Saturday, December 17th 2011

AMD Bulldozer Threading Hotfix Pulled

Since we reported on the AMD Bulldozer hotfix, The Tech Report reports in an updated post, that the Bulldozer threading hotfix said to improve performance of the processor, has been pulled:
We've spoken with an industry source familiar with this situation, and it appears the release of this hotfix was either inadvertent, premature, or both. There is indeed a Bulldozer threading patch for Windows in the works, but it should come in two parts, not just one. The patch that was briefly released is only one portion of the total solution, and it may very well reduce performance if used on its own. We're hearing the full Windows update for Bulldozer performance optimization is scheduled for release in Q1 of 2012. For now, Bulldozer owners, the best thing to do is to sit tight and wait.
It will be very interesting indeed to see how this much maligned processor benchmarks after the fully developed patch is released. It's true, actually attempting to download the hotfix and agreeing to the licence terms, at the moment, one is lead to a page that shows it as unavailable.
Add your own comment

90 Comments on AMD Bulldozer Threading Hotfix Pulled

#2
Dent1
nt300 said:
So Sandybridge had issues but Intel solved most of them before they launched right.
Yes, but when AMD had issues and was solving them you whiners kept saying "HURRY UP AMD AND RELEASE BULLDOZER".


You whiners then said "AH NOT AGAIN NOT ANOTHER BULLDOZER DELAY. HURRY UP AMD, WE WANT BULLDOZER".

So AMD release the Bulldozer then you guys complain when it needs patching. :banghead:
Posted on Reply
#3
cadaveca
My name is Dave
AMD didn't lsiten to enthusiasts and launched BD at the request of enthusiasts...they listened to investors and the big OEMs that wanted it. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#4
dave18505
No BD for me at the moment, but with my X6 the Amd dual core optimizer is automatically installed, So does that mean my X6 is borked and it's weak because it needs a driver update.
Posted on Reply
#5
Dent1
cadaveca said:
AMD didn't lsiten to enthusiasts and launched BD at the request of enthusiasts...they listened to investors and the big OEMs that wanted it. :laugh:
OEMS don't care, the market was flooded with good and cheap CPUs already! There was plenty of CPU variety already. Phenom II X2/X3/X4/X6, Athlon II X2/X3/X, Semprons, Opterons etc. Heck at that time blue team had 2 generations of core i7/i5/i3 etc so it's not like the OEMs didnt have choice already.

Lets not get it twisted. AMD acted on their investors best interest. However, whom isnt to say the investors was influenced based on "market research" suggesting that we want Bulldozer ASAP! They could of thought, well if people want Bulldozer, lets give them bulldozer, fuck if it's ready its good for revenue and growth.
Posted on Reply
#6
cyberloner
bulldozer user here... stop complain if you don't even have it...
it is working nice so far so good.... the hardware is powerful only the software sucks...
Posted on Reply
#7
cadaveca
My name is Dave
Dent1 said:
OEMS don't care, the market was flooded with good and cheap CPUs already! There was plenty of CPU variety already. Phenom II X2/X3/X4/X6, Athlon II X2/X3/X, Semprons, Opterons etc. Heck at that time blue team had 2 generations of core i7/i5/i3 etc so it's not like the OEMs didnt have choice already.

Lets not get it twisted. AMD acted on their investors best interest. However, whom isnt to say the investors was influenced based on "market research" suggesting that we want Bulldozer ASAP! They could of thought, well if people want Bulldozer, lets give them bulldozer, fuck if it's ready its good for revenue and growth.
Perhaps. Truly, I have no idea why BD was launched when it was, or positioned as it was. But it's here now, so we've got no choice but to make the best of it.

And for me, that's leaving it sitting the shelf while I buy a different CPU. :p I'd like to use BD to review boards, but with all the issues I just cannot do it.
Posted on Reply
#8
theoneandonlymrk
none the less im still eager for some 990fx board reviews cadaveca:)
Posted on Reply
#9
cadaveca
My name is Dave
Me too. I keep putting in requests, but it seems X79 is what the OEMs want covered right this moment. I got two x79 reviews to go live still, then I'll start pushing for 990FX boards a bit harder. Got ECS and Biostar 990FX board reviews live already.
Posted on Reply
#10
TheGuruStud
cadaveca said:

Nobody cares about BD's multi-threaded performance. I'm not sure we're on the same topic here.
True beyond belief. I don't understand it.

My old cpu was a phenom II at 3.8. I got 8 fps x264 encoding a tv show.

Now, I have an 8120 @ 4.2. 30 fps on the same file.

Go ahead and keep telling the world that the CPU is slow. That's the kind of results you get when you're not using intel compilers (disabled instructions and shit libraries) and software that's hand tuned to only run well on intel.

They could be much better if the cache problems were fixed, but to call them shit is incredibly disingenuous.
Posted on Reply
#11
seronx
nt300 said:
So Sandybridge had issues but Intel solved most of them before they launched right.
All fixes in that PDF are all labeled no fix....meaning they will never be fixed....I would be amazed on how much no fixes are on Sandy Bridge...

There is no fixes on Bulldozer as well...(It's not one sided but I bet if we compared intel no fixes to amd no fixes, intel will have more no fixes)

TheGuruStud said:
True beyond belief. I don't understand it.

My old cpu was a phenom II at 3.8. I got 8 fps x264 encoding a tv show.

Now, I have an 8120 @ 4.2. 30 fps on the same file.
He is talking about Singlethreaded performance because Multithreaded performance is totally irrelevant there is no way Intel needs these multicore architectures they don't even need x86-64 psshaawww you are silly for even bringing up a multithreaded benchmark into this because the only real benchmark is single threaded and its name is SuperPi!!!!

Posted on Reply
#12
theoneandonlymrk
im now amazed anything cpu related works:) though mine dosnt anymore:(
Posted on Reply
#13
xenocide
The reason most people don't concentrate on the half of the spectrum BD does well (heavily threaded apps) is because most apps that use more than 4 threads are very niche. They are mostly Media Production\Encoding programs that very few people use. Even in those programs, BD is onyl about as good as an i7-2600k. In lightly threaded applications (4 or less threads), the 8150 falls behind the i5-2500k, while still costing more. If you can get one for the same price as a 2500k the 8150 or 8120 are probably an alright deal, but for most circumstances the i5-2500k is still the price\performance king.
Posted on Reply
#14
seronx
xenocide said:
The reason most people don't concentrate on the half of the spectrum BD does well (heavily threaded apps) is because most apps that use more than 4 threads are very niche. They are mostly Media Production\Encoding programs that very few people use. Even in those programs, BD is onyl about as good as an i7-2600k. In lightly threaded applications (4 or less threads), the 8150 falls behind the i5-2500k, while still costing more. If you can get one for the same price as a 2500k the 8150 or 8120 are probably an alright deal, but for most circumstances the i5-2500k is still the price\performance king.
i5 2500K beats the i7 2600K and the i7 3960X

Get with the times

Don't ignore the blue spectrum $1000 i7 3960X can't even beat a $200 i5 2500K in single threaded applications
Posted on Reply
#15
quicksand037
instruction sets

AVX, FMA4 AND XOP, AES do a little research here you will find out that when apps start to use the new instruction sets which are very efficient and sandy bridge dose not support them see how they will compare then rumor is that a lot of companies have all ready unofficially started to support them uhum adobe if you dont believe me Google FMA4 AND XOP and go from there bulldozer may be more future proof in this respect then maybe it will perform on par or even better not a fanboy or anything just saying i own both chips and for the price its not a bad chip all the way around it works great for aps like maya lightwave zbrush rendering video/editing ect. its more or less an opteron for desktops my bet is it will get better!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment