AMD Piledriver is called "FX NEXT"

[CDdude55]

Not close to being enough. Everyone waiting for this do yourself a favor and buy a 2500/2600K. It's a vastly superior chip. I bought a Bulldozer and I knew it stunk before I bought it. It's now going to sit in it's tin can until issues are worked out.

I don't have money like you do sadly, you can buy both a SB setup and a BD setup if you want, i bought a 990FX board hence im willing to wait for a decent FX chip that at least performs better then their current Phenom II's, that is all i'd like, it doesn't need to win the performance battle against Intel. For someone who hasn't bought a 900 series/AM3+ board, then i agree, Sandy Bridge is more worth your money and time.

IF TPU had a review, there'd be no question. Fact of the matter is that most TPU'ers depend on TPU to set the facts straight, and currently, as a site, we cannot.

Don't blame the users..blame AMD. Hard to trust a site that said three days ago, Bulldozer was the next best thing, and then they turn it around, and say it isn't. Well, what about what they said a few days before?



Perfect example, two posts above..you are more reliable to 3volvedcombat than any of those reviews, even though you are not a reviewer. Plain and simple, many sites have lost TONNES of credibility because of this launch.

That's how it has been done for years, most people here ''new design'' and wet their pants over it, but that doesn't mean their reviews are less honest or less credible then TPU or any other site when they actually get the chips in hand. TPU does the same thing, front page full of Bulldozer speculation and expectations about how they''ll be 50% faster then the 980x, news posts advertising the slides AMD showed off etc. and people in the community hyping it up because of such things. But of course it was not their fault that their exceptions didn't come true or that the news on the front page didn't come true. Why should anyone expect to here something different from TPU?

I love TPU, but i don't pretend it's any more reliable then HardOCP, XbitLabs, XtremeSystems etc.

 

[cadaveca]

Why should anyone expect to here something different from TPU?

I love TPU, but i don't pretend it's any more reliable then HardOCP, XbitLabs, XtremeSystems etc.

I agree with you here 100%. But just read the posts here, man. Some people prefer to get TPU's own view, and while TPU may have posted news with the same info that turned out to be wrong, never once was TPU the SOURCE of that info, which is ultimately a critical detail.

It's simply becuase in the face of all the early "info", today the picture BD paints is quite shocking, and has created the situation where everyone is questioning things.

Just because you personally are not as loyal to TPU as some others, clearly some are, myself included. The only sites, to me, that are less relaible, are the ones that sourced the info that said BD was better...and at other sites, I always check the author of the article, as some reviewer's opinions I value more than others. It doesn't mean some are less "reliable", but yeah, their opinion is less important, for sure.

 

[xenocide]

TPU is basically my priority review site because their tests are generally as close to flawless as you will find. It's the attention to details really.

 

[CDdude55]

I agree with you here 100%. But just read the posts here, man. Some people prefer to get TPU's own view, and while TPU may have posted news with the same info that turned out to be wrong, never once was TPU the SOURCE of that info, which is ultimately a critical detail.

It's simply becuase in the face of all the early "info", today the picture BD paints is quite shocking, and has created the situation where everyone is questioning things.

Just because you personally are not as loyal to TPU as some others, clearly some are, myself included. The only sites, to me, that are less relaible, are the ones that sourced the info that said BD was better...and at other sites, I always check the author of the article, as some reviewer's opinions I value more than others. It doesn't mean some are less "reliable", but yeah, their opinion is less important, for sure.

Yes i agree that TPU generally isn't the source of the speculation, but many sites aren't either. It has no ties to the credibility of the site though, ive sourced information from HardOCP, XS, Mad Shrimps etc. and all the information that was sourced were factual. Most of the sites that are consistently inaccurate that get sourced are generally sites that hold barely any weight in the first place

I understand that some people wait for their own sites review because it's like their online home, i'm only loyal to TPU in the aspects that i come here a lot and i like the community and news, so yes, i agree that there are a lot more people loyal to this site then myself. I have been a member of HardOCP for over 5 years and have accounts on many other hardware sites too, but again, i am only loyal in certain aspects, as i am more about the bottom line and not about who has the funniest community troll. I don't hold one site above the other, because ive seen that they both have contributed similar things so i have no reason not to trust one or the other.

TPU is basically my priority review site because their tests are generally as close to flawless as you will find. It's the attention to details really.

I look at every sites reviews including TPUs and if the general consensus is similar then that's that, if one site hasn't given their review yet but the general consensus is the same, then that review isn't of much importance to me, i'll still read it, but i don't expect much.

Ive seen other sites that use better methodologies then TPU in certain reviews. It just depends.

 

[cadaveca]

I understand that some people wait for their own sites review because it's like their online home, i'm only loyal to TPU in the aspects that i come here a lot and i like the community and news, so yes, i agree that there are a lot more people loyal to this site then myself. I have been a member of HardOCP for over 5 years and have accounts on many other hardware sites too, but again, i am only loyal in certain aspects, as i am more about the bottom line and not about who has the funniest community troll. I don't hold one site above the other, because ive seen that they both have contributed similar things so i have no reason not to trust one or the other.

For the bigger sites, sure, I agree again, 100%. I visit [H], XS, and many others daily as well, but it's not becuase they are a site, but because of who works there, and generates the content.

Also, TPU doesn't have a "community troll" unless you are refering to me. If you are talking about Mailman, he's not gonna be posting for quite some time.

Hopefully AMD will do things right for the PileDriver launch, and TPU will have a review when every other sites does. In all honesty, logistics problems prevented TPU from having a BD review at launch.


Those differences in methodologies is what separates the sites form one another, and I chose to take it all in, and then make decisions. I might appreciate someone's writing style a bit more, etc...but you are very right, when the general concensus agrees, then there's little left to wonder, but that's not going to make people want to see a TPU less, more often than not, if only in hopes that AMD's marketing team pulls it's socks up.

 

[CDdude55]

For the bigger sites, sure, I agree again, 100%. I visit [H], XS, and many others daily as well, but it's not becuase they are a site, but because of who works there, and generates the content.

Also, TPU doesn't have a "community troll" unless you are refering to me. If you are talking about Mailman, he's not gonna be posting for quite some time.

Hopefully AMD will do things right for the PileDriver launch, and TPU will have a review when every other sites does. In all honesty, logistics problems prevented TPU from having a BD review at launch.


Those differences in methodologies is what separates the sites form one another, and I chose to take it all in, and then make decisions. I might appreciate someone's writing style a bit more, etc...but you are very right, when the general concensus agrees, then there's little left to wonder, but that's not going to make people want to see a TPU less, more often than not, if only in hopes that AMD's marketing team pulls it's socks up.

I agree with all of that.

And yes, by ''community troll'' it would mainly mean Mailman for this site pretty much lol.

I trust Steve and Al who delivers the [H] news daily as much as btarunr or qubit. Though i'm not a fan of Kyle Bennett though for many reasons, granted his reviews tend to be solid.

 

[Neuromancer]

Will I buy an FX processor at release? No.
Will I buy an FX processor? Maybe.
Will I buy a Piledriver cpu? Maybe.
Will I buy a Piledriver cpu at release? Maybe.
Will I buy either an Bulldozer or Piledriver cpu? Yes.
When will I buy an FX or 'FX-next' processor? Yet to be determined.

Sums it up for me as well.

I will definitely end up getting both (although I voted waiting for piledriver) I will probably wait for piledriver and then get a first gen used for cheap

I am currently waiting till after Christmas to pick up some more thubans Although I just ordered parts for a LLano build for a friend.

 

[RevengE]

Will I buy bulldozer? No
Will I buy piledriver? Maybe

 

[arnoo1]

Will i buy bulldozer or piledriver: no won't
Will i buy ivy bridge: maybe, i have sandy bridge, 2600k ;p

 

[Steevo]

Remember Where AMD innovates, Intel followed.
Remember it was AMD that released the Monster inside Intel. What AMD needs is IBM.


My middle name is AMD
Perhaps you are having issues with the OS, though it sounds more like a memory problem. Nobody is posting Blue Screen of Deaths with Bulldozer. I really hope you get it resolved. Your opinion is like GOLD IMO.

"Advanced Micro Devices was founded on May 1, 1969, by a group of former executives from Fairchild Semiconductor, including Jerry Sanders III, Ed Turney, John Carey, Sven Simonsen, Jack Gifford and three members from Gifford's team, Frank Botte, Jim Giles, and Larry Stenger. The company began as a producer of logic chips, then entered the RAM chip business in 1975. That same year, it introduced a reverse-engineered clone of the Intel 8080 microprocessor. During this period, AMD also designed and produced a series of bit-slice processor elements (Am2900, Am29116, Am293xx) which were used in various minicomputer designs."


Wiki


In 1991, AMD released the Am386, its clone of the Intel 386 processor. It took less than a year for the company to sell a million units. Later, the Am486 was used by a number of large original equipment manufacturers, including Compaq, and proved popular. Another Am486-based product, the Am5x86, continued AMD's success as a low-price alternative. However, as product cycles shortened in the PC industry, the process of reverse engineering Intel's products became an ever less viable strategy for AMD.


I owned and overclocked many early AMD/Intel rigs.


Intel has fallen down twice in big ways, first with RAMBUS, second with their stupid ideas about Netburst.

AMD has maintained a small performance gap from Intel throughout the years, their pricing in later years has been on the edge of where it needs to be for the performance per dollar.


This chip does NOT, does NOT, provide the same sort of performance per dollar that the X6 1100T does, its only $189 with free shipping. It does NOT provide the performance per dollar a 2500 or 2600 does.

The only people who should buy this from a logical standpoint are those who have a board that will accept it. Enthusiast overclockers should buy this as the next challenge. Fanbois will buy it, and thats OK, no one will stop them.

But, dollar for dollar, cent for cent, pound for pound, transistor for transistor. This chip is a fail.


Buy a dual socket C32 board, $289, two 4130 Opterons, $216,

8 cores with more bandwidth and you can get 50-150% more performance. But not due to the memory bandwidth alone.

 

[Super XP]

I agree AMD needs to lower the price of the AMD FX CPU's but you know how it is, retailers set the price. And because it's new they will keep it somewhat higher. I think $245 is a great price for the AMD FX 8150, especially with all that hidden horse power. Anyhow, I already have a ASUS Crosshair V Formula Socket AM3+ so I apply to your above statement If I had known Bulldozer would not Bulldoze as we all expected, then I would never have bought the ASUS board. I would have stuck it out longer for Piledriver, hoping they revise it for better overall performance.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

I agree AMD needs to lower the price of the AMD FX CPU's but you know how it is, retailers set the price. And because it's new they will keep it somewhat higher. I think $245 is a great price for the AMD FX 8150, especially with all that hidden horse power. Anyhow, I already have a ASUS Crosshair V Formula Socket AM3+ so I apply to your above statement If I had known Bulldozer would not Bulldoze as we all expected, then I would never have bought the ASUS board. I would have stuck it out longer for Piledriver, hoping they revise it for better overall performance.

Why?

You continue to say there is hidden power locked away in BD. Every time someone says that its performance is underwhelming you respond with "there is hidden potential not being tapped in BD."

AMD could well have harnessed the power of Thor, Zeus, and any other lightning controlling god in BD. What is seen during common use is something akin to a microwave oven, not a lightning bolt.

Awkward metaphores aside, there is no indication that BD has hidden power. There is plenty of indication that the multithreaded applications of today will run better on BD, but the numbers indicate that single threaded applications do not perform well at all. If there is some hidden power AMD better pull it out of its butt before SB-e comes out. The only great thing for AMD is the server market, which is a sizeable market but very not like the consumer market. Whenever BDs restructured "8 cores" can come to the table in a useful way wake me up.

 

[seronx]

unused power is more like it...but in this case SSE5 and AVX are not going to be the first things to be used in vidya gaems

IPC decreased so game performance decreases!

 

[nt300]

Why?

You continue to say there is hidden power locked away in BD. Every time someone says that its performance is underwhelming you respond with "there is hidden potential not being tapped in BD."

AMD could well have harnessed the power of Thor, Zeus, and any other lightning controlling god in BD. What is seen during common use is something akin to a microwave oven, not a lightning bolt.

Awkward metaphores aside, there is no indication that BD has hidden power. There is plenty of indication that the multithreaded applications of today will run better on BD, but the numbers indicate that single threaded applications do not perform well at all. If there is some hidden power AMD better pull it out of its butt before SB-e comes out. The only great thing for AMD is the server market, which is a sizeable market but very not like the consumer market. Whenever BDs restructured "8 cores" can come to the table in a useful way wake me up.

You don't think this bulldozer has hidden secret powers? I would have to respectfully disagree with you on that one.

 

[CDdude55]

Those that say there is ''untapped hidden power'' behind these chips are generally people in denial because they so desperately can't stand that it's a terrible chip. When compared to other chips in the market for around the same price, it's not a good buy for most, get over it.

It craps out badly in single threaded applications and doesn't actually perform even decently until work loads that use it's 8 threads are actually used and yet the cores are still not strong enough overall to make a dent. While at the same time delivers higher power consumption.

I'm still going Bulldozer at some point though.

 

[techtard]

It shows some strength in heavily multi-threadded apps. There's next to none on the consumer desktop front though.
Maybe next time Skynet will send their future CPU back to the correct year.

 

[Dopamin3]

I like how on the slide it says "10% better x68 performance (Based on AMD projections using digital media workload)". Probably means IPC that is still really bad, maybe 1.25% better per "core" and 10% in highly threaded apps :shadedshu

 

[Inceptor]

Single threaded performance isn't impressive, I agree.
It's about as good as my Phenom II. Which is OK, for most things, but you'd expect it to be higher, being a new design...
At this point, I'm probably going to go ahead and buy an x6 phenom to play with and pick up a Piledriver at some time in the future. Will it be a huge improvement going from an x6 to Piledriver? I doubt it, but it'll be an upgrade worth making at some point.

That being said, if I was planning a new rig right now, I'd be looking at an SB-E. I don't like the limited PCI-E lanes on the P67 and Z68 boards. If you're just gaming, they're fine, but for more connectivity/long term upgrading, not so good.

 

[alucasa]

FX-666 is (going to be) the new FX .