Big Member
cadaveca said:
Right. But how do they win over the OEMs? Remember that us, as a market, is jsut a drop in the bucket compared to the OEMs.



Seems to me you are considering this from the perspective as a cpu buyer/system builder, rather than an OEM. AMD doesn't sell US chips..they sell them to retailers and OEMs. Both of those tend to push products that give them the best profit.


you are right, greed palys an important role, but not AMD's greed..the greed of the real AMD cpu buyers is what is important.

;)
You have an AMD rig and an Intel rig priced identical. Customer comes into store wants to buy one. Which one does he buy?
Posted on Reply
#15
cadaveca
My name is Dave
Which ever one the salesperson convinces him is best...? Whichever one the salesperson makes the most money off of?

It's not JUST AMD that needs to market thier products more...the OEMs need to as well. It's is impossible for anyone to achieve great levels of success on thier own, and the same applies to business as well.
Posted on Reply
#16
TheMailMan78
Big Member
cadaveca said:
Which ever one the salesperson convinces him is best...? Whichever one the salesperson makes the most money off of?

It's not JUST AMD that needs to market thier products more...the OEMs need to as well. It's is impossible for anyone to achieve great levels of success on thier own, and the same applies to business as well.
Apple. HP. Dell. Intel are ALL household names. AMD is not.
Posted on Reply
#17
cadaveca
My name is Dave
TheMailMan78 said:
Apple. HP. Dell. Intel are ALL household names. AMD is not.
Yeah, but ATI is highly recognized here in Canada, at least. You get where I'm headed?


I mean really, that's what they need to change...mindshare. How do you do that? Maybe put your products alongside those well recognized names? Make it so that with those names, you offer more value for the dollar, but the same performance/features?
Posted on Reply
#18
TheMailMan78
Big Member
cadaveca said:
Yeah, but ATI is highly recognized here in Canada, at least. You get where I'm headed?


I mean really, that's what they need to change...mindshare. How do you do that? Maybe put your products alongside those well recognized names? Make it so that with those names, you offer more value for the dollar, but the same performance/features?
Nope. In a sane world sure but not in reality. Just look at Apple man. They are just better.......why I don't know but the commercials tell me so.

This is the perfect example....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL7yD-0pqZg
Posted on Reply
#19
WhiteLotus
TheMailMan78 said:
Nope. In a sane world sure but not in reality. Just look at Apple man. They are just better.......why I don't know but the commercials tell me so.

This is the perfect example....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL7yD-0pqZg
MailMan has it right. When was the last time you saw an Intel advert on the TV. Now when did you last see an AMD advert on the TV. And I mean an advert where it's selling it's own product, not "here at PC world you can get the latest AMD...".

Plus Intel has that annoying DUN DUN DUN DURRRR chime at the end of every advert. Again what does AMD have?


AMD marketing really does suck.
Posted on Reply
#20
cadaveca
My name is Dave
TheMailMan78 said:
Nope. In a sane world sure but not in reality. Just look at Apple man. They are just better.......why I don't know but the commercials tell me so.

This is the perfect example....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL7yD-0pqZg
Yeah, I get that, but of course, there is far more to making sales than just a pretty face(AMD kinda tried that with Leslie and the 3GHz Phenom1..we know how well that turned out...). There's no point in marketing a product if you can't get it into consumer's hands. That lawsuit was part of that...Intel's business practices prevented them from getting thier cpus into products that the consumers...well.. could consume.


And in regard to TV advertizing...I don't watch TV. MMA, F1, Rally racing is about the total of my TV consumption.

I mean really, us Canadians watch more youtube and such than anywhere else, as was reported recently, so marketing to me is not the same as marketing to you, etc...but again, marketing to the end user isn't the whole picture, just part of it. You can't, very specifically, market one way, and call it good enough. I think it's foolhardy to think that any single approach will be effective.
Posted on Reply
#21
theoneandonlymrk
my word its amazing how quick threads turn into fanboy bitchfights lol

anyone got any firm release date info on the new 8 core bulldozer, and has anyone else noticed a clear strategy by ati THEIR making bulldozers for effin everything phones tellies lapys pads pcs and servers prob all similar but binned different.

thats implies to me that they are running the bejebus outa their fab plants and might yet yield even higher cored derivatives for us tech heads im not surgesting their growing spuds or summat but id be surprised if we had heard of all their surprises yet??!!
Posted on Reply
#22
DigitalUK
marketing a new cpu to people like us is completely different than marketing to people who know nothing about computers. tv adverts would be pretty much useless to us but give some samples to some top sites to test and bingo. with OEM/normal users seems to be "if you cant make it good,make it shinny" and bundle norton 360 with it and a office demo (make it seem your getting the full version) and an intel badge (doesnt matter if its says celeron,pentium or i5) as long as it says intel.
Posted on Reply
#23
TheMailMan78
Big Member
theoneandonlymrk said:
my word its amazing how quick threads turn into fanboy bitchfights lol

anyone got any firm release date info on the new 8 core bulldozer, and has anyone else noticed a clear strategy by ati THEIR making bulldozers for effin everything phones tellies lapys pads pcs and servers prob all similar but binned different.

thats implies to me that they are running the bejebus outa their fab plants and might yet yield even higher cored derivatives for us tech heads im not surgesting their growing spuds or summat but id be surprised if we had heard of all their surprises yet??!!
Who's having a fanboy bitch fight? cadaveca and I are discussing AMD marketing strategies when it comes to bulldozer. If you are calling us fanboys you picked the wrong two guys.

cadaveca said:
Yeah, I get that, but of course, there is far more to making sales than just a pretty face(AMD kinda tried that with Leslie and the 3GHz Phenom1..we know how well that turned out...). There's no point in marketing a product if you can't get it into consumer's hands. That lawsuit was part of that...Intel's business practices prevented them from getting thier cpus into products that the consumers...well.. could consume.


And in regard to TV advertizing...I don't watch TV. MMA, F1, Rally racing is about the total of my TV consumption.

I mean really, us Canadians watch more youtube and such than anywhere else, as was reported recently, so marketing to me is not the same as marketing to you, etc...but again, marketing to the end user isn't the whole picture, just part of it. You can't, very specifically, market one way, and call it good enough. I think it's foolhardy to think that any single approach will be effective.
Canada is a good market. However they are not THEE market. Good old glutenous USA is the biggest consumer in the world. TV is our G-d.
Posted on Reply
#24
cadaveca
My name is Dave
TheMailMan78 said:
Canada is a good market. However they are not THEE market. Good old glutenous USA is the biggest consumer in the world. TV is our G-d.
Meh. Isn't China about to buy 48 Billion worth of US exports? :laugh:

My point was not that one market is better than the other, but that they are very differnt, and as such, each needs it's own approach. Likewise, marketing to the consumer, and to the OEMs, is very different as well.

The big question is...does AMD have the financial brevity to successfully market thier products to each and every segment?
Posted on Reply
#25
TheMailMan78
Big Member
cadaveca said:
Meh. Isn't China about to buy 48 Billion worth of US exports? :laugh:

My point was not that one market is better than the other, but that they are very differnt, and as such, each needs it's own approach. Likewise, marketing to the consumer, and to the OEMs, is very different as well.

The big question is...does AMD have the financial brevity to successfully market thier products to each and every segment?
If you are talking about marketing deviation for different demographic regions then sure. Put AMD ads on youtube for Canadians, ads on TV for Americans and ads in tentacle porn for the Japanese. But thats not the point. The fact of the matter is AMD has NO ads ANYWHERE.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment