AMD FX-8130P Processor Benchmarks Surface

[seronx]

I’d say that a 990FX mobo’s and FX-8130P together will be a much more competitive price package for the gaming enthusiast particularly once OC'd. Given AMD has had a price to performance lead in gaming against Intel up till now, I see Bulldozer as really becoming the preeminent platform for gaming. Especially considering the long term socket compatibility of AM3+, them coupled with Southern Islands, AMD has positioned it's self nicely.

Zambezi*

and for those saying Zambezi has weak core to core performance

It's a B1 Engineer Sample

Engineer Samples are to test functionality

B1 Engineer Sample =/= "B2" Consumer/Reviewer Sample
In performance

The scores will indeed go up from now to then when it releases

 

[Pestilence]

I’d say that a 990FX mobo’s and FX-8130P together will be a much more competitive price package for the gaming enthusiast particularly once OC'd. Given AMD has had a price to performance lead in gaming against Intel up till now, I see Bulldozer as really becoming the preeminent platform for gaming. Especially considering the long term socket compatibility of AM3+, them coupled with Southern Islands, AMD has positioned it's self nicely.

How do you figure? Preliminary pricing has the 8 core BD at 330 dollars and the 990FX boards are priced around the same as P67 boards.

As for overclocking. Sandy Bridge processors are 95W TDP's, BD 8 core is 140W. Which do you think is going to have an easier time overclocking?

Zambezi*

and for those saying Bulldozer has weak core to core performance

It's a B1 Engineer Sample

Engineer Samples are to test functionality

B1 Engineer Sample =/= "B2" Consumer/Reviewer Sample
In performance

The scores will indeed go up from now to then when it releases

By 1% to 2% ser. There will be no miracle 10% gains.

 

[Thefumigator]

Zambezi*

and for those saying Bulldozer has weak core to core performance

It's a B1 Engineer Sample

Engineer Samples are to test functionality

B1 Engineer Sample =/= "B2" Consumer/Reviewer Sample
In performance

The scores will indeed go up from now to then when it releases

Yeah it looks really good for an ES.
I personally blame the core to core performance "weakness" to the fact that in the test all 8 cores were used to the max, while a core to core performance should be tested using a single threaded application.

Maybe there's a memory bottleneck as they might be using slower DDR3, or the E. sample is configured for memory compatibility mode or something that degrades performance like that.

For those speculating about price, the chip being 32nm will make the price competitive and still be redituable for AMD.

Things look pretty good if those figures are for real.

 

[Pestilence]

Maybe there's a memory bottleneck as they might be using slower DDR3

They tested using DDR3 1866 so there's no bottleneck. Amd has always had shitty memory bandwidth

 

[DeerSteak]

AMD certainly has a price advantage in motherboard costs. A 990X motherboard has the same 8+8 config for Crossfire/SLI that the P67 does, and AMD boards have better features than P67 boards at the same price point. And if you're not doing Crossfire/SLI you can certainly step down to a 970 board like I did and get one packed to the gills with 6x SATA III and 4x USB3 ports for $120. As for the CPU, AMD's quads are "fast enough" for games, but in sheer gaming performance AMD kind of universally loses to Intel. A $130 965 BE + (your favorite dedicated video card) loses to an i3 2105 + (same video card) in games most of the time.

A "fast enough" AMD CPU + mobo with nice amenities is roughly $250.
A "fast enough" Intel CPU + mobo with nice amenities is closer to $300.

In total system cost (if you're pairing it up with a $100 case, $80 PSU, $200 GPU, and $60 for 8GB of RAM) $50 isn't all THAT much. It's actually in non-gaming applications that AMD gets a performance lead with highly-threaded apps. Audio/video production, for example.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

I’d say that a 990FX mobo’s and FX-8130P together will be a much more competitive price package for the gaming enthusiast particularly once OC'd. Given AMD has had a price to performance lead in gaming against Intel up till now, I see Bulldozer as really becoming the preeminent platform for gaming. Especially considering the long term socket compatibility of AM3+, them coupled with Southern Islands, AMD has positioned it's self nicely.

With the cpu prices most likely being the same and the boards being out now we can get a pretty good idea that that's not accurate. At the cheap end ($120) the boards are comparative. At the premium side ($200) the boards are also comparable. The only part where they differ is the flagships are cheaper on AM3+. And I have no idea what you mean by "particularly once OC'd". The best bulldozer can do is match SB in overclocking. It'd be a bit absurd to expect BD to overclock better than SB. Lastly, AMD has only had a price/performance lead in gaming with Intel in the sub $100 category, and only because Intel is still relying on 775 for that price segment. AMD gaming performance is rather atrocious across the board compared to modern Intel platforms. They have to be dirt cheap to even match Intel in price/performance.

 

[DeerSteak]

I gotta tell you guys, if you think per-core/per-clock performance for commercial CPUs is going to be significantly faster than that of engineering samples, you don't understand what an ES is for. The whole point of an ES is to ensure that the architecture is performing as expected.

OTOH, I'm very hopeful that default clocks are higher than 3.2GHz.

 

[Crap Daddy]

The aida64 cache and memory benchmark are a disaster compared to Sandy Bridge, but again that might change,

 

[fullinfusion]

Another fake posting. I thought all this crap was over with. I'm starting to just scroll past these useless threads. I just wish amd will release something solid for numbers already.

 

[Pestilence]

I gotta tell you guys, if you think per-core/per-clock performance for commercial CPUs is going to be significantly faster than that of engineering samples, you don't understand what an ES is for. The whole point of an ES is to ensure that the architecture is performing as expected.

OTOH, I'm very hopeful that default clocks are higher than 3.2GHz.

I could have sworn the top of the line 8 core was going to be clocked at 3.8ghz

 

[seronx]

Yeah it looks really good for an ES.
I personally blame the core to core performance "weakness" to the fact that in the test all 8 cores were used to the max, while a core to core performance should be tested using a single threaded application.

Core to Core performance is slightly weaker because of the new way the each core talks to each other in newer applications you'll see higher core to core performance

Maybe there's a memory bottleneck as they might be using slower DDR3, or the E. sample is configured for memory compatibility mode or something that degrades performance like that.

L2 and L3 are the bottlenecks and those are getting fixed by B2

For those speculating about price, the chip being 32nm will make the price competitive and still be redituable for AMD.

$320~ish

Things look pretty good if those figures are for real.

They are for real

By 1% to 2% ser. There will be no miracle 10% gains.

10 to 30% actually

They tested using DDR3 1866 so there's no bottleneck. Amd has always had shitty memory bandwidth

False, AMD has the fastest memory bandwidth

Another fake posting. I thought all this crap was over with. I'm starting to just scroll past these useless threads. I just wish amd will release something solid for numbers already.

Not fake, just unofficial

The aida64 cache and memory benchmark are a disaster compared to Sandy Bridge, but again that might change,

Memory was fine they fixed the IMC but they might tweak it

L2 and L3 were below-par what they were expecting

I could have sworn the top of the line 8 core was going to be clocked at 3.8ghz

FX-8130P 3.8GHz
FX-8110 3.6GHz

 

[DeerSteak]

See, that's what I thought, too. 3.8GHz plus turbo is what I had *thought* i'd seen published in rumor/articles as well. That'd be totally bitchin'. Using the bizarre math that Apple used with the G5 quad was released (4x2.5GHz = 10GHz monster!!!11), we're looking at 30.4GHz of "CPU power". That's a retarded metric.

Regardless, 3.8GHz Bulldozer would be good news. Hell, I'd still OC the crap out of a 3.2GHz Zambezi and be happy.

L2 and L3 are the bottlenecks and those are getting fixed by B2

Link? Also, the cache bandwidth tests already look pretty reasonable.

False AMD has the fastest memory bandwidth

That's just...not true...based on every published review. For example: here

 

[Thefumigator]

They tested using DDR3 1866 so there's no bottleneck. Amd has always had shitty memory bandwidth

Maybe 8 cores are too much for DDR3 1866. Even in a dual channel config.... again, maybe...

 

[repman244]

Meh I still don't trust in these "leaks", need to wait for the real deal.

As for overclocking. Sandy Bridge processors are 95W TDP's, BD 8 core is 140W. Which do you think is going to have an easier time overclocking?

IF the leaked lineup from some time ago is correct FX-8130P 3.2GHz is a 125W chip, FX-8110 95W, I don't know where you got the 140W from.



And people that are comparing core for core, I don't think that's a valid comparison, since the "cores" in the modules aren't very similar to the real cores that we know (and AFAIK BD "core" has less transistors than Phenom II core).

 

[RejZoR]

AMD's were never superior in SuperPI so why brag about that?

 

[DeerSteak]

And people that are comparing core for core, I don't think that's a valid comparison, since the "cores" in the modules aren't very similar to the real cores that we know (and AFAIK BD "core" has less transistors than Phenom II core).

While this is true, they need to be prepared for such comparisons since they've been "advertising" it (so to speak, when they discuss architecture) as 8 cores.

edit: they need to be honest and talk about it to the public as a 4-core with an enhanced form of SMT - there's more hardware duplication than HyperThreading, but it's not 8 full-blown CPU cores.

 

[seronx]

Link? Also, the cache bandwidth tests already look pretty reasonable.



That's just...not true...based on every published review. For example: here

No, link you got to a trust a dude who has read up on Zambezi/Tech Specs for 7 months

Memory Bandwidth is higher and Latency is lower on AMD Chips always over Intel

AMD doesn't have a prefetcher/predictor

Zambezi does but how it works I don't know

While this is true, they need to be prepared for such comparisons since they've been "advertising" it (so to speak, when they discuss architecture) as 8 cores.

edit: they need to be honest and talk about it to the public as a 4-core with an enhanced form of SMT - there's more hardware duplication than HyperThreading, but it's not 8 full-blown CPU cores.

It is a full blown 8 core it is just that while they were looking away Intel caught up to CMP performance heck in CMP performance intel destroyed Phenom IIs just look at the i5 2500K vs Phenom II 980 BE

 

[Thatguy]

Meh I still don't trust in these "leaks", need to wait for the real deal.




IF the leaked lineup from some time ago is correct FX-8130P 3.2GHz is a 125W chip, FX-8110 95W, I don't know where you got the 140W from.



And people that are comparing core for core, I don't think that's a valid comparison, since the "cores" in the modules aren't very similar to the real cores that we know (and AFAIK BD "core" has less transistors than Phenom II core).

likely from sharing fpu, which leaves more room for int work.

 

[Pestilence]

Ser,

10 to 30 percent from just a new stepping? Not a chance Imo.

 

[DeerSteak]

No, link you got to a trust a dude who has read up on Zambezi/Tech Specs for 7 months

Surely unless you work for AMD or a partner (and if you want to claim to do so, that's fine) you've been reading what I've been reading, like David Kanter's and Jon Stokes' excellent write-ups.

Don't get me wrong. I really want Bulldozer to be competitive. Really, truly, with all my heart. But I'm not going to delude myself into thinking there's a magical performance improvement coming without higher clocks. If, when the reviews FINALLY come, there's extra performance to be had, I'm totally a winner since this is the platform I'm betting on with my own money.

 

[seronx]

Ser,

10 to 30 percent from just a new stepping? Not a chance Imo.

I meant Engineer Sample to Consumer/Reviewer Grade Samples lol

Stepping will only be 5% at least 10% at most but could be 30% if there is more tweaks, by C0 30% will be hit absolute

Engineer is 3.2GHz
Consumer Grade is 3.6-3.8GHz(8110-8130P)

All FX Chips are unlocked so who cares about 8130Ps

I feel technically bad about the competition good luck overclocking your Multiplier Locked LGA 2011 4-cores and 6-cores

30% improvement in performance is only 55-60% over Phenom II 1100T in real world don't get your socks overblown yeesh

and to get back on the L2 and L3

They want the 2MB L2 to have the same latencies at a 256KB Intel L2 but with 8x the capacity
They want the 8MB L3 to do the same as the L3 is divided up in to portions of the module to help module communication

 

[DeerSteak]

No, link you got to a trust a dude who has read up on Zambezi/Tech Specs for 7 months

Memory Bandwidth is higher and Latency is lower on AMD Chips always over Intel

AMD doesn't have a prefetcher/predictor

Zambezi does but how it works I don't know



It is a full blown 8 core it is just that while they were looking away Intel caught up to CMP performance

If this is a duplicate it's because I've written it before, and can't find it.

Do you work for AMD? You may have access to information I don't in that case. Otherwise I've been reading the same stuff as you - plenty of great writeups by incredibly smart people and nothing that I can find anywhere says anything that you're saying. Lots of people are reading and writing, and I'm more apt to believe what's been repeated over and over.

1.) Bulldozer in general is not a full 8 cores
2.) AMD's memory theoretical bandwidth numbers are lower than Nehalem and Sandy Bridge. And they're not THAT far off of theoretical maxes; roughly 25% short or so.
3.) They're just theoretical numbers. Nothing actually uses memory bandwidth like that anyway.

Particularly, Kanter's awesome writeup (the RealWorldTech link) goes to great lengths to say specifically the opposite of what you're saying. There's tons of intelligently-shared resources.

 

[Pestilence]

I feel technically bad about the competition good luck overclocking your Multiplier Locked LGA 2011 4-cores and 6-cores

BD isn't competition for 2011 plus everyone is going to be buying the unlocked processors. I'd really love to see BD beat the 2600K badly that intel has to man up and release a 6 core on 1155 for 499.99 but i know i'm just dreaming.

Do you hear me Intel? We just want a 6 core. We don't NEED HT

 

[seronx]

1.) Bulldozer in general is not a full 8 cores
2.) AMD's memory theoretical bandwidth numbers are lower than Nehalem and Sandy Bridge. And they're not THAT far off of theoretical maxes; roughly 25% short or so.
3.) They're just theoretical numbers. Nothing actually uses memory bandwidth like that anyway.

1.) Zambezi in general is a full native 8 core processor
2.) AMD's memory theoretical bandwidth numbers are substantially higher than Nehalem and Sandy Bridge
3.) Exactly but Applications can use AMD's memory to the theoretical limit unlike the competition

There is a big improvement to the NB and IMC in Zambezi a HUGE Improvement we won't see it till consumer grade
(From Phenom II "Black Edition" -> Zambezi "FX Black Edition Vision FX" Processors

I'm not an employee or work for AMD I just been looking a lot longer

BD isn't competition for 2011 plus everyone is going to be buying the unlocked processors. I'd really love to see BD beat the 2600K badly that intel has to man up and release a 6 core on 1155 for 499.99 but i know i'm just dreaming.

Do you hear me Intel? We just want a 6 core. We don't NEED HT

Zambezi is damn as hell competing lol

The only LGA 2011 processor that is going to be unlocked is the Extreme Edition one($600-$1000)

 

[Crap Daddy]

There's the i7-970 6 core 32nm for 580$. It is eating this leaked BD for breakfast not that anybody would need such a chip for gaming.