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

HD 7970: Bulldozer vs. Sandy Bridge vs. Nehalem

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
27,243 (3.70/day)
Processor Ryzen 7 5700X
Memory 48 GB
Video Card(s) RTX 4080
Storage 2x HDD RAID 1, 3x M.2 NVMe
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 10 64-bit
You know what W1zzard probably has no idea what he is talking about I mean he only runs a forum with 65 thousand members and 2.4 million posts, not to mention some of the most in depth reviews on the internet.

while i appreciate your comment, i disagree. i dont run a religious outfit, so feel free to ask questions and criticize. we're all here to learn
 

cdawall

where the hell are my stars
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
27,680 (4.21/day)
Location
Houston
System Name All the cores
Processor 2990WX
Motherboard Asrock X399M
Cooling CPU-XSPC RayStorm Neo, 2x240mm+360mm, D5PWM+140mL, GPU-2x360mm, 2xbyski, D4+D5+100mL
Memory 4x16GB G.Skill 3600
Video Card(s) (2) EVGA SC BLACK 1080Ti's
Storage 2x Samsung SM951 512GB, Samsung PM961 512GB
Display(s) Dell UP2414Q 3840X2160@60hz
Case Caselabs Mercury S5+pedestal
Audio Device(s) Fischer HA-02->Fischer FA-002W High edition/FA-003/Jubilate/FA-011 depending on my mood
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 1200w
Mouse Thermaltake Theron, Steam controller
Keyboard Keychron K8
Software W10P
while i appreciate your comment, i disagree. i dont run a religious outfit, so feel free to ask questions and criticize. we're all here to learn

Very true. Just out of curiosity why do you still test at such low resolutions? Just to get a comparison with some of the lower end cards or is there a deeper reasoning?
 

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
27,243 (3.70/day)
Processor Ryzen 7 5700X
Memory 48 GB
Video Card(s) RTX 4080
Storage 2x HDD RAID 1, 3x M.2 NVMe
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 10 64-bit
Very true. Just out of curiosity why do you still test at such low resolutions? Just to get a comparison with some of the lower end cards or is there a deeper reasoning?

comparison data for low end cards.

in theory i could leave out the graphs of the lower resolutions for high-end cards. i'd still have to bench them for comparison. but some readers might be interested in the low-res graphs to look at them for advanced concepts like cpu dependency, resolution scaling etc.

the majority of readers should have no issues skipping over a few graphs on each page
 

Tatty_Two

Gone Fishing
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
25,838 (3.82/day)
Location
Worcestershire, UK
Processor Intel Core i9 11900KF @ -075mV PL max @225w
Motherboard MSI MAG Z490 TOMAHAWK
Cooling DeepCool LS520SE Liquid + 3 Phanteks 140mm case fans
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB SR) Patriot Viper DDR4 @ 3600Mhz CL14 1.45v Gear 1
Video Card(s) Asus Dual RTX 4070 OC
Storage WD Blue SN550 1TB M.2 NVME//Crucial MX500 500GB SSD (OS)
Display(s) AOC Q2781PQ 27 inch Ultra Slim 2560 x 1440 IPS
Case Phanteks Enthoo Pro M Windowed - Gunmetal
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek ALC1200/SPDIF to Sony AVR @ 5.1
Power Supply Seasonic CORE GM650w Gold Semi modular
Mouse Coolermaster Storm Octane wired
Keyboard Element Gaming Carbon Mk2 Tournament Mech
Software Win 10 Home x64
i am still surprised how well the nehalem processors are holding up especially because of how old they are. I upgraded from my 920 at the start of last year to a 2600k only because it seemed more fun and it ran much cooler.

Ditto^^^ it makes me feel kind of good even though I have had this chip for 3 odd years.....and as most of us here overclock, I would guess that if all the CPU's on test were cranked up to BD's stock clocks, the results would have been even more interesting.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Messages
2,064 (0.31/day)
Location
Toronto, Ontario
System Name The Expanse
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D
Motherboard Asus Prime X570-Pro BIOS 5013 AM4 AGESA V2 PI 1.2.0.Ca.
Cooling Corsair H150i Pro
Memory 32GB GSkill Trident RGB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34-1T (B-Die)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 24GB (24.6.1)
Storage WD SN850X 2TB / Corsair MP600 1TB / Samsung 860Evo 1TB x2 Raid 0 / Asus NAS AS1004T V2 14TB
Display(s) LG 34GP83A-B 34 Inch 21: 9 UltraGear Curved QHD (3440 x 1440) 1ms Nano IPS 160Hz
Case Fractal Design Meshify S2
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi + Logitech Z-5500 + HS80 Wireless
Power Supply Corsair AX850 Titanium
Mouse Corsair Dark Core RGB SE
Keyboard Corsair K100
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 22H2
Benchmark Scores 3800X https://valid.x86.fr/1zr4a5 5800X https://valid.x86.fr/2dey9c
comparison data for low end cards.

in theory i could leave out the graphs of the lower resolutions for high-end cards. i'd still have to bench them for comparison. but some readers might be interested in the low-res graphs to look at them for advanced concepts like cpu dependency, resolution scaling etc.

the majority of readers should have no issues skipping over a few graphs on each page

Hey Wiz have you seen techreports new approach to graphing FPS if so what do you think about it?
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2011
Messages
467 (0.10/day)
System Name Gaming PC
Processor Intel Core i5 12400f at 5.4Ghz
Motherboard Asrock B660 Riptide PG (Eternal clock gen)
Cooling ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II
Memory 32GB Kingston FURY Renegade
Video Card(s) Zotac RTX 4070ti Trinity
Storage WD SN750 SE 1TB M.2 + 2x Kioxia Exceria 480GB
Display(s) BenQ EX2780Q 1440p/144Hz
Case Lian Li 205M
Power Supply Corsair RM850x SHIFT
doesn't that mean "tricky" ? actually your statement confirms that.

how do you propose to reliably measure minimum fps? how to ensure decent accuracy? what resolution and accuracy for the measurement do you consider acceptable?

how is minimum fps defined? (just one frame? over one second?)
when does a frame start and end anyway? what about the time between frames?

everybody who shows minimum fps in their reviews uses fraps.

Crysis
Crysis 2
Stalker series
Far Cry 2
Cryostsis
Batman : AA
Metro 2033

There's HUNDREDS of games that have built in benchmark programs that messure minimum fps without the need for fraps or any other program.

A few other website actually provide minimum frame rates but if you look closely its only for games that have built in benchmarks that show and record them. These built in benchmarks are much more consistent then fraps and you should know that.

But yes you're right, They all use fraps :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

OOZMAN

New Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2011
Messages
160 (0.03/day)
Location
Brisbane, Australia
System Name Gaming Rig + Digital Audio Workstation.
Processor i5 2500k @ 4.7ghz 1.4V (max 5.0)
Motherboard ASUS P8Z68-V Pro
Cooling Noctua NH-D14 with single Antec Tri-Cool fan, 3 more Tri-cools for the case
Memory 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws X 1866mhz 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) HIS HD6950 2GB, 930/1500mhz stable. CFX with 6970 eventually
Storage Intel 320 series 120GB SSD. 2.7TB generic HDD storage.
Display(s) 32" Sony Bravia LCD TV 1920x1080. Yeah baby!
Case Blue Raidmax Raptor.
Audio Device(s) Phonic 302+ 1394 interface, + 2x Behringer 9" 225W studio monitors. Cant buy better for under $600!
Power Supply Corsair TX750W
Software Dual boot: Win 7 Ultimate x64 SP1/Mac OSX Lion (not really used), Cubase 5 for DAW.
Benchmark Scores 3DMark Vantage- P22288 :|: Furmark 720 preset- 3644 frames, 1080 preset- 2347 :|: Skyrims max everyt
Crysis
Crysis 2
Stalker series
Far Cry 2
Cryostsis
Batman : AA
Metro 2033

There's HUNDREDS of games that have built in benchmark programs that messure minimum fps without the need for fraps or any other program.

A few other website actually provide minimum frame rates but if you look closely its only for games that have built in benchmarks that show and record them. These built in benchmarks are much more consistent then fraps and you should know that.

But yes you're right, They all use fraps :rolleyes:

Hey man, fraps is awesome.
 

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
27,243 (3.70/day)
Processor Ryzen 7 5700X
Memory 48 GB
Video Card(s) RTX 4080
Storage 2x HDD RAID 1, 3x M.2 NVMe
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 10 64-bit
Crysis
Crysis 2
Stalker series
Far Cry 2
Cryostsis
Batman : AA
Metro 2033

you want me to bench with those games only? almost all new titles dont have benchmarking functionality

These built in benchmarks are much more consistent then fraps and you should know that.

how do you define consistent ? and whats your reference value to compare to ? part of the issue is what i mentioned further above for which you apparently have no answers. another problem is that time measurements are quite difficult to do on windows. i'd expect fraps to do better in that department than most engine benchmarking code

Hey Wiz have you seen techreports new approach to graphing FPS if so what do you think about it?
just looked at it. good to see someone trying new things.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/22192/11


personally i think fps graphs are too complicated for many readers and offer little additional insight.
not sure why tr graphs their data the way they do, but frame number on the x axis seems like a bad choice. you want to put time on x axis. look how each of their graphs has a different number of frames for its own run.
frametimes on y is also counterintuitive to what most readers expect, especially if the values are in the 20-100 range where people instantly think fps

the use of 99th percentile frametime makes no sense to me (yes i know what 99th percentile is). most people will look at that graph with the big scientific name, skip it, and be impressed with it

time spent beyond 50 ms: good idea. bad naming, i thought FPS again
so each of their benchmark runs runs a different time duration. then they add up how long the frametimes were 50+ ms (for a different number of frames in each run) and then compare these values by putting them in a graph. so they compare a shorter maximum time with a longer time?

edit: so i found their article explaining the changes: http://techreport.com/articles.x/21516
good read. their choices make more sense now. need to think more about it, but that alone is a problem. review readers dont want to read an instruction manual for the review
 
Last edited:

someone

New Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
2 (0.00/day)
Location
Saarbrücken, Germany
Hi there :)

@techreport
I generally like their ideas very much. As a former user of a multi-gpu setup I particularly know that fps don't tell the whole story. In fact, they don't even tell half the story sometimes. I remember playing Crysis at 70-80fps (vsync=off) which stuttered big time and felt worse than 40fps without micro stuttering.

As per the metrics, they should definiitely normalize everything, that would eliminate the problem of comparing runs of different lengths (or different amounts of frame times). Instead of counting the number of frame times larger than a given threshold, they would then report the proportion which is larger than 50ms. I find this transformation quite standard and straightforward, and it's a clear improvement IMO.



@BD vs. SB vs. NH
The results are pretty much as expected (sadly for AMD, one should note).

Here are two interesting things in the results:

1. In Skyrim, going from 1024 to 1280 keeps the fps constant, the same for 1680 to 1920.
But there's a difference between the upper resolutions and the lower ones:

aspects skyrim.JPG

(black arrow=no difference, red arrow=difference)


2. In Starcraft, on the other hand, there are neither "horizontal" nor "vertical" changes, or at least the upper resolutions are more similar to the lower ones than in our example before (Skyrim):

aspects starcraft.JPG



I suspect the aspect ratio makes the difference, since the upper resolutions are 4:3 and 5:4 whilst the lower ones are 16:10 and 16:9 respectively. The wide screen aspects require more rendering in the horizontal than in the vertical, compared to the 4:3 (and 5:4) ratio.


The explanation, why there is a difference in Skyrim and (almost) none in Starcraft is then, that
- there's not so much going on in the vertical in Skyrim: floor texture and sky texture, from which especially the latter is very simple to compute for the CPU. So, when you add more horizontal pixels, I would expect a much larger amount of CPU computations necessary than when adding vertical ones (just paint some more heaven and floor, to oversimplify).

- in Starcraft, since it's a top-down view, adding horizontal pixels and adding vertical ones should make (almost) no difference. It's far less asymmetric than Skyrim, since more terrain, buildings and units will be computed, regardless in what direction the image is expanded.
 
Last edited:

HTC

Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
4,619 (0.78/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name HTC's System
Processor Ryzen 5 5800X3D
Motherboard Asrock Taichi X370
Cooling NH-C14, with the AM4 mounting kit
Memory G.Skill Kit 16GB DDR4 F4 - 3200 C16D - 16 GTZB
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse 6600 8 GB
Storage 1 Samsung NVMe 960 EVO 250 GB + 1 3.5" Seagate IronWolf Pro 6TB 7200RPM 256MB SATA III
Display(s) LG 27UD58
Case Fractal Design Define R6 USB-C
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair TX 850M 80+ Gold
Mouse Razer Deathadder Elite
Software Ubuntu 20.04.6 LTS
you want me to bench with those games only? almost all new titles dont have benchmarking functionality



how do you define consistent ? and whats your reference value to compare to ? part of the issue is what i mentioned further above for which you apparently have no answers. another problem is that time measurements are quite difficult to do on windows. i'd expect fraps to do better in that department than most engine benchmarking code


just looked at it. good to see someone trying new things.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/22192/11

http://img.techpowerup.org/120103/Capture283.jpg
personally i think fps graphs are too complicated for many readers and offer little additional insight.
not sure why tr graphs their data the way they do, but frame number on the x axis seems like a bad choice. you want to put time on x axis. look how each of their graphs has a different number of frames for its own run.
frametimes on y is also counterintuitive to what most readers expect, especially if the values are in the 20-100 range where people instantly think fps

the use of 99th percentile frametime makes no sense to me (yes i know what 99th percentile is). most people will look at that graph with the big scientific name, skip it, and be impressed with it

time spent beyond 50 ms: good idea. bad naming, i thought FPS again
so each of their benchmark runs runs a different time duration. then they add up how long the frametimes were 50+ ms (for a different number of frames in each run) and then compare these values by putting them in a graph. so they compare a shorter maximum time with a longer time?

edit: so i found their article explaining the changes: http://techreport.com/articles.x/21516
good read. their choices make more sense now. need to think more about it, but that alone is a problem. review readers dont want to read an instruction manual for the review

Interesting read: hadn't seen that approach before.

If i may make a suggestion: instead of using seconds, why not use the next value along the line, as in tenths of seconds? Wouldn't this catch more of the issues described in that techreport site's article?

Ofc, i'm assuming there's a tool that can measure this because, otherwise, no point in even trying.
 

MilesRdz

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
16 (0.00/day)
A lot of people seem to not notice or care that Bulldozer is vastly underutilized in most of these games.
While SB is using half or more of it's resources, BD is using about 1/4th.

If games used more threads to feed the graphics card, we wouldn't be discussing this issue to death.

Some people could argue that if BD had better single-threaded performance, games would run better.
That is true, but it doesn't change the fact that BD is underutilized.
 

Mussels

Freshwater Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
58,413 (8.08/day)
Location
Oystralia
System Name Rainbow Sparkles (Power efficient, <350W gaming load)
Processor Ryzen R7 5800x3D (Undervolted, 4.45GHz all core)
Motherboard Asus x570-F (BIOS Modded)
Cooling Alphacool Apex UV - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora + EK Quantum ARGB 3090 w/ active backplate
Memory 2x32GB DDR4 3600 Corsair Vengeance RGB @3866 C18-22-22-22-42 TRFC704 (1.4V Hynix MJR - SoC 1.15V)
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 3090 SG 24GB: Underclocked to 1700Mhz 0.750v (375W down to 250W))
Storage 2TB WD SN850 NVME + 1TB Sasmsung 970 Pro NVME + 1TB Intel 6000P NVME USB 3.2
Display(s) Phillips 32 32M1N5800A (4k144), LG 32" (4K60) | Gigabyte G32QC (2k165) | Phillips 328m6fjrmb (2K144)
Case Fractal Design R6
Audio Device(s) Logitech G560 | Corsair Void pro RGB |Blue Yeti mic
Power Supply Fractal Ion+ 2 860W (Platinum) (This thing is God-tier. Silent and TINY)
Mouse Logitech G Pro wireless + Steelseries Prisma XL
Keyboard Razer Huntsman TE ( Sexy white keycaps)
VR HMD Oculus Rift S + Quest 2
Software Windows 11 pro x64 (Yes, it's genuinely a good OS) OpenRGB - ditch the branded bloatware!
Benchmark Scores Nyooom.
A lot of people seem to not notice or care that Bulldozer is vastly underutilized in most of these games.
While SB is using half or more of it's resources, BD is using about 1/4th.

If games used more threads to feed the graphics card, we wouldn't be discussing this issue to death.

Some people could argue that if BD had better single-threaded performance, games would run better.
That is true, but it doesn't change the fact that BD is underutilized.

and thats why people still have hope for the two-patch solution MS is working on for windows 7 and BD.
 
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
2,067 (0.40/day)
System Name The Stone that the Builders Refused / iJayo
Processor R5 1600/ R7 3700X
Motherboard Asrock AB350 Pro4 / Asus Rog Strix B450-F gaming
Cooling Cryorig M9 / Noctua NH-D14
Memory G skill 16 Gigs ddr4 / 16 gigs PNY ddr4
Video Card(s) Nvdia GTX 660 / Nvidia RTX 2070 Super
Storage 120gig 840 evo, 120gig adata sp900 / 1tb Mushkin M.2 ssd 1 & 3 tb seagate hdd, 120 gig Hyper X ssd
Display(s) 42" Nec retail display monitor/ 34" Dell curved 165hz monitor
Case Pink Enermax Ostrog / Phanteks Enthoo Evolv Tempered Glass edition
Audio Device(s) Altec Lansing Expressionist Bass/ M-Audio monitors
Power Supply Corsair450 / Be Quiet Dark Power Pro 650
Mouse corsair vengence M65 / Zalman Knossos
Keyboard corsair k95 / Roccat Vulcan 121
Software Window 10 pro / Windows 10 pro
Benchmark Scores meh... feel me on the battle field!
and thats why people still have hope for the two-patch solution MS is working on for windows 7 and BD.

Yeeeahhh but ain't

1/4 of 8 =2

1/2 of 4 =2

Sooo.....its pretty much a fair match up ratio

Wait.....no it aint....sorry my math was off
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
3,946 (0.64/day)
Location
Police/Nanny State of America
Processor OCed 5800X3D
Motherboard Asucks C6H
Cooling Air
Memory 32GB
Video Card(s) OCed 6800XT
Storage NVMees
Display(s) 32" Dull curved 1440
Case Freebie glass idk
Audio Device(s) Sennheiser
Power Supply Don't even remember
and thats why people still have hope for the two-patch solution MS is working on for windows 7 and BD.

That doesn't fix apps only using a couple threads, though.

And we all know that since M$ released the patch it doesn't do anything at all. We will have to wait for win8 for any small improvement.

A lot of people seem to not notice or care that Bulldozer is vastly underutilized in most of these games.
While SB is using half or more of it's resources, BD is using about 1/4th.

If games used more threads to feed the graphics card, we wouldn't be discussing this issue to death.

It wouldn't be discussed at all b/c intel would lose in every game. That's how the game works don't you know? :ohwell:

A lot of sites (paid by you know who) won't bench apps favorable to AMD b/c they're paid not to. We end up with reviews massively one siding a situation regardless of real performance.
I remember Athlon 64s losing to pentium 4s back in the day in benches....now, I wonder how that was possible LOL
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2009
Messages
620 (0.11/day)
Location
Michigan, USA
System Name Black Box
Processor Intel i7 3770K
Motherboard AsRock z77 Extreme 6
Cooling Thermalright Venemous X
Memory 2 x 8GB Crucial Ballistix
Video Card(s) 2 x GTX 480
Storage A-Data 128GB SSD, Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB
Display(s) HANNspree 25" 1080p 2ms
Case Lian Li PC-9F
Audio Device(s) Creative XFI
Power Supply PC Power & Cooling Silencer MKII 750w
Software Win 7 pro x64
Where do people get off saying BD is fail? I looked through every page and, more often than not, it was beating Nehalem, and sometimes even beating the 2500k.

While sure it's not superdooperawesome like a lot of people were hoping for, but it's far from fail IMO.

EDIT: W1zzard, how come you guys don't test in 1080p? I'd dare say that the probably THE MOST common resolution used these days, yet it's always omitted in tests.
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,150 (2.89/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
Where do people get off saying BD is fail? I looked through every page and, more often than not, it was beating Nehalem, and sometimes even beating the 2500k.

While sure it's not superdooperawesome like a lot of people were hoping for, but it's far from fail IMO.

EDIT: W1zzard, how come you guys don't test in 1080p? I'd dare say that the probably THE MOST common resolution used these days, yet it's always omitted in tests.

That is because at higher resolutions, your bottleneck is almost always your video card. Bulldozer didn't fail, it just had a lot of hype for something that was decent at best in comparison to the T1100 and T1090. Bulldozer did good enough where it has to and shines when SMP really matters. It's the first step towards something better. There aren't a whole lot of applications that use a lot of SMP, but there very well could in the future.

This review kind of puts everything into perspective imho.
http://guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-7970-cpu-scaling-performance-review

In all realism, BD isn't that bad. Keep in mind that a lot of these titles don't use a lot of cores yet, so there is a lot of horse power BD still has waiting to be used. Nothing is stopping someone from transcoding video while playing a video game and not have a problem. That is what AMD is trying to do.

Albeit, Intel has better IPC counts, but that is only because SB has a shorter pipeline than BD. BD has some obstacles to overcome, but all in all, it is more space friendly, so you can cram more cores on the same amount of die space.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2009
Messages
620 (0.11/day)
Location
Michigan, USA
System Name Black Box
Processor Intel i7 3770K
Motherboard AsRock z77 Extreme 6
Cooling Thermalright Venemous X
Memory 2 x 8GB Crucial Ballistix
Video Card(s) 2 x GTX 480
Storage A-Data 128GB SSD, Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB
Display(s) HANNspree 25" 1080p 2ms
Case Lian Li PC-9F
Audio Device(s) Creative XFI
Power Supply PC Power & Cooling Silencer MKII 750w
Software Win 7 pro x64
That is because at higher resolutions, your bottleneck is almost always your video card.
I know that, but thanks anyway. The reason I'm asking is because why would you review at a resolution that 7% use, as opposed to a resolution that is THE MOST commonly used --1920x1080 (25%). Which is followed by 1680x1050 @ 17%. (source)
Bulldozer didn't fail, it just had a lot of hype for something that was decent at best in comparison to the T1100 and T1090. Bulldozer did good enough where it has to and shines when SMP really matters. It's the first step towards something better. There aren't a whole lot of applications that use a lot of SMP, but there very well could in the future.

This review kind of puts everything into perspective imho.
http://guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-7970-cpu-scaling-performance-review

In all realism, BD isn't that bad. Keep in mind that a lot of these titles don't use a lot of cores yet, so there is a lot of horse power BD still has waiting to be used. Nothing is stopping someone from transcoding video while playing a video game and not have a problem. That is what AMD is trying to do.

Albeit, Intel has better IPC counts, but that is only because SB has a shorter pipeline than BD. BD has some obstacles to overcome, but all in all, it is more space friendly, so you can cram more cores on the same amount of die space.
You're absolutely right, it didn't but all of these intel fanboi's would lead people to believe that it's slower than socket 939 single core. When in reality, it's their fastest CPUs' to date. Regardless of whether the software can utilize it or not.
 

cadaveca

My name is Dave
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
17,233 (2.58/day)
Regardless of whether the software can utilize it or not.

For most peopel though, this is what's most important.

The question gets asked "Will this make what I do now faster?"

And the answer, of course, for most is "Not Really".


The hype let people down, but of course it's not a bad chip...but it's not "The best" either. I think many more people would be happier if the 8150's price matched the 2500k's, but it doesn't.

I've recommended to many PHenom II quad users that they upgrade to 8150, and soem have. Not one has been disappointed in the change.
 
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
2,067 (0.40/day)
System Name The Stone that the Builders Refused / iJayo
Processor R5 1600/ R7 3700X
Motherboard Asrock AB350 Pro4 / Asus Rog Strix B450-F gaming
Cooling Cryorig M9 / Noctua NH-D14
Memory G skill 16 Gigs ddr4 / 16 gigs PNY ddr4
Video Card(s) Nvdia GTX 660 / Nvidia RTX 2070 Super
Storage 120gig 840 evo, 120gig adata sp900 / 1tb Mushkin M.2 ssd 1 & 3 tb seagate hdd, 120 gig Hyper X ssd
Display(s) 42" Nec retail display monitor/ 34" Dell curved 165hz monitor
Case Pink Enermax Ostrog / Phanteks Enthoo Evolv Tempered Glass edition
Audio Device(s) Altec Lansing Expressionist Bass/ M-Audio monitors
Power Supply Corsair450 / Be Quiet Dark Power Pro 650
Mouse corsair vengence M65 / Zalman Knossos
Keyboard corsair k95 / Roccat Vulcan 121
Software Window 10 pro / Windows 10 pro
Benchmark Scores meh... feel me on the battle field!
I know that, but thanks anyway. The reason I'm asking is because why would you review at a resolution that 7% use, as opposed to a resolution that is THE MOST commonly used --1920x1080 (25%). Which is followed by 1680x1050 @ 17%. (source)

You're absolutely right, it didn't but all of these intel fanboi's would lead people to believe that it's slower than socket 939 single core. When in reality, it's their fastest CPUs' to date. Regardless of whether the software can utilize it or not.

Aaaaahhhhhhhh thats like having the fastest speed boat....in the middle of the desert. JUST ENJOY THE DARN THING!!!!!!!! There is no mighty, morphing power ranger upgrade fix for it. Its not the intel killer. By the time software catches up to it....sometime 10 times better will be available... I still use my mindisc and laserdisc player....why? Because I paid for it and it makes me happy....get it? Apply
 
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
5,731 (1.10/day)
Location
West Midlands. UK.
System Name Ryzen Reynolds
Processor Ryzen 1600 - 4.0Ghz 1.415v - SMT disabled
Motherboard mATX Asrock AB350m AM4
Cooling Raijintek Leto Pro
Memory Vulcan T-Force 16GB DDR4 3000 16.18.18 @3200Mhz 14.17.17
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro+ 4GB RX 580 - 1450/2000 BIOS mod 8-)
Storage Seagate B'cuda 1TB/Sandisk 128GB SSD
Display(s) Acer ED242QR 75hz Freesync
Case Corsair Carbide Series SPEC-01
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair VS 550w
Mouse Zalman ZM-M401R
Keyboard Razor Lycosa
Software Windows 10 x64
Benchmark Scores https://www.3dmark.com/spy/6220813
Don't really see what all the fuss is about with BD, it compares and competes directly with Intel Nehalem which before SB was the target. I would be happy with BD if I had one, just so happens I have SB and am able to :nutkick: BD lol but seriously, still a half decent chip and if anything with AMD the 2nd revision will always be stronger as they improve upon the 1st build. Nice review W1zz, thanks as always!! :rockout:
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,150 (2.89/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
You also have to realize that single-threaded workloads isn't bulldozer's strong suit. You do some media encoding with the 8150 and it will give any 1155 CPU (at the moment,) a run for it's money, and in some cases get's close to 990X performance when it comes to media. If I look at framerates for any game and see them practically at 50-60fps, I wouldn't complain. Also SC2 isnt as dependent on IPC as it is on memory bandwidth, which is what Intel's chips are currently excelling it. Just keep in mind that a properly tuned bulldozer can crank out some impressive numbers.

Also, rumor has it that the next version of bulldozer, "Enhanced Bulldozer," may have a quad-channel memory controller while still using AM3+. That could be a good selling point as AMD processors are reasonable to replace without having to change all of your hardware. Intel's IPC counts are much nicer than AMD's, but AMD has something going for it because bulldozer has a very scalable architecture. Once AMD trims off the fat, reduces the length of the pipeline and gets its memory controller up to snuff. It will do better in single-threaded applications, and there will be more cores at the same time.

The future isn't single-threaded applications, just keep that in mind. Remember where we were 10 years ago, and 10 years ago before that.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
6,565 (1.40/day)
Processor Intel® Core™ i7-13700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory 32GB(2x16) DDR5@6600MHz G-Skill Trident Z5
Video Card(s) ZOTAC GAMING GeForce RTX 3080 AMP Holo
Storage 2TB SK Platinum P41 SSD + 4TB SanDisk Ultra SSD + 500GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD
Display(s) Acer Predator X34 3440x1440@100Hz G-Sync
Case NZXT PHANTOM410-BK
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium PCIe
Power Supply Corsair 850W
Mouse Logitech Hero G502 SE
Software Windows 11 Pro - 64bit
Benchmark Scores 30FPS in NFS:Rivals
Damn. I have a 4 years old Core 2 Quad Q9650 which is on pair with the I7-920, and still beats the crap out of the Shitdozer. Shame AMD, shame!
 

Mussels

Freshwater Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
58,413 (8.08/day)
Location
Oystralia
System Name Rainbow Sparkles (Power efficient, <350W gaming load)
Processor Ryzen R7 5800x3D (Undervolted, 4.45GHz all core)
Motherboard Asus x570-F (BIOS Modded)
Cooling Alphacool Apex UV - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora + EK Quantum ARGB 3090 w/ active backplate
Memory 2x32GB DDR4 3600 Corsair Vengeance RGB @3866 C18-22-22-22-42 TRFC704 (1.4V Hynix MJR - SoC 1.15V)
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 3090 SG 24GB: Underclocked to 1700Mhz 0.750v (375W down to 250W))
Storage 2TB WD SN850 NVME + 1TB Sasmsung 970 Pro NVME + 1TB Intel 6000P NVME USB 3.2
Display(s) Phillips 32 32M1N5800A (4k144), LG 32" (4K60) | Gigabyte G32QC (2k165) | Phillips 328m6fjrmb (2K144)
Case Fractal Design R6
Audio Device(s) Logitech G560 | Corsair Void pro RGB |Blue Yeti mic
Power Supply Fractal Ion+ 2 860W (Platinum) (This thing is God-tier. Silent and TINY)
Mouse Logitech G Pro wireless + Steelseries Prisma XL
Keyboard Razer Huntsman TE ( Sexy white keycaps)
VR HMD Oculus Rift S + Quest 2
Software Windows 11 pro x64 (Yes, it's genuinely a good OS) OpenRGB - ditch the branded bloatware!
Benchmark Scores Nyooom.
Damn. I have a 4 years old Core 2 Quad Q9650 which is on pair with the I7-920, and still beats the crap out of the Shitdozer. Shame AMD, shame!

show me where you got these numbers from, please
 

InnocentCriminal

Resident Grammar Amender
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
6,477 (0.91/day)
System Name BeeR 6
Processor Intel Core i7 3770K*
Motherboard ASUS Maximus V Gene (1155/Z77)
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 16GB Samsung Green 1600MHz DDR3**
Video Card(s) 4GB MSI Gaming X RX480
Storage 256GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD
Display(s) 27" Samsung C27F591FDU
Case Fractal Design Arc Mini
Power Supply Corsair HX750W
Software 64bit Microsoft Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores *@ 4.6GHz **@ 2133MHz
Yeah I'll 2nd that. I'll be interested to see how it compares with my Q9550.

:p
 
Top