AMD Bulldozer Performance Exposed?

[HalfAHertz]

well the Phenom 1 >> Phenom 2 jump was pretty nice and that was keeping the same core architecture and only shrinking the die. Now imagine a similar die shrink plus an entirely new architecture. I think we're looking at at least twice the improvement of what we experienced with the Phenom 2s

 

[xenocide]

well the Phenom 1 >> Phenom 2 jump was pretty nice and that was keeping the same core architecture and only shrinking the die. Now imagine a similar die shrink plus an entirely new architecture. I think we're looking at at least twice the improvement of what we experienced with the Phenom 2s

Just because they are implementing a new architecture doesn't mean they are doing it with the same level of success that Intel usually does. It will definitely be better than PII's, but those are only just better than the last generation of C2D's\Q's. AMD is a full generation and a half to two generations behind in most applications outside of Cinebench and various Synthetics. Keeping that in mind, Bulldozer might just make AMD competitive again since SB is pretty affordable, and the mid-range SB CPU's destroy anything AMD has currently.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

I like AMD and all, but I don't see this happening. Core for core they might match SB, but easly beat them, no. There is no facts stating that it would be true or otherwise.

There are no facts about Bulldozer period. All either one of us is doing is speculating.

I could very well be wrong, I just hope I'm not.

 

[allnights]

Oh dear oh dear oh dear ... I always see the same old stuff spouted time after time.

Think some people need a CPU history lesson or two!

It seems some people believe that Intel can do no wrong. Funny I seem to remember a number of failed designs, and not just the desktop market either, and seem to recall there was a problem just recently.

As for their wonderful R&D, do you know WHERE the first Core Design first came about? While intel were using miniature freezer units, pun, to keep the Pentium D cold enough?

As for Bulldozer I am just as anxious as everyone else to see real benchmarks but I am not going to allow the fact the the stress from being on tender hooks is going to make me billow out a load of claims that has no foundation whatsoever. I even just came from a site that claimed AMD were coming to an end, I shall not use any words to describe my thoughts on him, other than misguided.

Now I could be completely wrong here, though I have NOT been proved wrong before. But my money is on Bulldozer being something a bit special, and that benefits us all. I also do not think it is a case of whether it is faster than SB but instead a case of how much.

Sorry to any intel fanboys out there but those of you who have been a little too forthcoming may have to do some back pedalling. SB was a great design and I thoroughly enjoyed reading about it and I love the fact that both companies exist. But to claim that AMD do not stand a chance is pure madness.

I look forward to what Bulldozer can do and what Intel will counter with and I believe that the main event, which means WE benefit, will take place around Dec/Jan. Hmm but then considering history maybe make that August to October 2012, lol.

Oh one last thing, I may be 'new' here, hello by the way, but I am certainly not new to this industry. lol.

Wish I was, could do with knocking a few years off.

 

[allnights]

Oh and if you want a laugh about this Intel thing I will tell you of a short conversation I had with the owner of a local Computer Store.

Me: Any idea when AMD Bulldozer is being released.

Store Owner: Oh we do not touch AMD only sell Intel

Me: That is mad, why do you do that?

Store Owner: AMD are unreliable they always overheat and crack!

Me: Your saying you built AMD rigs and customers bought them back cracked, sorry that's not right....(realsiing why) OH MY GOD I LET YOU TOUCH MY LAPTOP?!?!

When I left the store he was NOt very happy for some bizarre reason. LOL.

 

[cadaveca]

You must consider that what many here are looking at for performance, is not stock numbers. Most are interested on what you get with a fair overclock, and that's what Intel brings, currently.

That says, that thier process is very mature, as thier chips have high "overhead".

AMD, on the other hand, do not scale as far, and current chips have much less overhead than what Intel offers.


Your comment about the store owner seems almost fitting, in this regard. try running an AMD @ 5 GHz on air, and yeah, it'll crack, and crumble, if it even gets that far.

I'm not an Intel fanboy, actually, quite the opposite, but Intel is faster currently, so AMD has a huge bar to jump over.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

also for those looking for value for performance AMD didnt offer that either

Core 2 Duo vs Athlon II or Athlon x2 64 hmm the old X2s got slammed athlon II offered parity,
Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4ghz yea Phenom I 9850 did okay it was slowery but in multi thread apps it stayed close. Phenom IIs yea they butcher a stock Q6600. but oh wait G0 stepping 2.4ghz went to 3.4 some were able to get 3.6ghz

compare a 3.6ghz Q6600 vs a Phenom II the performance difference is miniscule

Q6600 release was Jan 7 2007
Phenom II x4 January 2009

that means the guy who paid the high price for a Q6600 had a Phenom IIs performance 2 years before Phenom II arrived and still has equal performance now. at least when compared to the quads.

so in 2007 intel offered 100% for example it took amd 2009 to offer 102% its now 2011, AMD still couldn't really put a nail in the 775 coffin with Intel users enjoying the same performance over the course of 4 years what AMD offered for 2years. value for money dosent exist really. The AMD chip came late and didnt beat its intended competition and arrived late to the party with core i3 i5 and i7 slaughtering it in the process.

Overall theres ways to make any company look good or bad if you pick out the right data. All that really matters is WHEN can you buy the CPU and for how long is its performance going to keep up.

from what i can tell so far Core 2 Quad still does well to this day 1156 / 1336 is faster and 1155 faster still. from that perspective it would seem an Intel Chip in recent memory has a good 4 year to 5 year life span before its no longer really able to push the Games we play or the apps we use. compared to AMDs cpus only offering comparable performance to there competition at 2yrs . this basically means you might pay an Intel Tax but at the same time you got that much more performance sooner.

good example of this if amd does beat a 2600k by 5-10% thats great but you could already own a 2600k for the last 6 months sure there was a mobo problem with the chipset that was blown way out of proportion. so sure AMD might reach parity with or beat a 2600k but will it beat it enough to make ppl notice? thats the problem here. if they cant wow people then they wont make a difference. You have a chip thats good but not good enough to make people take notice. This is a world of consumers. we are a tiny 1-5% of the market, what matters is winning over the consumer and the OEMs heres the thing the guy above posted about a shop owner stating amd systems overheat and crack etc. is that a load of BS sure is. problem is thats what MOST of the consumer population thinks as well Untill AMD changes that nothing changes same old song an dance.

I will give AMD one thing thought they REALLY REALLY REALLY! know how to milk and architecture, since the Athlon 64 to Phenom to Phenom II is essentially still the same architecture just scaled further and further all these years. But they just cant scale it enough to be good enough anymore.

now before any smartasses step in saying how great AMD are.
yes yes we know
They were the first with an IMC
the first to bring 64bit cpus to the masses blah blah we get it they have done us alot of good

and

I am running a phenom II system right now. Ive pushed it as far as it can go with gpus which it could never hope to feed. I like a few others around here know the limits AMD has. If they can pull off a big win with Bulldozer id be extremely happy about that as my new build wont be for a little while, but history tells us that Bulldozer wont be what we wish it would be. It could it might its possible but following the trends it wont.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Actually, if history tells us anything, it's that when AMD releases a completely new architecture, it beats Intel quite solidly.

But, since no one has released an architecture anything like Bulldozer, there is no historical basis for comparison.

 

[erocker]

Actually, if history tells us anything, it's that when AMD releases a completely new architecture, it beats Intel quite solidly.

But, since no one has released an architecture anything like Bulldozer, there is no historical basis for comparison.

The Athlon series did, the Phenom series definitely did not. History tells us it's a 50/50 chance.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

The Athlon series did, the Phenom series definitely did not. History tells us it's a 50/50 chance.

The Phenom series wasn't completely new.

 

[alexsubri]

@ Damn_Smooth --where did you find that pic? those girl`s look sexy. I would like to see a close up

wait..nvm they are attractive, but the only really hot one is the one in the middle...

is it just me (stoned) or from left to right, these girl`s have: cup cake breast`s, hot water bottle`s breast`s, flap jack breast`s, & lemon breat`s?

 

[Damn_Smooth]

@ Damn_Smooth --where did you find that pic? those girl`s look sexy. I would like to see a close up

http://www.mega-cars.net/d/2606-4/AMD-pit-babes.jpg

wait..nvm they are attractive, but the only really hot one is the one in the middle...

I like the 3 tall ones.

I guess I'd have to take those tops off to be able to tell for sure.

 

[Melvis]

Because there has never been a company that talked up a product and failed to deliver correct? The fact is, there exists the very real possibility that Bulldozer is NOT as good as people want. I hope it does great, but there has to be a reason AMD isn't bragging left and right with Benchmarks for their new flagship product that is around a month away from launch. That being said, I cannot prove or disprove these screens so who knows. We'll have to wait and see when AMD does a big reveal at whatever that trade show is that is coming up.

Yes i agree both sides have talked up there products before and did not deliver (Phenom 1 and P4) But AMD has also done this in the past and said nothing about there older FX CPU's and we all know what happened there And if AMD wants to bring back the FX branding i for one would NEVER bring it back unless you know your product is going to deliver like it did in 2005, it just wouldn't make sense and look even sillier then the Phenom 1 release.

At this stage i disprove ALL so called leaked benchmarks and will wait for real ones after the release date, then the proof is in the pudding.

 

[alexsubri]

I am still optimistic for AMD...Beating an i7-2600K is pure win, but beating a i7-990x is winning!

 

[Wile E]

I completely disagree with your sleeping giant analogy. AMD did a great job of keeping up with Intel, and they completely wiped the floor with them in the price/performance ratio, up until the release of Sandy 3 months ago.

The whole time they were using 45nm technology.

Now that they've jumped to 32nm, I really don't find it hard for them to not only match Intel, but to easily beat them.

No, not really. Several members showed that the price to performance ratio was pretty damn equal until you hit AMD's wall, then Intel got considerably more expensive, but also considerably faster. Intel currently still has the fastest desktop cpu.

Die size is irrelevant here. The only thing that matters is end results.

Oh dear oh dear oh dear ... I always see the same old stuff spouted time after time.

Think some people need a CPU history lesson or two!

It seems some people believe that Intel can do no wrong. Funny I seem to remember a number of failed designs, and not just the desktop market either, and seem to recall there was a problem just recently.

As for their wonderful R&D, do you know WHERE the first Core Design first came about? While intel were using miniature freezer units, pun, to keep the Pentium D cold enough?

As for Bulldozer I am just as anxious as everyone else to see real benchmarks but I am not going to allow the fact the the stress from being on tender hooks is going to make me billow out a load of claims that has no foundation whatsoever. I even just came from a site that claimed AMD were coming to an end, I shall not use any words to describe my thoughts on him, other than misguided.

Now I could be completely wrong here, though I have NOT been proved wrong before. But my money is on Bulldozer being something a bit special, and that benefits us all. I also do not think it is a case of whether it is faster than SB but instead a case of how much.

Sorry to any intel fanboys out there but those of you who have been a little too forthcoming may have to do some back pedalling. SB was a great design and I thoroughly enjoyed reading about it and I love the fact that both companies exist. But to claim that AMD do not stand a chance is pure madness.

I look forward to what Bulldozer can do and what Intel will counter with and I believe that the main event, which means WE benefit, will take place around Dec/Jan. Hmm but then considering history maybe make that August to October 2012, lol.

Oh one last thing, I may be 'new' here, hello by the way, but I am certainly not new to this industry. lol.

Wish I was, could do with knocking a few years off.

Yeah, I think I already pointed out that Intel got it's ass kicked in the P4 days, but I also pointed out that they have since learned from their mistakes. I don't see them making the same error any time in the near future. Your point is moot in terms of modern cpus.


That said, I hope for the best with Bulldozer, but don't honestly expect it to pull ahead. But even if it just reaches parity with Intel in terms of performance, then that's a huge win. Not only for AMD, but for us as well.

There is only one thing we can do, and that's wait for the real benches to hit.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Die size is irrelevant here. The only thing that matters is end results

Die size matters because it directly effects end results.

 

[ShiBDiB]

He sounds like a complete CUNT!

For having an opinion different from yours? He owns the store, he can sell whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

 

[Lionheart]

Oh and if you want a laugh about this Intel thing I will tell you of a short conversation I had with the owner of a local Computer Store.

Me: Any idea when AMD Bulldozer is being released.

Store Owner: Oh we do not touch AMD only sell Intel

Me: That is mad, why do you do that?

Store Owner: AMD are unreliable they always overheat and crack!

Me: Your saying you built AMD rigs and customers bought them back cracked, sorry that's not right....(realsiing why) OH MY GOD I LET YOU TOUCH MY LAPTOP?!?!

When I left the store he was NOt very happy for some bizarre reason. LOL.

He sounds like a complete CUNT!

@ Damn_Smooth --where did you find that pic? those girl`s look sexy. I would like to see a close up

http://www.mega-cars.net/d/2606-4/AMD-pit-babes.jpg

wait..nvm they are attractive, but the only really hot one is the one in the middle...

is it just me (stoned) or from left to right, these girl`s have: cup cake breast`s, hot water bottle`s breast`s, flap jack breast`s, & lemon breat`s?

Do they come with any AMD CPU/GPU bundle?

 

[Lionheart]

For having an opinion different from yours? He owns the store, he can sell whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

Yep of course, I still stand by what I said though.

Anyways back to topic.

 

[ShiBDiB]

Yep of course, I still stand by what I said though.

Anyways back to topic.

woah sneaky ninja edit.. that or the rapture reversed r posts just to mess with peoples minds !!

 

[Thefumigator]

May I post my opinion?

you won't believe some of these points but...

1-I dislike the AMD girls in the picture... sorry guys, ugly girls being blonde and blue eyed are ugly girls after all.

2-I agree with Wile E ... AND I also agree with DAMN SMOOTH.

There was a different attitude from intel after Athlon. Because intel lost market share to AMD, and shareholders became worried, mad or commit suicide. After these tragic events (sorry, black humor), Intel REALLY turned some lights on. Also, DAMN SMOOTH got a point, AMD learnt some lesson on the way and got as close to intel as possible. And they really are now, they just have to complete their offerings with better performance CPUs in the high end.

When Phenom 1 was out the TLB bug ruined it, if it wasn't because of that, I would just call it a very good processor. Not an excellent one, just a very good one. But people out there just called it a complete disaster. Even after the bug was corrected. I personally think the intel offerings at the time weres better. But it wasn't fair to call Phenom B3 a complete disaster.... C'mon guys.

to me Phenom was a godsend. With a simple bios update it worked on my old mobo, which had AGP(!) (Asrock NF3), with only a pair of butterflies in my pocket, at least I could get rid of my Athlon 64 X2, the first AM2 one.

Also, @DAMN SMOOTH, does your nick name relates to the "feeling" of having an AMD system, then I'm with you. As an owner of a Phenom 9550, I can notice that the whole system doesn't lag. it is slow, but no matter how many things I throw at it, it just doesn't lag as the X2 did. I mean, maybe Phenom 1 is slower to whatever, but its not laggy at all. Ok, it may be a subjective thingy, but mouse pointer and non-responding windows are quite evident in older systems.

Rounding out things: in my opinion, first of all, to AMD: if you can't catch intel, at least improve what you have. improve and innovate your line as far as you can. As several actual AMD offerings are not bad sellings products. Just keep going. Being 10% slower than competition should not be big deal.

 

[Wile E]

Die size matters because it directly effects end results.

Only when referring to the same architecture design. AMD's die size vs Intel's is completely irrelevant, and not directly comparable. Besides, if you really want to go down that road, after the p4 debacle, Intel has been ahead, even when on the same size process.

 

[Goodman]

I make this thread & post the article because that is the only "benchmark" i found about AMD Bulldozer true or false it's always fun to speculated

But my personal opinion is that Bulldozer will still not be able to beat the performance of the I7 SB but will come close at a much better price , ~90% performance for 65-75% of the price of an SB...

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Only when referring to the same architecture design. AMD's die size vs Intel's is completely irrelevant, and not directly comparable. Besides, if you really want to go down that road, after the p4 debacle, Intel has been ahead, even when on the same size process.

Yes, because AMD hasn't released a new architecture since then.

 

[Wile E]

Yes, because AMD hasn't released a new architecture since then.

What is your point? So has Intel, and Intel has still been firmly ahead since then, on every process.

AKA: Your die size argument is not in AMD's favor.