Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Official] AMD Bulldozer Reviews Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Official] AMD Bulldozer Reviews Thread - Page 141

post #1401 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by ekg84 View Post
lol here are the settings they used in techreport review.



Techreport settings are lower which means result is less gpu bound. Thats why u got different result with overclockersclub review.

And here are overclockersclub settigs:

4x AA
16x AF
Global settings = High

I hope that answers your question.
No, my question was which review the last attacker was trying to poo poo. Thanks for all the graphs. Does this mean that the reviews showing FX kicking butt in games are going to disappear just because you manage to dig one up that makes it look bad? You have lost me here.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-4170 @ 4.86 Ghz ASUS M5A97 EVO 2 x PowerColor AX6790 Crossfire 16GB (4 x 4GB) SAMSUNG MV-3V4G3D @1890 Mhz 8-9-9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x Corsair Force 3 120 GB SSD External USB AMD stock cooler Win7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS 23" DVI Fullsize, solid. OCZ ModXStream Pro 500W CM Praetorian 730 Black 
Mouse
Has red light on bottom 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-4170 @ 4.86 Ghz ASUS M5A97 EVO 2 x PowerColor AX6790 Crossfire 16GB (4 x 4GB) SAMSUNG MV-3V4G3D @1890 Mhz 8-9-9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x Corsair Force 3 120 GB SSD External USB AMD stock cooler Win7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS 23" DVI Fullsize, solid. OCZ ModXStream Pro 500W CM Praetorian 730 Black 
Mouse
Has red light on bottom 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1402 of 2308














Obviously if you increase the resolution and the quality settings, it will become GPU bound. But looking at those results, its safe to say BD gaming performance is garbage. I don't know what Jagged Steel is talking about when he claims it performs better than the 2600k. BD can't even compete with PII X6s.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagged_Steel View Post
No, my question was which review the last attacker was trying to poo poo. Thanks for all the graphs. Does this mean that the reviews showing FX kicking butt in games are going to disappear just because you manage to dig one up that makes it look bad? You have lost me here.
To prove that if you increase the resolution, all CPUs will start performing similarly in GPU bound games but why would you pick up a $280 FX-8150 when you can get a 2500K that will outperform it in almost every scenario?
Edited by Clairvoyant129 - 10/12/11 at 6:11pm
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1403 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagged_Steel View Post
No, my question was which review the last attacker was trying to poo poo. Thanks for all the graphs. Does this mean that the reviews showing FX kicking butt in games are going to disappear just because you manage to dig one up that makes it look bad? You have lost me here.
No, I'm pretty sure you can pretty much pick any benchmark or any game at random to make BD look bad. He has plenty of more benchmarks to post. BD certainly isn't doing itself any favors.

EDIT: Oh look, there they are now! Yeah, most of them look like that. Pretty much every games benchmark on something other than 1080p and ultra settings with a good GPU puts BD worse than X6 and X4 even sometimes.
Edited by DayoftheGreek - 10/12/11 at 6:11pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2600k 4.5GHz @ 1.32V Asus P8P67 Pro EVGA GTX 580 Mushkin 2133 9-10-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840  WD Black Silver Arrow Windows 7 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell U2211H Rosewill RK-9000BR Seasonic X750 HAF X 
MouseAudio
Razer Lachesis Grado HF2 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2600k 4.5GHz @ 1.32V Asus P8P67 Pro EVGA GTX 580 Mushkin 2133 9-10-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840  WD Black Silver Arrow Windows 7 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell U2211H Rosewill RK-9000BR Seasonic X750 HAF X 
MouseAudio
Razer Lachesis Grado HF2 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1404 of 2308
Wow, this is a bigger launch failure than Fermi was.

I'm truly saddened by this. It's been years since I rocked an AMD computer. With results like this, looks like its going to be a few more.
MOAR COARS
(14 items)
 
Red Dragon
(9 items)
 
Old Green
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700 AsRock Taichi X370 EVGA 1080Ti FE 16GB Trident Z 3200 C14 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 960 Evo 250GB SK Hynix 500GB SSD EK Supremacy Evo EK XTX 65mm Rad 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10  BenQ XL2420T 120hz Tomoko Blue 84-key EVGA SuperNova G2 1000w 
CaseMouse
Fractal Define S Logitech G300S 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 750 MSI P55-GD65 2x Palit GTX460 1GB 8GB 1333 G.Skill F3 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
2x 500gb 1x 320gb Windows 7 Ultimate 22" Samsung 1080p Corsair 750w 
Case
CoolerMaster 690 
  hide details  
Reply
MOAR COARS
(14 items)
 
Red Dragon
(9 items)
 
Old Green
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700 AsRock Taichi X370 EVGA 1080Ti FE 16GB Trident Z 3200 C14 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 960 Evo 250GB SK Hynix 500GB SSD EK Supremacy Evo EK XTX 65mm Rad 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10  BenQ XL2420T 120hz Tomoko Blue 84-key EVGA SuperNova G2 1000w 
CaseMouse
Fractal Define S Logitech G300S 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 750 MSI P55-GD65 2x Palit GTX460 1GB 8GB 1333 G.Skill F3 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
2x 500gb 1x 320gb Windows 7 Ultimate 22" Samsung 1080p Corsair 750w 
Case
CoolerMaster 690 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1405 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slappy Mcgee;15283539 
How is it a power guzzler? Here break it down liked this
Intel 4 cores = 155 watts = 38.75 watts/core
AMD 8 cores = 223 watts = 27.875 watts /core

How is it a power guzzler?

They're both eight threads, the OS could give a crap if they're 4 cores with hyper-threading to give 8 threads, or 8 "modules". Here are the few things that matter to most people on OCN:

1.) Price/performance, Intel is the winner here in most categories
2.) Power/performance. AMD is epic failing this one with any of its "high performance" CPUs.
3.) Pure performance, goes to Intel, no contest.

AMD Fans, answer me this, you save $60 on buying an AMD FX over Intel 2600k, get performance that isn't even close to the 2600k, and then end up paying most of that $60 back on your electricity bill. Seriously, you'd have to be high or just completely irrational to want the Bulldozer for any reason.

And for the record let me state that I've owned numerous AMD rigs over the years, I'm a performance enthusiast, not some hopeless fanboy, and at the moment AMD has nothing to bring to the table.
Edited by lordikon - 12/13/11 at 10:59pm
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1406 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Code-Red View Post
Wow, this is a bigger launch failure than Fermi was.

I'm truly saddened by this. It's been years since I rocked an AMD computer. With results like this, looks like its going to be a few more.
I know what you mean. I sold my PC to wait for BD. Looks like I can safely pick up SB or SB-e.
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1407 of 2308
I'll remind everyone again. Could we all act like civilized human beings for once in this thread?
post #1408 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by DayoftheGreek View Post
No, I'm pretty sure you can pretty much pick any benchmark or any game at random to make BD look bad. He has plenty of more benchmarks to post. BD certainly isn't doing itself any favors.

EDIT: Oh look, there they are now! Yeah, most of them look like that. Pretty much every games benchmark on something other than 1080p and ultra settings with a good GPU puts BD worse than X6 and X4 even sometimes.


I see the FX on top here. Are you saying that if you bought an FX system that you are not capable of getting it to function as well as these guys?
Edited by Jagged_Steel - 10/12/11 at 6:18pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-4170 @ 4.86 Ghz ASUS M5A97 EVO 2 x PowerColor AX6790 Crossfire 16GB (4 x 4GB) SAMSUNG MV-3V4G3D @1890 Mhz 8-9-9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x Corsair Force 3 120 GB SSD External USB AMD stock cooler Win7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS 23" DVI Fullsize, solid. OCZ ModXStream Pro 500W CM Praetorian 730 Black 
Mouse
Has red light on bottom 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-4170 @ 4.86 Ghz ASUS M5A97 EVO 2 x PowerColor AX6790 Crossfire 16GB (4 x 4GB) SAMSUNG MV-3V4G3D @1890 Mhz 8-9-9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x Corsair Force 3 120 GB SSD External USB AMD stock cooler Win7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS 23" DVI Fullsize, solid. OCZ ModXStream Pro 500W CM Praetorian 730 Black 
Mouse
Has red light on bottom 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1409 of 2308
I keep popping in hoping to see that there was some massive.... magical fairy uCode or BIOS fix. Any news on this front?

I see mentioning of Linux kernels needing to be adjusted to compensate, but claimed Windows should not have the same issue. Something about memory addressing index of level 2 cache...

Jagged... its bad, give it up.
Edited by RagingCain - 10/12/11 at 6:18pm
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Reply
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1410 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordikon View Post
They're both eight threads, the OS could give a crap if they 4 cores with hyper-threading to give 8 threads, or 8 "modules". Here are the few things that matter to most people on OCN:

1.) Price/performance, Intel is the winner here in most categories)
2.) Power/performance. AMD is epic failing this one with any of its "high performance" CPUs.
3.) Pure performance, goes to Intel, no contest.

AMD Fans, answer me this, you save $60 on buying an AMD FX over Intel 2600k, get performance that isn't even close to the 2600k, and then end up paying most of that $60 back on your electricity bill. Seriously, you'd have to by high or just completely irrational to want the Bulldozer for any reason.

And for the record let me state that I've owned numerous AMD rigs over the years, I'm a performance enthusiast, not some hopeless fanboy, and at the moment AMD has nothing to bring to the table.
Perfect.
My Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500K ASUS P8Z68-V 2x EVGA GTX 580 SLI 8GB Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1x WD Black 1TB 2x WD Green 2TB LITEON Sata DVD Burner Windows 7 Professional 64Bit 27" 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
MS X4 CORSAIR HX 1000W HAF932 Deathadder 3g 
Mouse Pad
None 
  hide details  
Reply
My Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500K ASUS P8Z68-V 2x EVGA GTX 580 SLI 8GB Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1x WD Black 1TB 2x WD Green 2TB LITEON Sata DVD Burner Windows 7 Professional 64Bit 27" 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
MS X4 CORSAIR HX 1000W HAF932 Deathadder 3g 
Mouse Pad
None 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Official] AMD Bulldozer Reviews Thread