CPU/Mobo Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II

Hades.

Hades.

Forerunner
Source: Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II | techPowerUp

Here, take some salt. AMD reportedly gave out performance figures in a presentation to its partners, performance figures seen by DonanimHaber. It is reported that an 8-core processor based on the "Bulldozer" high-performance CPU architecture is pitched by its makers to have 50% higher performance than existing processors such as the Core i7 950 (4 cores, 8 threads), and Phenom II X6 1100T (6 cores). Very little is known about the processor, including at what clock speed the processor was running at, much less what other components were driving the test machine.

Taking this information into account, the said Bulldozer based processor should synthetically even outperform Core i7 980X six-core, Intel's fastest desktop processor in the market. Built from ground-up, the Bulldozer architecture focuses on greater inter-core communication and reconfigured ALU/FPU to achieve higher instructions per clock cycle (IPC) compared to the previous generation K10.5, on which its current Phenom II series processors are based. The processor is backed by new 9-series core logic, and a new AM3+ socket. AMD is expected to unveil this platform a little later this year.
Click to expand...
 
if it does perform that good,then the price is all i am waiting to hear...

will sell like hot cakes if they just price it right!
 
Sandybridge = 4 cores
Bulldozer = 8 cores

that means there should be at least 100% performance increase as there are 2x the amount of cores. AMD here is saying that they have only 50% increase in performance. Seems like marketing BS. It should be able to give that performance core for core and not on a handicap to the other side!

Until I see the comparison vs price review for myself, I won't believe it.
 
mrnikhilsudo said:
Sandybridge = 4 cores

Bulldozer = 8 cores

that means there should be at least 100% performance increase as there are 2x the amount of cores. AMD here is saying that they have only 50% increase in performance. Seems like marketing BS. It should be able to give that performance core for core and not on a handicap to the other side!

Until I see the comparison vs price review for myself, I won't believe it.
Click to expand...
According to that logic i7 980X should be 50% faster than i7 965 but it is only 30% faster.... Not all apps scale 100% with extra cores.
 
^^^right,double the core doesn't always mean double the performance...various other things come into play in determining the processing power...
 
Sub said:
According to that logic i7 980X should be 50% faster than i7 965 but it is only 30% faster.... Not all apps scale 100% with extra cores.
Click to expand...
It is 50% better than i7 965, if you take a specific app like Wprime which is multi-threaded, and thats where marketing comes into play to spinoff things in their favor.
 
^ thebanik said it....

one thing I forgot to mention was that..... if its cheaper than sandy baby ...then my next rig is Bulldozer. I'd save the cash and go Crossfire!!!

wonder if I can wait that long though :)

oh yeah....and none of this arguing makes sense....if amd is really going to be faster....then we can expect the prices to crash quite easily. Great news for consumers!

peace guys :peace:
 
mrnikhilsudo said:
Sandybridge = 4 cores

Bulldozer = 8 cores

that means there should be at least 100% performance increase as there are 2x the amount of cores. AMD here is saying that they have only 50% increase in performance. Seems like marketing BS. It should be able to give that performance core for core and not on a handicap to the other side!

Until I see the comparison vs price review for myself, I won't believe it.
Click to expand...
Layman's terms:

Two cars travelling at speed 100kmph does not give you twice the speed compared to 1 car at 100kmph.

It is just that more people travel simultaneous at same speed..thereby, in same time. Now it depends how many people travel in those cars...just like how many cores does an app utilize. So scaling is subjective to application.
 
Its essentially

Quad Core i7 = Hex Bulldozer

So it all boils down to the price. What Sandy Bridge has going for it is the fact that even the Conservative auto Overclocking features on the P67 motherboards are safely overclocking a Sandy Bridge processor like the i7 2600K to 4.7~4.8GHz on the stock cooler. So to even match, AMD has to release a $300 Bulldozer based Hex Core CPU that can hit similar clocks.
 
Sandy Bridge or the Bulldozer - whatever offers the best VFM, I'd buy that eyes closed. Pair it with 4 gigs of RAM and a HD 6950/GTX 560 and I am set for the next couple of years. I am done with the dual GPU shite. Had enough problems with the previous crossfire setup. Pathetic scaling needless to say. :|

I am eyeing for the i5 2500K ATM.
 
Desecrator said:
Sandy Bridge or the Bulldozer - whatever offers the best VFM, I'd buy that eyes closed. Pair it with 4 gigs of RAM and a HD 6950/GTX 560 and I am set for the next couple of years. I am done with the dual GPU shite. Had enough problems with the previous crossfire setup. Pathetic scaling needless to say. :|

I am eyeing for the i5 2500K ATM.
Click to expand...
Have you seen the scaling of this generation of GPU's from both AMD and Nvidia? If you havent you should. But yeah I would also agree its better to buy a better single GPU rather than SLI/CF 2 mediocre GPUs
 
Back
Top