AMD Bulldozer News and Discussion

sukesh1090

sukesh1090

Adam young
why actually it failed when its architecture was better than 2600k or this why it is said that theory is always theory it will never suits the real word practical.btw is there any bug in the processor because of which it is not performing as promised or the programs are no able to use its features?
 
Piyush

Piyush

Lanaya
---price will play a vital role---

IF AMD wants this one to sold just like phenoms, then it must be priced sweet

BTW the funny thing
BD 8150 =8 cores and
i7 2600k = 4 cores
 
A

akastek

Right off the assembly line
Bulldozer 8150 doesn't have 8 "cores" but 4 modules.

Bulldozer module doesn’t incorporate two complete cores. Instead, it shares certain parts of what we’d expect to find as dedicated resources in a typical execution core, including instruction fetch and decode stages, floating-point units, and the L2 cache.
 
max_snyper

max_snyper

Maximum Effort!!!!!!
^^ as said earlier it has 2 integer cores per module that translates to 1.75 of a normal dual core processor
2.programs are actually not able to use its features, windows 7 is not able to utilise its true potential.
3.If the prices are corrct in India then im in for bulldozer.
 
sukesh1090

sukesh1090

Adam young
^^but in toms review they have also given the performance in win 8 and there is no much difference.the single threaded performance may improve but the over all performance still remains epic fail.i am totally disappointed,95% of the reviewers there don't recommend or suggest i5 over this and don't even think about comparing this with 2600k.
I am completely disappointed.my question is where AMD failed even when it is having a very good architecture?why amd? why?

it looks like the only place where AMD defeated intel buy a hell lot of margin is............power consumption.may be even for 10 years in future the intel won't be able to defeat this.
 
max_snyper

max_snyper

Maximum Effort!!!!!!
^^Win 8 is in the development stage now not complete...many optimization are to be done,
amd ppl have not failed to deliver,its just that the performance is not as good as 2600k in single threaded application...in multithreading optimized application it will perform good if not best.
BTW a total revamp of the architechture and getting performance close to i7-series is not a easy task especially when u are the only contender in the field against Intel for mainstream market.
Which AMD product has thrashed intel products in the last 2~3 years,not in the price /performance ratio but in pure performance...none still ppl bought the product coz it has lower price upto the mark performance....
And in gaming leave it,frame rates above 30 are pure not noticible for human eye,and ppl fighting over mere 2~8 frames is sheer bragging nothing else...still most games are Gpu depended not cpu (i hope GTA 5 comes to pc first and then ported to consoles.) with few exceptions.
 
A

akastek

Right off the assembly line
the bottomline is bulldozer has dissapointed many. the performance they are going to deliver now has been delivered by intel almost a year ago and price wise too sandy bridge shines :neutral:
 
OP
Cilus

Cilus

laborare est orare
sukesh1090 said:
^^but in toms review they have also given the performance in win 8 and there is no much difference.the single threaded performance may improve but the over all performance still remains epic fail.i am totally disappointed,95% of the reviewers there don't recommend or suggest i5 over this and don't even think about comparing this with 2600k.
I am completely disappointed.my question is where AMD failed even when it is having a very good architecture?why amd? why?

it looks like the only place where AMD defeated intel buy a hell lot of margin is............power consumption.may be even for 10 years in future the intel won't be able to defeat this.
Click to expand...

Sukesh, stop crying buddy, in most of the review sites like Toms hardware, Legitreviews, guru3d, FX 8150 is placed between i5 2500K and i7 2600K. So a slight price cut will make it a hot deal. In heavily multi-threaded applications FX 8150 has shown its potential in lots of the test benchmarks, performing neck to neck with 2600K and sometimes beating it.

It is the single threaded performance where it failed completely. According to me, AMD should treat each of the modules as a SMT ebnabled single unit like two logical cores of a HT enabled core rather than make them treated as two physical cores by OS. As a result when a single threaded application is assigned to any of the cores of a module, the 2nd core is not getting used although theoritically it is possible to execute instructions of the assigned thread in both the cores as they share same frontend (Fetch-decode unit).

Lets hope upcoming programs and OS will be optimized to utilize the new architecture benefits.
 
tkin

tkin

Back to school!!
sukesh1090 said:
^^but in toms review they have also given the performance in win 8 and there is no much difference.the single threaded performance may improve but the over all performance still remains epic fail.i am totally disappointed,95% of the reviewers there don't recommend or suggest i5 over this and don't even think about comparing this with 2600k.
I am completely disappointed.my question is where AMD failed even when it is having a very good architecture?why amd? why?

it looks like the only place where AMD defeated intel buy a hell lot of margin is............power consumption.may be even for 10 years in future the intel won't be able to defeat this.
Click to expand...
ROFL :))

Anyway, don't worry, think of this as GTX480 of AMD, GTX580(aka PD I guess) might make it work, the first product of any generation sucks(except intel cpus starting from C2D).

PS: 2B transistors? What are they trying to beat nvidia gpus with their cpus?
 
tkin

tkin

Back to school!!
I will just leave this here:

*t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR7nHFP6DeRIZg6QxlEXq9K4OonYVR-rexjy3ONGt1zGrEgcEoKAMf7g1jAJw

BTW, I just read this in another forum:
Seems like AMD is intent on burying something, hopefully it's not their CPU division.

Bulldoze, pile, roll, excavate, bury. Did I just give you a look into the future?
Click to expand...
 
vaibhav23

vaibhav23

In the zone
Anyone has read reviews of 4110 & 6110?
Any will the prices of phenom processors drop?This will be a much better decision when compared to launching Bulldozer?
 
tkin

tkin

Back to school!!
Jaskanwar Singh said:
yup no drop on 2600k prices. 2500k may go lower.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt that, the only price cut that needs to happen is for Bulldozer, top end BD prices are not competitive at all considering 2500k price is really nice.

Jaskanwar Singh said:
yup no drop on 2600k prices. 2500k may go lower.



this along with this -



yep, i think it has potential.
Click to expand...
I think it does, only issue is that even with the monstrous power consumption and temps GTX480/470 actually BEAT the competition at intended price points.
 
Jaskanwar Singh

Jaskanwar Singh

Aspiring Novelist
tkin said:
I think it does, only issue is that even with the monstrous power consumption and temps GTX480/470 actually BEAT the competition at intended price points.
Click to expand...

well yes you are right but i just wanted to point out potential. :))

---------------------------------

nice one -

The good news is AMD has a very aggressive roadmap ahead of itself; here's hoping it will be able to execute against it. We all need AMD to succeed. We've seen what happens without a strong AMD as a competitor. We get processors that are artificially limited and severe restrictions on overclocking, particularly at the value end of the segment. We're denied choice simply because there's no other alternative. I don't believe Bulldozer is a strong enough alternative to force Intel back into an ultra competitive mode, but we absolutely need it to be that. I have faith that AMD can pull it off, but there's still a lot of progress that needs to be made. AMD can't simply rely on its GPU architecture superiority to sell APUs; it needs to ramp on the x86 side as well—more specifically, AMD needs better single threaded performance. Bulldozer didn't deliver that, and I'm worried that Piledriver alone won't be enough. But if AMD can stick to a yearly cadence and execute well with each iteration, there's hope. It's no longer a question of whether AMD will return to the days of the Athlon 64, it simply must. Otherwise you can kiss choice goodbye.
Click to expand...
AnandTech - The Bulldozer Review: AMD FX-8150 Tested
 
sukesh1090

sukesh1090

Adam young
bulldozer has a good multi thread performance but still there are some days for the applications to come which will use 8 cores completely.but the single thread performance is pathetic,may be it is a program mistake which is treating half of the module as single core,but the program developer can't simply develop a program solely for bd there should always be a effort from AMD to optimize bd as they can make the program to treat a module as a single core.lets see what happens there may be some revisions where we can see these bug like things are fixed.but the field where they completely lost is power consumption:sad:
guys 8150 is easily beating 2600k in multi threaded performance.isn't it guys?
actually AMD itself made the hype by comparing it with 980x or else BD was a huge success.if they sell 8150 at around 11k then i am sure that they will kick intel's ***.may be BD will win when we compare 2600k and 8150 after 1 year where program will be optimized to use multi cores and latest instructions.:razz:
 
tkin

tkin

Back to school!!
sukesh1090 said:
bulldozer has a good multi thread performance but still there are some days for the applications to come which will use 8 cores completely.but the single thread performance is pathetic,may be it is a program mistake which is treating half of the module as single core,but the program developer can't simply develop a program solely for bd there should always be a effort from AMD to optimize bd as they can make the program to treat a module as a single core.lets see what happens there may be some revisions where we can see these bug like things are fixed.but the field where they completely lost is power consumption:sad:
guys 8150 is easily beating 2600k in multi threaded performance.isn't it guys?
actually AMD itself made the hype by comparing it with 980x or else BD was a huge success.if they sell 8150 at around 11k then i am sure that they will kick intel's ***.may be BD will win when we compare 2600k and 8150 after 1 year where program will be optimized to use multi cores and latest instructions.:razz:
Click to expand...
Have you even remotely read any reviews of BD? I guess not, so here is the rundown, BD single core performance(IPC) is so horrible that even with 8 cores it can't match either their predecessors(Phenom II) or sandy bridge, even with higher freq, more cache, deeper pipelines, in single as well multithreaded benchmarks, 8 core phenoms would be faster than BDs, everything is wrong with that architecture, low IPC, memory latency is not good, cache latency and speed is disastrously horrible, power consumption is through the roof, 4.8GHz BD draws close to 600w, thats just plain nuts, so if you buy BD your electricity bill may well make you go bankrupt.

*img189.imageshack.us/img189/6627/ocpower.png

And here is what multithreaded for BD looks like:

*oi55.tinypic.com/6hs306.jpg
From hardware-canucks.
 
nilgtx260

nilgtx260

Maximum Craze
OMG WTF???? It's the biggest let down by AMD I have ever seen, I am so disappointed now after seeing Bulldozer's performance. It's not a epic fail but from price point of view.....YEAH IT IS. I mean how the hell AMD fix that kind of stupid high price of that processor which should compete against i7 960/970/2600/2600K but eventually ended up by delivering same performance of 2500K/Phenom II X6 1100T with more power consumption & less gaming performance. From a gamer point of view why should we have this processor which has high price & consumes more power than Intel & deliver average gaming performance? What the hell AMD actually done with its new architecture??? Now I am very doubtful whether AMD repeats same kind of failure with its Radeon HD 7000 series which also has new architecture with its 32mm gpu. In the next year Intel will drop another bomb with Ivy bridge & Sandy Bridge E is already knocking the door prepared with i7 Xtreme series. Now where do we put AMD Bulldozer ?
 
Last edited:
sukesh1090

sukesh1090

Adam young
:banghead:amd should do this but they are not so i am doing this.but still brother performance in multithread is good but is single thread it is failing because of it module thing which the present programs can't understand.about power consumption thats what i am telling from the beginning that its just an epic fail.intel can never ever beat this bd in that field.hope AMD will also won't beat it with its newer architecture.BD is just like modern instruction set pentium 4(bcoz logic behind the architecture are all same) who is competing with athlon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom