Bulldozer Information Thread.

[eidairaman1]

Well I know that, but that 100 more thing is confusing me. But then again it's TheMailMan78 so everything is confusing

Ok the Maximum Frames an Eyeball can detect is 60 FPS, so meaning if games are running at 100 Frames constant without any slowdown wut so ever the games are running great. Now if they start say goin from 100 to say 80 you can notice a graphical slowdown in the game, n it gets worse as you start reaching minus 60 frames.

Highest Recorded OC for the line is 8 GHz

My CPU is actually overkill for me so it's no need for it. I AM waiting for reviews though.

Did L3 Cache Unlock on that CPU aswell, cuz Athlon Line dont have L3 cache but that chip of yours could of been a Phenom

 

[Goodman]

Just because I really REALLY don't want to go through 14 pages of useless posts...

What FACTS are there about Bulldozer?

Except for getting at 8.429ghz on 2 cores... nothing , nothing at all :shadedshu

 

[Lionheart]

Just because I really REALLY don't want to go through 14 pages of useless posts...

What FACTS are there about Bulldozer?

Good prices, that's about it, and a lot of fanboyismshadedshu

 

[seronx]

http://blogs.amd.com/fusion/2011/09/14/what-the-amd-tech-guy-said/

 

[techtard]

Ok the Maximum Frames an Eyeball can detect is 60 FPS, so meaning if games are running at 100 Frames constant without any slowdown wut so ever the games are running great. Now if they start say goin from 100 to say 80 you can notice a graphical slowdown in the game, n it gets worse as you start reaching minus 60 frames.

Highest Recorded OC for the line is 8 GHz



Did L3 Cache Unlock on that CPU aswell, cuz Athlon Line dont have L3 cache but that chip of yours could of been a Phenom

I know this is off topic, but ...

It has been proven that people can detect over 200fps. So this whole 60fps maximum is just baseless heresay.

Also, people who have played fast paced video games for a long time tend to develop better visual acuity. So the hard core FPS gamers who say they need more than 60fps actually mean it.

 

[cadaveca]

The 60 FPS comes from the 60 Hz of a LCD screen. In other words, even IF you can detect greater, the monitor is not capable any more, so it doesn't matter.

that speaks nothing to how games themselves deal with extra FPS; that's purely about the monitor, although some assume it means for the entire system.

Frankly, if a 1000Hz USB port can matter then clearly 60 FPS is not quite enough for all situations.

 

[TRWOV]

Wondering what the outcome might be.

I hope that AMD at least let some sites run a preview a week or so in advance although judging by JF-AMD's post I guess we'll get benchmarks until launch day.

 

[billcat479]

Things are looking up for AMD on this front anyway.

Interesting info there over at XS in the context of the 8.5 GHz clock, and it's also worth noting:



That's more good news.

The below is based on very shallow memory of the old days at Intel and so are questionable but has common sense. (I hope lol..)

It's great news. Speaks volumes of how well their stability and overall design has matured. They have noise and leakage down and stable waveforms out of their transistors. This gets more important as the cpu's voltage keeps going down, down and more down. It was so easy when they were at 5v, then 3.3v and down and down and down.
At current voltages any noise and leakage even of very small amounts is critical. If they can get overclocking numbers like they say, then they do have a good build and overall design process from start to finish on the die level. It seems also that thanks go to the people who are building them a lot. Good Job G.F.
This should give them a lot of overhead for the future not to mention combining these with GPU's for future APUs. I really hope they got a winner here. If they do we are all going to share in it for a good amount of time. Even (ugh, the Intel crowd) as it will effect their prices which is where the everyone comes out a winner and all thanks to AMD.
It's one of the major reason's I support them, they are our safety net for low price cpus. Not to mention good ones even if the current ones are slower. They are still fast enough for any home computer.

I just can't wait (oh yeah, have to darn it) for the day they hit the market to see just what we can do with them and what they can do for us.
As I see it not being a rabid overclocker is when I get one I can feel darn well that I will have a very stable system as far as this area is concerned and if I ever have to kick it up some in the future there will be that room to play with. Gives me more time between upgrades which is always good to know. And if I can feel the need to want more than the 8 core setup then something will really have to change in a big way. It's like I'm using all of the 6 cores I currently have... LOL..

 

[naoan]

haha yeah, the last time AMD went for architecture change (well, sorta), we got Phenom I... and everyone know how that turn out. this time around, at least we know it is OC'able .

 

[techtard]

Yeah, I was told by my friends how awesome the Phenom I would be, and bought a system before the reviews came out. That turned out to be a mistake.
The Motherboard I got is still in use, and actually pretty damned good. But the Phenom 9600 was a flop.

Lesson : don't build a PC based on fanboys opinions and out of date hardware knowledge.

I am waiting for reviews this time around.

 

[Poul-erik]

AMD had done it before, in 1999/2000 there Athlon 600 came on the marked, it killd the King Pentium III, so it can be done.

 

[repman244]

Slightly off-topic:

AMD Trinity running Deus ex:

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa-Fdh3BXSs&feature=player_embedded

Source/more info:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4813/...-comes-trinity-amds-2012-demo-on-video-at-idf

 

[naoan]

Wait, so they already have a working piledriver core?

 

[repman244]

Wait, so they already have a working piledriver core?

It seems so yes.


EDIT: Love the name

 

[eidairaman1]

The 60 FPS comes from the 60 Hz of a LCD screen. In other words, even IF you can detect greater, the monitor is not capable any more, so it doesn't matter.

that speaks nothing to how games themselves deal with extra FPS; that's purely about the monitor, although some assume it means for the entire system.

Frankly, if a 1000Hz USB port can matter then clearly 60 FPS is not quite enough for all situations.

ya once u turn off Vsync Graphical tearing occurs, in game or cut scenes, normally in middle of the screen on horizontal scale

 

[Damn_Smooth]

haha yeah, the last time AMD went for architecture change (well, sorta), we got Phenom I... and everyone know how that turn out. this time around, at least we know it is OC'able .

I appreciate the "well, sorta", but the Phenom I was nowhere near an architectural change. The Phenom II wasn't either. This is AMD's first real architectural change in almost a decade.

I'm sure we all know how it turned out the last time AMD had a real architecture change too, but history has nothing to do with how Bulldozer will perform.

 

[eidairaman1]

in all technicality, AMD could create a 8 core that runs on 2.0GHz and just blows the fastest SB-E CPU out of the water yet has way lower clocks

 

[naoan]

I appreciate the "well, sorta", but the Phenom I was nowhere near an architectural change. The Phenom II wasn't either. This is AMD's first real architectural change in almost a decade.

I'm sure we all know how it turned out the last time AMD had a real architecture change too, but history has nothing to do with how Bulldozer will perform.

And that's even worse No, that's not the point of my post, see the last sentences.

Also, do you think that it'll perform worse than current Phenom II? I myself are looking for CPU to do lots of encoding and X6 currently has nice performance/price ratio for that task, if it could do better (higher ipc) with more cores and at about the same price (likely so), AMD have a winner, at least for me.

 

[HalfAHertz]

The first Phenom was a bust because AMD tried to cram too much stuff on a very big node. 65nm was not small enough for 4 cores + dedicated L3 cache. The end result was a very big die that was way too crammed, couldn't clock well, used way too much power and produced a lot of heat.

They were doing the exact opposite of their GFX division, trying to produce big monolithic designs that were not efficient enough while their competition was simply gluing two smaller dies together to achieve a similar design. And as we saw Intel chose to do things the right way this time around. If they had done it without the L3 cache from the start and had saved the L3 for the 45nm shrink, I think the results would have been quite different.

See the problem AMD's CPU division has is that they always try to overshoot the competition by making huge and sudden changes each cycle. They wanna be that crazy inventor guy that lives in the basement and hold the secret to something huge. But they just don't have the resources nor the freedom to do that. Instead they should focus on small incremental changes and should try to push them as fast as possible.
I'm not saying that they should not try to look ahead and plan what comes behind the curve - keep that forward thinking but try to be realistic at the end. Shooting for the stars every time is great but if you fall on your head too often you may wound up not being able to stand up again.

My little rant went a bit off topic but what I was trying to say was this: focus on realistic deadlines and keep then instead of giving false promises each time.

 

[repman244]

Also, do you think that it'll perform worse than current Phenom II?

They spent years designing it, an ocean of money for it. I think it's pretty clear it would be crazy to work on something that you already have.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

And that's even worse No, that's not the point of my post, see the last sentences.

Also, do you think that it'll perform worse than current Phenom II? I myself are looking for CPU to do lots of encoding and X6 currently has nice performance/price ratio for that task, if it could do better (higher ipc) with more cores and at about the same price (likely so), AMD have a winner, at least for me.

Honestly, I expect it to kill the Phenom II. I really have the confidence in it to say that it will be a very worthy competitor to the SB lineup. I have so much belief in my theory, that my Crosshair V will be here tomorrow. I have gathered what I can (Between the lines.) to build that confidence. If I am wrong, I will prove to myself that I am a much bigger moron than I think I am.

 

[HTC]

AMD announced the EOL status of their Phenom II line of processors. IMO, there are only 2 possible reasons for this:

1 - Bulldozer isn't powerful enough for people to switch from the old to the new. I don't mean they're slower: just that they're not much faster.

2 - Bulldozer has such a punch it blows the old ones right out of the water: AMD would have to seriously lower the Phenom II's price and lose money in the process.


Personally, i would very much like the 2º one.

 

[Kramdra]

Want to upgradde my pc, im still using a a64 4200+ x2, so about 8 years old

is AM3+ going to stay or is FM1 going to be the new socket? Im not sure if FM1 is just for the llano APU chips? or the high end ones aswell

 

[repman244]

Want to upgradde my pc, im still using a a64 4200+ x2, so about 8 years old

is AM3+ going to stay or is FM1 going to be the new socket? Im not sure if FM1 is just for the llano APU chips? or the high end ones aswell

Nothing is certain for how long AM3+ will last (it will end when they integrate the PCI-e into the CPU that's for sure), FM1 is only for Llano, the next socket is FM2 which IMO will be compatible with APU's and normal CPU's.

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

You think this would perform equal to nehalem performance?