CPU/Mobo AMD Bulldozer Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Hades.
- Start date
- Status
comp@ddict
Galvanizer
chiragsthakur
Forerunner
I wish BD chips shouldl be priced well below i7 2600K and perform similar or better than i7 2600K.... In that case I am getting BD for sure.
rabid.parrots
Contributor
muzux2
Forerunner
Hades.
Galvanizer
^^Buy AMD Company 
Well even people who have new stepping ES BD CPUs can't benchmark those CPUs until AMD lifts NDA... People who got ES sample did somehow leak some benchmarks but BD processor performance was nothing sort of spectacular... I dont want to see benchmarks in which AMD processors get beaten by Sandybridge i want to see benchmarks of BD processors in which they perform better...
Well even people who have new stepping ES BD CPUs can't benchmark those CPUs until AMD lifts NDA... People who got ES sample did somehow leak some benchmarks but BD processor performance was nothing sort of spectacular... I dont want to see benchmarks in which AMD processors get beaten by Sandybridge i want to see benchmarks of BD processors in which they perform better...
raxy said:
iamnew said:
Okay stop making this a AMD vs. Intel thread please raxy.
AMD doesn't forge its own chips, a separate company GlobalFoundries forge them for AMD. That is why when the yield is low, AMD has to revise its launch dates drastically. This also makes it hard for them to compete head-to-head against Intel as Intel has its own fabrication plants and they have implemented the tic-toc strategy flawlessly.
iamnew it is Llano not Liano [double L].
ROFL yes yes of-course it does
AnandTech - Bench - CPU
And in games phailoms dont beat Q9x5x ..... only stand a chance where more cores count and thats AMD's mightiest X6 on the market fighting more than 3 year old intel quad lol that too with 300 mhz faster in those benches.
Thought that was bad I had come across a bench showing only games with the 2 processors to really show the difference but I found something better. Single core comparisons with the processors locked at 3ghz. Highlight is X6 losing to intel E6xxx dual core more than 4 year old architecture.
Charts, benchmarks X86 Core Performance Comparison, PCMark 7
Notice the progression of the green bars , single core performance is where the technology and the improvements are and you can see there has been like 5% improvement in a X6 single core performance vs dual core phailoms 3-4 years old. Pretty freaking pathetic and now you are gonna get 2 more useless cores .... I remember how much AMD fanbabies cried about no need for intel 920 with its ht and 8 cores bla bla bla stuff isnt even optimised etc etc.
Look at the graphs single core multicore whatever if you have a older intel system no reason to buy anything but intel, anything else is going backwards. Buying anything but budget amd (now x4 955@5k~ great vfm) waste of money. When X6 1100 release 15k+ its already 10k and people have realised what a flop it is really. I see the same thing happening with bulldozer sadly because this has been the theme with AMD releases for a while now.
So correction isnt X4 955 already smashes Q9xxx it is AMD still getting raped by old C2D.
AnandTech - Bench - CPU
And in games phailoms dont beat Q9x5x ..... only stand a chance where more cores count and thats AMD's mightiest X6 on the market fighting more than 3 year old intel quad lol that too with 300 mhz faster in those benches.
Thought that was bad I had come across a bench showing only games with the 2 processors to really show the difference but I found something better. Single core comparisons with the processors locked at 3ghz. Highlight is X6 losing to intel E6xxx dual core more than 4 year old architecture.
Charts, benchmarks X86 Core Performance Comparison, PCMark 7
Notice the progression of the green bars , single core performance is where the technology and the improvements are and you can see there has been like 5% improvement in a X6 single core performance vs dual core phailoms 3-4 years old. Pretty freaking pathetic and now you are gonna get 2 more useless cores .... I remember how much AMD fanbabies cried about no need for intel 920 with its ht and 8 cores bla bla bla stuff isnt even optimised etc etc.
Look at the graphs single core multicore whatever if you have a older intel system no reason to buy anything but intel, anything else is going backwards. Buying anything but budget amd (now x4 955@5k~ great vfm) waste of money. When X6 1100 release 15k+ its already 10k and people have realised what a flop it is really. I see the same thing happening with bulldozer sadly because this has been the theme with AMD releases for a while now.
So correction isnt X4 955 already smashes Q9xxx it is AMD still getting raped by old C2D.
Zloyd said:
^^ I hope you realize Sire that you are using unacceptable language.
And secondly for your information, most of Intel's so called home-grown technology is re-badged AMD technology that they have reverse engineered.
a) do you know Intel has something called Quick Path Interconnect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_QuickPath_Interconnect right now (since Bloomfield days), do you know where they stole this idea from --> AMD's HyperTransport http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperTransport / http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/The-HyperTransport-Bus-Used-By-AMD-Processors/19/4, before QPI Intel processors had a massive bottle-neck called FSB or have you Intel lovers forgotten that.
b) AMD --> True Dual Core design, flash-back 2003 AMD releases the first dual core Athlon-FX, Intel Prescott's are literally at their peak envelope for TDP because the Net-burst architecture on a 90nm fabrication was being pushed for the break through 3.8 GHz mark, AMD-FX processors beat Intel on all counts, Intel returns with the Pentium D -- unleashes a viral marketing drive for its Hyper Threading technology -- end of the day people buy that very Intel stuff because the industry exhorts them too, plus the Pentium D's suffice to say are no match for the AMD-FX architecture.
c) Intel presses false charges against every competing company so that no company has the might to challenge them head-to-head, dollar-for-dollar, AMD has won each of these litigation's since 1992 [founding days] to as recent as 2010 where Intel has to pay it damages upto 1.5 billion USD for false marketing plus blocking other companies from selling AMD products.
Learn something from history Zloyd, the people who control the past control the future, those who control the future control the present and finally those who have the present have the past. Intel lives because it has the money to live, lets see how it fares when things come to a head and every company worth its salt pushes them back and there is a long list I assure you, starting from
-- AMD, VIA, ARM conglomerate, nVidia [made a flimsy peace for now], IBM... I assure you the list is endless.
The only thing Intel has created for itself is the tic-toc rhythm of changing architecture then changing fabrication process, finally marrying them on the third tic. This has made sure we upgrade time and again and they keep getting their money back. I'm not flaming you but know this --
"History is written by the victorious, the vanquished are confined to the texts."
Zloyd said:
^^ I hope you realize Sire that you are using unacceptable language.
And secondly for your information, most of Intel's so called home-grown technology is re-badged AMD technology that they have reverse engineered.
a) do you know Intel has something called Quick Path Interconnect right now (since Bloomfield days), do you know where they stole this idea from --> AMD's HyperTransport, before QPI Intel processors had a massive bottle-neck called FSB or have you Intel lovers forgotten that.
b) AMD --> True Dual Core design, flash-back 2003 AMD releases the first dual core Athlon-FX, Intel Prescott's are literally at their peak envelope for TDP because the Net-burst architecture on a 90nm fabrication was being pushed for the break through 3.8 GHz mark, AMD-FX processors beat Intel on all counts, Intel returns with the Pentium D -- unleashes a viral marketing drive for its Hyper Threading technology -- end of the day people buy that very Intel stuff because the industry exhorts them too, plus the Pentium D's suffice to say are no match for the AMD-FX architecture.
c) Intel presses false charges against every competing company so that no company has the might to challenge them head-to-head, dollar-for-dollar, AMD has won each of these litigation's since 1992 [founding days] to as recent as 2010 where Intel has to pay it damages upto 1.5 billion USD for false marketing plus blocking other companies from selling AMD products.
Learn something from history Zloyd, the people who control the past control the future, those who control the future control the present and finally those who have the present have the past. Intel lives because it has the money to live, lets see how it fares when things come to a head and every company worth its salt pushes them back and there is a long list I assure you, starting from
-- AMD, VIA, ARM conglomerate, nVidia [made a flimsy peace for now], IBM... I assure you the list is endless.
The only thing Intel has created for itself is the tic-toc rhythm of changing architecture then changing fabrication process, finally marrying them on the third tic. This has made sure we upgrade time and again and they keep getting their money back. I'm not flaming you but know this --
"History is written by the victorious, the vanquished are confined to the texts."
MODS PLEASE DELETE THIS REPEAT POST.
- Status