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

[Official] AMD Bulldozer Reviews Thread - Page 165

post #1641 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by matty0610 View Post
In what case would you need 3 6970s at 1920x1200 for gaming?
In a case where you can't allow a GPU to be a bottleneck?
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K Asus P8Z68-V PRO PowerColor 5870 PCS++ GSkill DDR3 1600 8GB 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Arch Linux / Ubuntu 11.10 / Windows 7 HP ZR24w Filco Majestouch with blacks Real Power M850 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Cooler Master HAF 932 Razer Deathadder 90x45cm l0l 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K Asus P8Z68-V PRO PowerColor 5870 PCS++ GSkill DDR3 1600 8GB 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Arch Linux / Ubuntu 11.10 / Windows 7 HP ZR24w Filco Majestouch with blacks Real Power M850 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Cooler Master HAF 932 Razer Deathadder 90x45cm l0l 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1642 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer86 View Post
prolly been posted but im not reading through 160 pages of arguing lol

why do the benches on the non asus boards look so much better across the board? hell even the power consumption is different on the boards problems with asus bios??

if it really does perform that well on non asus boards then i might look at picking up one
Ye the power consumption is only +20watts for AMD vs Intel.. strange thing.
post #1643 of 2308
OK, I understand this graph shows the superiority of the 2600K platform with multiple video cards, but it also shows something else (which cannot be ignored).

The benchmark shows that the user experience will be nearly identical not matter which platform.

OK, SB is faster in this benchmark, but this "faster" does not translate into an improved user experience.

Yes, I put my flame resistant suit on prior to writing this comment. Have at me kids
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
15 4690K @ 4.5 MSI Z97 Gaming 5 XFX R9 390 DD Gskill Sniper 8X2 GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1 GB Seagate Barricuda alpahcool ST30 360 Radiator, XSPC RASA waterblo... Windows 7 Ulitmate 64 bit LG 25UM57 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Rosewill HIVE 650 Phanteks Enthoo Pro TT Ventus Rocketfish 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
15 4690K @ 4.5 MSI Z97 Gaming 5 XFX R9 390 DD Gskill Sniper 8X2 GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1 GB Seagate Barricuda alpahcool ST30 360 Radiator, XSPC RASA waterblo... Windows 7 Ulitmate 64 bit LG 25UM57 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Rosewill HIVE 650 Phanteks Enthoo Pro TT Ventus Rocketfish 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1644 of 2308
I'm not sure why they didn't use a 2500K in the review instead of the 2600K. Results would have been identical
Edited by Don Karnage - 10/13/11 at 7:37am
post #1645 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by omninmo View Post
OK FOLKS SOME GOOD NEWS (for some people!)

BTW: This is not my work, I just compiled info and ported it here from the thread posted on Xtremesys a couple pages back

Disabling one core per module to avoid resource sharing improves single-threaded IPC ALOT - ACROSS THE BOARD! And surely fixes some of the stranger results we've seen!
Credit to DGLee @ XS who tested this, and to chew who stepped in to confirm having similar results when he was playing around with the chip, so here go the benches improvement when comparing 2M/4C vs 4M/4C:

Fritz Chess: 39,1% improvement
wPrime 32M: 31% improvement
Winrar: 9,5% improvement
3DMark06 CPU: 5.8% improvement
3DMark Vantage CPU: 22.1% improvement
3DMark11 Physics: 14.1% improvement
Cinebench R10: 21.4% improvement
Cinebench R11.5: 19.1% improvement
Blender: 21.7% improvement
TechARP x264 enc: 20% improvement
Daum PotEncoding H264 transcoding: 11,7% improvement

-------------- EDIT TO ELLABORATE ----------------

Now there isn't a direct comparison benchmark but word going around is that these gains across the board seem to leave Bulldozer with a bit more IPC than phenom II!

This means, for people willing to turn off 4 of their threads, that bulldozer will NOT SUCK AS HARD as originally intended in gaming and lightly threaded apps (although we are still waiting on gaming benches to confirm!).. In particular, gains by this are particulary big in some of the weirder results we had seen in original reviews.

IMO this makes BD at least a bit more viable as with 4 cores disabled, you will likely be seeing close to or actual 5Ghz on air and more on water with slightly higher IPC than Phenom! And all the while lowering power draw and heat output!

Ergo, not a 2500k killer by any stretch BUT AT LEAST a viable upgrade for those who already have a 990FX board..

ATTENTION, Currently it is not known if all boards support disabling individual cores, testing was done on a CHV, can't comment on others!

SOURCE: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...Threaded-Perf.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Partol View Post
According to this,
gaming performance improves a little when running in 4 Module/4 Core mode vs 4 Module/8 Core mode

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/842-...acite-cmt.html
Software core/module load balancing should be able to provide the same affect as disabling a core per module to prevent the sharing performance penalty. In any case, looks like the hardware.fr site shows there is a 10% increase in gaming performance when using 4c/4m compared to 4c/2m, which seems to be right in line with these results:





Windows 8 can distribute threads for optimal performance?
Intel
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 2500K Asus P8Z68-V LE GTX 560 Ti 8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
64GB Crucial M4 - 1TB Caviar Black Windows 7 HP Syncmaster 915n 650W Corsair HX 
  hide details  
Reply
Intel
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 2500K Asus P8Z68-V LE GTX 560 Ti 8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
64GB Crucial M4 - 1TB Caviar Black Windows 7 HP Syncmaster 915n 650W Corsair HX 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1646 of 2308
The 2500K might have been a fairer choice but ok
Home PC
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 GA-P55A-UD4P EVGA GTX 460 SLI G. Skill 8GB 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Hitachi 1TB Windows 7 20" HP Monitor Corsair 750TX 
  hide details  
Reply
Home PC
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 GA-P55A-UD4P EVGA GTX 460 SLI G. Skill 8GB 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Hitachi 1TB Windows 7 20" HP Monitor Corsair 750TX 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1647 of 2308
The silliest thing here is the fact that they compared 4.7Ghz to 5.2Ghz. TweakTown reviews are terrible anyway.

SB owners wont stop gloating and being smug now that Bulldozer isn't all it was expected to be. How sad lol. If it was ~$40-$50 cheaper it would be amazing.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500k @ 4300Mhz Biostar TP67XE Waiting to buy a new one 8GB 1600Mhz 7-8-7-21 1T 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 SSD [250GB] Antec H20 620 Windows 7 x64 Acer S242HL 
PowerCase
Thermaltake 775W NZXT Phantom [White] 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500k @ 4300Mhz Biostar TP67XE Waiting to buy a new one 8GB 1600Mhz 7-8-7-21 1T 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 SSD [250GB] Antec H20 620 Windows 7 x64 Acer S242HL 
PowerCase
Thermaltake 775W NZXT Phantom [White] 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1648 of 2308
The sad part is that the 5.2 ghz i7 probably still bottlenecks the 6970's.
Dunno
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 3550 Asrock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 MSI HD7850 1GB Kingston Hyperx Blu 2x2GB 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Kingston Hyperx Blu 2x4GB Samsung Spinpoint F3 1tb Intel 330 60Gb SSD Scythe Mugen 2 
OSMonitorMonitorPower
Windows 8 Pro Acer AL2416W Samsung 940n Chieftec 750w 
Case
Thermaltake V4 
  hide details  
Reply
Dunno
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 3550 Asrock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 MSI HD7850 1GB Kingston Hyperx Blu 2x2GB 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Kingston Hyperx Blu 2x4GB Samsung Spinpoint F3 1tb Intel 330 60Gb SSD Scythe Mugen 2 
OSMonitorMonitorPower
Windows 8 Pro Acer AL2416W Samsung 940n Chieftec 750w 
Case
Thermaltake V4 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1649 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Karnage View Post
I'm not sure why they didn't use a 2500K in the review instead of the 2500K. Results would have been identical
There is a BD review thread! This review is already in there, so it makes it a repost!
MyCleanPC
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770k ASUS MAXIMUS VI EVGA master blaster Corsair Vengence  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ SSD raid0 samsung Win 7 Samsung 
PowerCase
Enermax rev 1050 Stacker 832 
  hide details  
Reply
MyCleanPC
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770k ASUS MAXIMUS VI EVGA master blaster Corsair Vengence  
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ SSD raid0 samsung Win 7 Samsung 
PowerCase
Enermax rev 1050 Stacker 832 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1650 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFPS View Post
There is a BD review thread! This review is already in there, so it makes it a repost!
This is more a video card scaling review then a bulldozer review but if the mods want to close go ahead.
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