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

AMD Gives Bulldozer 6-core a Speed-Bump with FX-6200

Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
9,770 (2.78/day)
Likes
1,779
Location
Suffolk/Essex, England
System Name Joseph's Laptop Clevo P771ZM
Processor 4970k @4/4.4ghz
Motherboard *shrugs*
Cooling About 2 kilos of copper fins and pipes.
Memory 2x 8gb
Video Card(s) GTX 970m 6gb
Storage 500gb Msata SSD 2x 2TB storage drives
Display(s) Built in
Power Supply 300w power brick
Mouse Steam controller
Software Windows ten
#26
It's definitely a case by case thing, an FX 8150/8120 does excel by a pretty good margin in software that will put the extra cores/threads to use as expected. I don't see how it's a good thing to say that it's practically like a Phenom with 8 cores though when clocked higher, as doesn't that still indicate that you'd be better off with a Phenom II chip if you don't use heavily threaded software?, so what would justify going with BD?
Well depends how in to over-clocking you are.

Like I said by IPC matches a phenom @ 4ghz ( cept in some older software)

If I ran 1.45 volts through this chip I could probably hit 5ghz a good phenom can maybe get to 4.5 so again single core performance ends up the same but with 2 extra cores.

You have to bare in mind an 8120 is 20-30 pound more than a 1100t, for it's price it does perfectly.

The 8150 is completely waste of time though :laugh:



"Yes, Bulldozer has 8 "cores", but it shares a lot of resources between them. So, in workloads reliant on those shared resources, it'll perform like a quad. This is why you see Phenom x6 beating it in some threaded applications. In workloads that aren't so reliant on those shared resources, or that are a bit more balanced (e.g. real world multitasking), BD can start to behave more like an 8 core. However, the end result in benchmarks is the power consumption of an 8 core and often the performance of a hyperthreaded quad, and a lot of the bad press on launch was because of this.
"

Can you give me a few examples please, I'd like to try it out :toast:

It certainly doesn't effect cine-bench ( I can disable one core per module with my motherboard and it didn't really make a difference compared to disabling the last 2 modules)

But if you name what software is effected I can try and see if it really doesn't get an extra performance from those extra cores.


I think people forget that two extra cores( over a phenomx6) doesn't necessarily mean 33% extra performance.

Like going from single to dual didn't give us the 100% boost people would of expected.


Now just to before I get barrages of " fan boy" If I was doing this build from scratch I would go with a 2600k set up.

How ever I already had the 990fxa board so went with BD. But compared to my 1055t most things are quite a lot quicker .


For example you would expect a 50 performance difference between a phenom 965 and 1100t stock at cinebench, but the actual performance difference is closer to 28% .


It seems the hype killed these chips more then anything else.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Messages
1,125 (0.23/day)
Likes
392
Location
66 feet from the ground
System Name 2nd AMD puppy
Processor Phenom II x4 BE 970-3.6 Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper TX2
Memory 16 Gb DDR3:8GB Kingston HyperX Beast + 8Gb G.Skill Sniper(by courtesy of tabascosauz &TPU)
Video Card(s) MSI HD6850 Cyclone;860/1100 Mhz
Storage SSD-840 pro 128 Gb;Seagate 500Gb;WD-1Tb
Display(s) Samsung 2032BW
Case NZXT 820 PHANTOM
Audio Device(s) Audigy SE with Logitech Z-5500
Power Supply Cooleer Master RP M520
Mouse Razer copperhead / Gamdias zeus (by courtesy of sneekypeet & TPU)
Keyboard MS Sidewinder x4
Software win7 64bit sp1
Benchmark Scores irrelevant for me
#27
can we call this chip "sexdozer" ?
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
1,522 (0.31/day)
Likes
828
Location
South Africa
System Name Firelance
Processor i7-3770K @ 4.6GHz / 1.23V
Motherboard Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H @ F16h mod BIOS
Cooling Corsair H105 + 4x Gentle Typhoon 1850
Memory 2x 8GB Crucial Ballistix Sport DDR3-1600 CL9 @ CL7
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1070 Armor OC with Gaming X BIOS @ 2000 core / 2300 mem
Storage 2x 256GB 840 Pro (RAID-0) + 3TB Deskstar 7K3000 + 512GB BX300 + 8TB WD Purple
Display(s) Dell U2713HM (25x14) + Acer P243W (19x12)
Case Thermaltake Core X31
Audio Device(s) Corsair VOID Wireless
Power Supply Seasonic SS-760XP² Platinum
Mouse Logitech G400
Keyboard Logitech G19
Software Windows 7 Professional x64 Service Pack 1
#28
I wonder if this is a harvested FX-8xxx, would explain the TDP increase over the 6100.
 
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
1,187 (0.33/day)
Likes
326
Location
Portland, OR
Processor Ryzen 2600x
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix X470-F Gaming
Cooling Noctua
Memory G.SKILL Flare X Series 16GB DDR4 3466
Video Card(s) EVGA 980ti FTW
Storage (OS)Samsung 950 Pro (512GB), (Data) WD Reds
Display(s) 24" Dell UltraSharp U2412M
Case Fractal Design Define R5
Audio Device(s) Sennheiser GAME ONE
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA 650 P2
Mouse Mionix Castor
Keyboard Deck Hassium Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro x64
#29
A 500MHz increase over the FX 6100 and 4GHz+ turbo is great, but still not significant enough for me to consider going BD just yet. A lot needs to improve.
I agree. I got the AM3+ mobo ready but I want more refinements before I pull the trigger
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
9,770 (2.78/day)
Likes
1,779
Location
Suffolk/Essex, England
System Name Joseph's Laptop Clevo P771ZM
Processor 4970k @4/4.4ghz
Motherboard *shrugs*
Cooling About 2 kilos of copper fins and pipes.
Memory 2x 8gb
Video Card(s) GTX 970m 6gb
Storage 500gb Msata SSD 2x 2TB storage drives
Display(s) Built in
Power Supply 300w power brick
Mouse Steam controller
Software Windows ten
#30
I wonder if this is a harvested FX-8xxx, would explain the TDP increase over the 6100.
The TDP increase would be from the overclocking of the exact same CPU : ]

Could be wrong, but the whole point of bulldozer is that is is a modular design so there is no more need to have disabled cores, they can simply cut them away.
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
867 (0.27/day)
Likes
207
Location
London, UK
System Name The one under the desk / Media Centre
Processor Xeon X3730@3.6GHZ / Phenom II X4 805E
Motherboard Gigabyte P55M-UD4 / Asus Crosshair III
Cooling Corsair H70 + 2*PWM fan / Arctic Alpine 11
Memory 16GB DRR3-1333 9-9-9-27 / 4GB Crucial DDR3-1333
Video Card(s) Asus DirectCU GTX 680 / Gigabyte 560TI
Storage Kingston V200 128GB, WD6400AAKS, 1TB Seagate 7.2kRPM SSHD / Kingston V200 128GB
Display(s) Samsung 2343BW + Dell Ultrasharp 1600*1200 / 32" TV
Case C'M' Silencio 550 / Some ancient SilverStone brushed aluminium media centre
Audio Device(s) No.
Power Supply Thermaltake Toughpower XT 675W / EVGA 430W
Mouse Mionix Naos 3200 / Generic PS2
Keyboard Roccat Ryos TKL Pro / Evoluent Mouse Friendly Keyboard (Logitech OEM)
Software Windows 7 Ult x64
Benchmark Scores Nah.
#31
Well depends how in to over-clocking you are.

Like I said by IPC matches a phenom @ 4ghz ( cept in some older software)

If I ran 1.45 volts through this chip I could probably hit 5ghz a good phenom can maybe get to 4.5 so again single core performance ends up the same but with 2 extra cores.
I fear you're missing the boat here to some degree. The thing is that even if you equalised per-core performance between Phenom and FX - and the FX would be drawing a lot more power, even power per core, to do so - the Phenom would still outperform it many multithreaded applications, because of the architectural bottlenecks of the FX.

But if you name what software is effected I can try and see if it really doesn't get an extra performance from those extra cores.
I've not had the chance to experiment myself, but one example of a piece of software that seems not to be held back by the architecture is this:



Notice the near excellent scaling vs. the (faster clock for clock) Phenom II.

I think people forget that two extra cores( over a phenomx6) doesn't necessarily mean 33% extra performance.

Like going from single to dual didn't give us the 100% boost people would of expected.

It seems the hype killed these chips more then anything else.
It's not just that two extra cores failed to mean 33% extra performance, it's that it actually meant less performance in many areas. This, as I've repeated above, is because Bulldozer "cores" are not cores in the same sense as Phenom cores. You could just as easily call it a quad core in which each core has two of some things.

The hype definitely was a big mistake by AMD - this should have been promoted as a budget multitasking chip. I think what really killed it, though, was the single-threaded performance and single-threaded performance per watt. Too much of what we do is still dependent on this.

There's also an issue (fixed in Windows 8 iirc) with how Windows assigns tasks to cores. If you have a dual-threaded task, for example, Windows may well send it to cores 0 and 1 of a Bulldozer CPU - because it sees it as a regular 8 core. But depending on the application, performance could sometimes be almost doubled by sending that task to cores on different modules, such as 0 and 2. Tests in Windows 8 show BD close the gap on but not catch up with SB.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
1,867 (0.70/day)
Likes
249
Location
So. Cal.
#32
Yes, Bulldozer has 8 "cores", but it shares a lot of resources between them. So, in workloads reliant on those shared resources, it'll perform like a quad.
That's where the Windows 8 scheduler would add benefits, it suppose to break those packets and provide them to the modules in improved sequencing, the module has only to point the packet to the next "core" that will be ready.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
3,046 (0.62/day)
Likes
643
Location
Ancient Greece, Acropolis (Time Lord)
System Name RiseEn Gaming PC
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ stock
Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty X370 GAMING X AM4
Cooling Corsair H115i PRO RGB, 280mm Radiator, Dual 140mm ML Series PWM Fans
Memory G.Skill TridentZ 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3200 @ 2933
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon RX 580 8GB Nitro+ SE
Storage Corsair Force MP500 M.2 2280 480GB + WD/Seagate 5TB Total 64MB Cache
Display(s) Asus 27" (MG278Q) 144Hz WQHD 1440p + 2 x Asus 24" (VG245H) FHD 75Hz 1080p (3 x 1ms FreeSync)
Case Corsair Obsidian Series 450D Gaming Case
Audio Device(s) SteelSound 5Hv2 8CH HD + Creative Sound Blaster Cinema 3 & Logitech THX 5.1CH HD
Power Supply Corsair TX750W Power Supply
Mouse Razer DeathAdder PC Gaming Mouse - Ergonomic Left Hand Edition
Keyboard Logitech G15 Classic Gaming Keyboard
Software Windows 10 Pro - 64-Bit Edition
Benchmark Scores I have the worlds Fastest PC ever Built - 1980
#33
Might as well grab the 4100, those overclock very well and is quite cheap.
I am half tempted to grab one to play around with it if there they release a FX-4200.
Don't quote me but within my Crosshair V bios there is a setting where you can enable "Core-Unlocking". The thing is can you unlock extra cores within the FX-4100? Some already claim they've unlocked cores with the ASUS Sabertooth mobo that has almost the same bios as the Crosshair V.

Anyhow nice speed bump from FX-6100 to FX-6200. Though it does sound odd that they didn't name it the FX-6120/6150. I believe the FX-**70 and FX-**90 are reserved for clock speeds higher than 4GHz such as the upcoming FX-4170 @ 4.20GHz, FX-8170 @ 4.00GHz and FX-8190 @ 4.60 GHz at stock speeds.
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
867 (0.27/day)
Likes
207
Location
London, UK
System Name The one under the desk / Media Centre
Processor Xeon X3730@3.6GHZ / Phenom II X4 805E
Motherboard Gigabyte P55M-UD4 / Asus Crosshair III
Cooling Corsair H70 + 2*PWM fan / Arctic Alpine 11
Memory 16GB DRR3-1333 9-9-9-27 / 4GB Crucial DDR3-1333
Video Card(s) Asus DirectCU GTX 680 / Gigabyte 560TI
Storage Kingston V200 128GB, WD6400AAKS, 1TB Seagate 7.2kRPM SSHD / Kingston V200 128GB
Display(s) Samsung 2343BW + Dell Ultrasharp 1600*1200 / 32" TV
Case C'M' Silencio 550 / Some ancient SilverStone brushed aluminium media centre
Audio Device(s) No.
Power Supply Thermaltake Toughpower XT 675W / EVGA 430W
Mouse Mionix Naos 3200 / Generic PS2
Keyboard Roccat Ryos TKL Pro / Evoluent Mouse Friendly Keyboard (Logitech OEM)
Software Windows 7 Ult x64
Benchmark Scores Nah.
#34
That's where the Windows 8 scheduler would add benefits, it suppose to break those packets and provide them to the modules in improved sequencing, the module has only to point the packet to the next "core" that will be ready.
You replied while I was typing, see above :p

Even with this problem resolved, SB still leaves BD in the dust.

 
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
3,046 (0.62/day)
Likes
643
Location
Ancient Greece, Acropolis (Time Lord)
System Name RiseEn Gaming PC
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ stock
Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty X370 GAMING X AM4
Cooling Corsair H115i PRO RGB, 280mm Radiator, Dual 140mm ML Series PWM Fans
Memory G.Skill TridentZ 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3200 @ 2933
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon RX 580 8GB Nitro+ SE
Storage Corsair Force MP500 M.2 2280 480GB + WD/Seagate 5TB Total 64MB Cache
Display(s) Asus 27" (MG278Q) 144Hz WQHD 1440p + 2 x Asus 24" (VG245H) FHD 75Hz 1080p (3 x 1ms FreeSync)
Case Corsair Obsidian Series 450D Gaming Case
Audio Device(s) SteelSound 5Hv2 8CH HD + Creative Sound Blaster Cinema 3 & Logitech THX 5.1CH HD
Power Supply Corsair TX750W Power Supply
Mouse Razer DeathAdder PC Gaming Mouse - Ergonomic Left Hand Edition
Keyboard Logitech G15 Classic Gaming Keyboard
Software Windows 10 Pro - 64-Bit Edition
Benchmark Scores I have the worlds Fastest PC ever Built - 1980
#35
You replied while I was typing, see above :p
Even with this problem resolved, SB still leaves BD in the dust.
http://media.bestofmicro.com/N/G/310588/original/win 8 wow 2560.png
There's also an issue (fixed in Windows 8 iirc) with how Windows assigns tasks to cores. If you have a dual-threaded task, for example, Windows may well send it to cores 0 and 1 of a Bulldozer CPU - because it sees it as a regular 8 core. But depending on the application, performance could sometimes be almost doubled by sending that task to cores on different modules, such as 0 and 2. Tests in Windows 8 show BD close the gap on but not catch up with SB.
It's because todays Bulldozer requires a lot more refining and tuning. Hopefully the upcoming Piledriver cores also called Enhanced Bulldozer resolved these issues. For today's Bulldozer AMD will have to jack up the clock speed to compensate for now. But great points nevertheless.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
4,063 (0.94/day)
Likes
510
Location
Hong Kong
Processor Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Motherboard X399 Fatal1ty Professional Gaming
Memory Team NightHawk 3600 4x8GB
Video Card(s) RX Vega 56
Storage Samsung 960 Evo 512GB 3-way Raid 0, Toshiba 8TB HDD
Display(s) Samsung C27HG70
Case Thermaltake Urban T81
Audio Device(s) Xonar Essence STX II
Power Supply FSP Aurum Pro 1000W
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
#36
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
1,867 (0.70/day)
Likes
249
Location
So. Cal.
#37
Even with this problem resolved, SB still leaves BD in the dust.
Well, that's about a 12% increase just from Win8 while not a big thing it Free! :toast:

Then another 20% get to SB... but yes they’re playing catch-up to IB. Although, I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea they have to beat Intel in every B-M to be taken seriously, as long as the CPU/Mobo are priced right and available they' stay in the game.
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
194 (0.07/day)
Likes
32
Location
Montreal, Canada
Processor Phenom II 955 @ 3955Mhz 1.45v
Motherboard ASUS M4A79XTD EVO
Cooling CoolerMaster Hyper TX3 push-pull /2x140mm + 2x230mm + 2x120mm = super noisy computer
Memory 4x2Gb Kingston DDR3-1333 8-8-8-22 @ 1527Mhz
Video Card(s) Crossfire 2x Sapphire Radeon 6850 @ 850/1200
Storage 320Gb Western Digital WD3200AAJS
Display(s) Samsung 23" 1920x1080
Case Azza Solano 1000R Full-Tower
Audio Device(s) VIA VT1708S (integrated) + quadraphonic speakers
Power Supply CoolerMaster Extreme Power Plus 700w
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
#38
A speed-bump or a speed bump:laugh:
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
867 (0.27/day)
Likes
207
Location
London, UK
System Name The one under the desk / Media Centre
Processor Xeon X3730@3.6GHZ / Phenom II X4 805E
Motherboard Gigabyte P55M-UD4 / Asus Crosshair III
Cooling Corsair H70 + 2*PWM fan / Arctic Alpine 11
Memory 16GB DRR3-1333 9-9-9-27 / 4GB Crucial DDR3-1333
Video Card(s) Asus DirectCU GTX 680 / Gigabyte 560TI
Storage Kingston V200 128GB, WD6400AAKS, 1TB Seagate 7.2kRPM SSHD / Kingston V200 128GB
Display(s) Samsung 2343BW + Dell Ultrasharp 1600*1200 / 32" TV
Case C'M' Silencio 550 / Some ancient SilverStone brushed aluminium media centre
Audio Device(s) No.
Power Supply Thermaltake Toughpower XT 675W / EVGA 430W
Mouse Mionix Naos 3200 / Generic PS2
Keyboard Roccat Ryos TKL Pro / Evoluent Mouse Friendly Keyboard (Logitech OEM)
Software Windows 7 Ult x64
Benchmark Scores Nah.
#39
Funny that you use a 7 year old game that only have 2 main threads on an 8-core CPU build for multitasking ;)
Colossal missing of the point in evidence.

I used that benchmark PRECISELY FOR THAT REASON. Using an 8-threaded application clearly would not demonstrate this effect at all, but that's not all that significant as so few applications are optimised for 8 cores. The 10% performance boost is a best case scenario. It's explained in my post above and in the TH article, I cannot be bothered to go over it again for your benefit.
 
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
3,416 (1.13/day)
Likes
1,049
System Name My baby
Processor Athlon II X4 620 @ 3.5GHz, 1.45v, NB @ 2700Mhz, HT @ 2700Mhz - 24hr prime95 stable
Motherboard Asus M4A785TD-V EVO
Cooling Sonic Tower Rev 2 with 120mm Akasa attached, Akasa @ Front, Xilence Red Wing 120mm @ Rear
Memory 16 GB G.Skills 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) ATI ASUS Crossfire 5850
Storage Samsung 1Tb EcoGreen hard drive
Display(s) Hanngs-G 19"
Case Antec VSK 2000 Black Tower Case
Audio Device(s) Onkyo TX-SR309 Receiver, 2x Kef Cresta 1, 1x Kef Center 20c
Power Supply OCZ StealthXstream II 600w, 4x12v/18A, 80% efficiency.
Software Windows Vista X64
#40
You replied while I was typing, see above :p

Even with this problem resolved, SB still leaves BD in the dust.

http://media.bestofmicro.com/N/G/310588/original/win 8 wow 2560.png
Yes but how many gamers whom are serious about high end hardware play World of Warcraft - Not a lot! Warcraft users are generally laptop users or have mainstream hardware i.e. integrated GPU and a Atom CPU. So this benchmark is moot really.

If you want to turn this into a benchmark contest, we can post images of multi threaded games and applications leaving "SB still leaves BD in the dust". - But that would be immature. You agree :)
 
Joined
Apr 7, 2011
Messages
1,184 (0.44/day)
Likes
499
System Name Desktop
Processor Intel i7-3930k
Motherboard ASUS Sabertooth X79
Cooling Intel AIO
Memory 8x4GB DDR3 1866MHz
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 970 SC
Storage LSI 9266-8i|3xHitachi SAS 15K600 450GB RAID5|6x WD RE Enterprise 4TB in RAID 10|HP Ultrium 1760 Tape
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Fractal Define XL Black
Audio Device(s) Schiit Modi Uber>Schiit Asgard 2>Sennheiser HD600
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Mouse Logitech G603
Keyboard Logitech G613
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#41
What you need to consider is that everything 96W and up must be marked with the 125W TDP envelope.
So we really don't know how much more power does it use with a ~15% clock increase.
So until a full review is up we won't know if there are any improvements.
You are correct I totally forgot about that.

What we need from Bulldozer or better yet, from Piledriver is at least 5% higher IPC and lower power consumption...for a start. If Piledriver doesn't deliver AMD will fall even further behind Intel, since IB is suposed to have ~8% higher IPC than SB.
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
867 (0.27/day)
Likes
207
Location
London, UK
System Name The one under the desk / Media Centre
Processor Xeon X3730@3.6GHZ / Phenom II X4 805E
Motherboard Gigabyte P55M-UD4 / Asus Crosshair III
Cooling Corsair H70 + 2*PWM fan / Arctic Alpine 11
Memory 16GB DRR3-1333 9-9-9-27 / 4GB Crucial DDR3-1333
Video Card(s) Asus DirectCU GTX 680 / Gigabyte 560TI
Storage Kingston V200 128GB, WD6400AAKS, 1TB Seagate 7.2kRPM SSHD / Kingston V200 128GB
Display(s) Samsung 2343BW + Dell Ultrasharp 1600*1200 / 32" TV
Case C'M' Silencio 550 / Some ancient SilverStone brushed aluminium media centre
Audio Device(s) No.
Power Supply Thermaltake Toughpower XT 675W / EVGA 430W
Mouse Mionix Naos 3200 / Generic PS2
Keyboard Roccat Ryos TKL Pro / Evoluent Mouse Friendly Keyboard (Logitech OEM)
Software Windows 7 Ult x64
Benchmark Scores Nah.
#42
Yes but how many gamers whom are serious about high end hardware play World of Warcraft - Not a lot! Warcraft users are generally laptop users or have mainstream hardware i.e. integrated GPU and a Atom CPU. So this benchmark is moot really.
Fail.

The point is that (insert any 2-6 core optimised workload here) can perform noticeably better on BD with Windows 8 than with Windows 7, because of how Windows 7 sees it as a "full" 8 core.

If you look at the TH article, or go google "Windows 8 Bulldozer benchmark" (without the quotation marks of course) you can see plenty of other applications showing similar effects.
 
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
3,416 (1.13/day)
Likes
1,049
System Name My baby
Processor Athlon II X4 620 @ 3.5GHz, 1.45v, NB @ 2700Mhz, HT @ 2700Mhz - 24hr prime95 stable
Motherboard Asus M4A785TD-V EVO
Cooling Sonic Tower Rev 2 with 120mm Akasa attached, Akasa @ Front, Xilence Red Wing 120mm @ Rear
Memory 16 GB G.Skills 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) ATI ASUS Crossfire 5850
Storage Samsung 1Tb EcoGreen hard drive
Display(s) Hanngs-G 19"
Case Antec VSK 2000 Black Tower Case
Audio Device(s) Onkyo TX-SR309 Receiver, 2x Kef Cresta 1, 1x Kef Center 20c
Power Supply OCZ StealthXstream II 600w, 4x12v/18A, 80% efficiency.
Software Windows Vista X64
#43
Fail.

The point is that (insert any 2-6 core optimised workload here) can perform noticeably better on BD with Windows 8 than with Windows 7, because of how Windows 7 sees it as a "full" 8 core.

If you look at the TH article, or go google "Windows 8 Bulldozer benchmark" (without the quotation marks of course) you can see plenty of other applications showing similar effects.
Maybe so, not getting into Windows 7 vs Windows 8. I'm not talking about that.

I think you are reaching, I fail to see what Bulldozer's performance has to do with World of War Craft Cataclysm, and why WWCC is even cared about in the enthusiast community.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Messages
6,580 (1.35/day)
Likes
1,196
Location
Republic of Asia (a.k.a Irvine), CA
System Name Red Spy
Processor FX 8350 @ 4.35 Ghz with 1.28v
Motherboard Gigabyte 990FX-UD3 v4.0
Cooling TT Water 3.0 Performer + 2 x Cougar 120mm fan, 1 x 120mm Blue LED, 1 x 200 mm Red LED fan
Memory Kingston HyperX DDR3 1333 16GB
Video Card(s) Asus R9 290 OC @ GPU - 1050, MEM - 1300
Storage ADATA 128GB Sata III SSD for OS, WDC Black - 1TB Storage, OCZ Vertex 3 120GB SSD - Games
Display(s) AOC 23" 1080P LCD
Case AeroCool XPredator X3
Audio Device(s) Built-in Realtek
Power Supply Corsair HX1000 Modular
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit
Benchmark Scores BF4 with Mantle on Ultra settings gets around 60 FPS.
#44
FX-6200 Rename to Pentium IV FX Extreme 6200?

Seems like Chief design Engineer from P IV got fired and got hired to design the FX line :laugh:
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,287 (0.85/day)
Likes
529
Location
Burlington, VT
Processor Intel i5-2500k
Motherboard MSI P67A-GD65
Cooling Deep Cool Gammax 400
Memory 8GB (4x2GB) G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3-1600
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX 1060 Windforce OC 6GB
Storage Samsung EVO 850 256GB / WD Caviar Black 1TB
Display(s) Acer GD235HZbid 120hz LCD
Case Rosewill Challenger Mid-Tower
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair 650W 650-TX
Software Windows 10
#45
I think you are reaching, I fail to see what Bulldozer's performance has to do with World of War Craft Cataclysm, and why WWCC is even cared about in the enthusiast community.
Cataclysm is a very CPU-bound game. The difference between a Athlon X2 and a Phenom II X4 is very noticeable as such, so people use it to compare CPU performance since you can get valid observable results. From my own personal experience, going from an overclocked Q6600 to a stock i5-2500k, with the same GPU resulted in double the frame rate.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
241 (0.08/day)
Likes
43
Location
Ohio, USA
System Name The Black Mamba
Processor AMD FX-8150 @ 4.8 GHz + 2.5 GHz CPUNB
Motherboard ASUS Crosshair V Formula
Cooling Custom water, HeatKiller 3.0 LT, Swiftech MCR320, 3 GentleTyphoon 1850 RPM, OCZ HydroPulse 800
Memory Super Talent 2000 CAS 7 @ 2100 7-7-7-21 1.70v / GSKill Pi 2133 CAS 7 @ 2250 7-10-7-27
Video Card(s) 2x Sapphire Vapor-X HD5770's @ stock
Storage 2x 640GB Caviar Black in RAID 0
Display(s) 22" ASUS something + 20" Sceptre something
Case Lian-Li "Lancool" PC-K62
Power Supply XFX Black Edition 850w 80 Plus Silver
Software Windows 7 Pro
Benchmark Scores Too many to list ;D
#46
There's only a 10% ipc difference betwen phenom and fx.

So my fx 8120 @ 4.4 is like a phenom x 8 ( theoretically) @ 4ghz.

That might not be true across the board but certainly in all the apps I use.

Super pi is a lot slower though :laugh: ( super pi is ancient code though)

If you have the cooling a BD chip will got a lot higher than a thurban core though.


I had a 1055t before this by the way.
No, the IPC difference is 20-30% depending on what you app are running. The good thing is that you can clock it 10-15% higher and MT apps improve overall over the old architecture.
Your 8120 @ 4.4 is like a Phenom II X6 @ 4 Ghz when apps use all of its cores.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2011
Messages
407 (0.15/day)
Likes
136
System Name AMD
Processor Phenom 2 x6 1075T @ 4.1Ghz
Motherboard ASUS Crosshair 4 Extreme
Cooling Custom Water Cooling Loop
Memory 4Gb Kingston Hyper X 2000Mhz
Video Card(s) Power Color 4870x2
Storage 2x WD Carviar Blacks 64mb Cache - RAID 0
Case Cooler Master Cosmos S
Power Supply Jeantech Absolute 1000w Modular
#47
Speed bump and yet would still get hammered by a low-end SB powered CPU..
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
867 (0.27/day)
Likes
207
Location
London, UK
System Name The one under the desk / Media Centre
Processor Xeon X3730@3.6GHZ / Phenom II X4 805E
Motherboard Gigabyte P55M-UD4 / Asus Crosshair III
Cooling Corsair H70 + 2*PWM fan / Arctic Alpine 11
Memory 16GB DRR3-1333 9-9-9-27 / 4GB Crucial DDR3-1333
Video Card(s) Asus DirectCU GTX 680 / Gigabyte 560TI
Storage Kingston V200 128GB, WD6400AAKS, 1TB Seagate 7.2kRPM SSHD / Kingston V200 128GB
Display(s) Samsung 2343BW + Dell Ultrasharp 1600*1200 / 32" TV
Case C'M' Silencio 550 / Some ancient SilverStone brushed aluminium media centre
Audio Device(s) No.
Power Supply Thermaltake Toughpower XT 675W / EVGA 430W
Mouse Mionix Naos 3200 / Generic PS2
Keyboard Roccat Ryos TKL Pro / Evoluent Mouse Friendly Keyboard (Logitech OEM)
Software Windows 7 Ult x64
Benchmark Scores Nah.
#48
Maybe so, not getting into Windows 7 vs Windows 8. I'm not talking about that.
No, I'm not interested in a Windows 8 vs. Windows 7 debate either. I'm just using the example to explain and demonstrate one of Bulldozer's performance issues.

I think you are reaching, I fail to see what Bulldozer's performance has to do with World of War Craft Cataclysm, and why WWCC is even cared about in the enthusiast community.
You don't think I am reaching? I don't understand.

It's not that Bulldozer's performance is somehow related to WoW:C. I don't see how that point is relevant or interesting, though.

I certainly don't care about WoW:C, but, as explained above, it's an excellent way of comparing and analysing how CPUs deal with applications optimised for two cores (which is a LOT of applications and games right now).
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
1,034 (0.35/day)
Likes
230
Location
USA, Arizona
System Name SolarwindMobile
Processor AMD FX-9800P RADEON R7, 12 COMPUTE CORES 4C+8G
Motherboard Acer Wasp_BR
Cooling It's Copper.
Memory 2 x 8GB SK Hynix/HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF
Video Card(s) ATI/AMD Radeon R7 Series (Bristol Ridge FP4) [ACER]
Storage TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 1TB + KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 128 GB
Display(s) ViewSonic XG2401 SERIES
Case Acer Aspire E5-553G
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC255
Power Supply PANASONIC AS16A5K
Mouse SteelSeries Rival
Keyboard Ducky Channel Shine 3
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit (Version 1607, Build 14393.969)
#49
The point is that (insert any 2-6 core optimised workload here) can perform noticeably better on BD with Windows 8 than with Windows 7, because of how Windows 7 sees it as a "full" 8 core.
Bulldozer will run the same as Windows 7 as it will in Windows 8

The flaw of Tom's Hardware guide is the implications not noted

Windows 7:
Both Cores in a module being used
Core A1 <-- 30-50 ns --> Core A2

Windows 8:
Two different cores in two differnt modules being used
Core A2 <-- 100-200 ns --> Core B2

The only reason Windows 8 is showing an increase is because World of Warcraft is optimized for Intel Architectures where the decoders are an odd number
Intel Sandy Bridge, Nehalem can have 5 macro-op decodes(3 simple, 1 complex)

While Bulldozer 1 module can decode 8 macro-ops, 4 per core... meaning for Bulldozer to have relatively the same performance it will need a uops cache and 6 decoders to have perfect alignment with code in World of Warcraft...because you will have a bleed of 2 macro-ops with World of Warcraft unless Blizzard recodes the game for AMD FX

What is Interesting is the benchmark that is on the front page is single threaded

4.1 GHz / ~17 = .2412 x 14 = 3.4GHz

i5 2400 = 3.4GHz single core turbo
FX-6200 = 4.1GHz single core turbo
meaning that Bulldozer has a 16-17 stage pipeline compared to Sandy Bridges 14 stage pipeline
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
867 (0.27/day)
Likes
207
Location
London, UK
System Name The one under the desk / Media Centre
Processor Xeon X3730@3.6GHZ / Phenom II X4 805E
Motherboard Gigabyte P55M-UD4 / Asus Crosshair III
Cooling Corsair H70 + 2*PWM fan / Arctic Alpine 11
Memory 16GB DRR3-1333 9-9-9-27 / 4GB Crucial DDR3-1333
Video Card(s) Asus DirectCU GTX 680 / Gigabyte 560TI
Storage Kingston V200 128GB, WD6400AAKS, 1TB Seagate 7.2kRPM SSHD / Kingston V200 128GB
Display(s) Samsung 2343BW + Dell Ultrasharp 1600*1200 / 32" TV
Case C'M' Silencio 550 / Some ancient SilverStone brushed aluminium media centre
Audio Device(s) No.
Power Supply Thermaltake Toughpower XT 675W / EVGA 430W
Mouse Mionix Naos 3200 / Generic PS2
Keyboard Roccat Ryos TKL Pro / Evoluent Mouse Friendly Keyboard (Logitech OEM)
Software Windows 7 Ult x64
Benchmark Scores Nah.
#50
Bulldozer will run the same as Windows 7 as it will in Windows 8...

The only reason Windows 8 is showing an increase is because World of Warcraft is optimized for Intel Architectures ...
Your reasoning is flawed. World of Warcraft does not suddenly become optimised for AMD FX when you run it in Windows 8. The game is the same. As such, the game's being optimised for Intel does not explain the performance gap between Windows 7 with BD and Windows 8 with BD. Furthermore, you do nothing to refute the generally accepted explanation for this phenomenon. That said, if you can provide a valid argument, or better still a credible source boasting one, I'd be very interested.

Until then, I think we're better off with the generally accepted explanation, which is that in treating BD CPUs as "normal" 8-cores, Windows 7 isn't (yet) understanding the Bulldozer architecture properly.
 
Top