Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [SP]AMD Is Already Cutting 8-Core FX-8150 Bulldozer CPU Price
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[SP]AMD Is Already Cutting 8-Core FX-8150 Bulldozer CPU Price - Page 6

post #51 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by DayoftheGreek View Post
You know, you keep making this post so I decided to google some reviews from 2008 to see what was going on. First of all, none of these posters are the same. People talking back then are different then people talking now. I LOOKED. The internet isn't one big person that always has the same expectations. Stop saying "you all" like everyone else is the same person.

Second, this situation is not the same at all. The Q6600 wasn't as good as the E8400 in gaming, but it was actually better in multi-threaded benchmarks. It was consistently better. The number I saw was 23 benchmarks out of 40 went to the E8400, but the margin was pretty close when everyone was OC'ed a bit. Compare this to bulldozer, where a majority of the benchmarks fail to beat the X6 and for anyone interested in just gaming, the X4. And it is $100 more than the X6. And it uses a poopload of power.

The Q6600 made two steps forward and one step backwards.

The 8150 made a half step forward, stole your gold watch, then stripped naked and ran screaming and laughing in the opposite direction.

Now honestly, this whole comparison confuses me even more, because the Q6600 CAME OUT A YEAR BEFORE THE E8400. The reason people said the E8400 was better for gaming was because it was cheaper and ran games just fine (or better) because of its high OC headroom.
This is somewhat correct but, what you fail to mention is the lack of apps that actually used the quad until the E8400 was released.

The E8400's had a significantly higher headroom and when released, the Quad Q6600 was still haralded as the giant when, in reality, there still weren't quad-threaded apps capable of utilizing the platform.

Now, we see the same //EXACT// situation. The 8 core can't be fully utilized because there are no apps that actually support it...That doesn't make it any less innovative then the first quads were.

Most of the hype was generated around the first 8 core processor, which it is...Only, it's not perfected...It's far from perfected.

I'm glad you actually researched it but, you failed to see the key aspects of my entire point which was, you couldn't fully utilize the Q6600 and core for core it was slower...The same is true for the 8150, you can't utilize all of it's potential and core for core it's slower...It also uses more power which, is mostly the same exact situation for the 6600 until the 8400 was OC'd which...You could hit about 3.4 on the Q6600's (was a tech when this release happened so am VERY familiar with it) and the E8400 was able to achieve 4.0-4.2 ghz. BD is actually able to achieve 5.2 (our sample) so quite frankly, I fail to see //at all// how it's a failure in comparison to previous launches.

P.S. OCN in GENERAL did clamor around the Q6600...I use OCN as an entity since, it's what it actually is...Not an individual.
post #52 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuell View Post
LOL at all the people taking offense about BD, especially the hardcore Intel people, they are by far the most vocal in just about any thread that mentions AMD and BD.

You people need to look at the big picture here... BD has been in the planning stages for years... now lets go back over those years and see what happened... We got 64 bit CPU, Dual cores, quad cores, clock speeds slowly going up, but threading seemed like it was moving faster... and both Intel and AMD had 6 cores planned... So what seemed like the logical move?

Threading likely seemed like the easiest way to gain performance, and it appeared the market was moving there, slowly but steadily... Now had this picked up a little and multithreading was a much more mainstream thing for common programs, we'd all be looking at a completely different outlook...

Like everyone can agree upon, the benches show the FX line tank in single thread/low thread compared to expectations... but multithreaded it surpasses the 2500K and even competes with the 2600K at times (and the odd time beat it) which is amazing for AMD considering how things were looking if you removed BD from the picture and were left comparing SB to a Phenom II.

I don't think AMD truly failed, I think BD is an architecture thats very complex, needed some extra time because of this, likely should not have been the choice for moving to 32nm for the first time and was simply ahead of its time... I feel AMD would have benefited more from a Phenom II die shrink aka Phenom III with a few more tweaks to increase performance and efficiency, and then take the knowledge gained from working on 32nm to THEN try a new radical arch... similar to Intels Tick Tock. Also, choosing an automated design where they knew that previous attempts netted approx 20% larger dies with 20% less performance or something like that seems to have been a terrible choice... and I get the feeling it came from upstairs, not the engineers.

If benchmarks are any indication, if threading had become more used and mainstream, we would be looking at a completely different situation... but sadly for us, its not.

Not trying to justify anything, just stating an alternative perspective.... just an unsubstantiated thought that popped into my mind when reading. No need to get offended and pick it apart, though I bet someone who just needs to talk down about BD will, because its a hobby for some on OCN...

-------

Heres hoping AMD fixes some of the issues and comes back strong. The BD architecture has some potential, I think we can all agree, perhaps they will go back to "hand crafting" important parts of the CPU again and never try this automated crap again...
but why would i not just buy an intel who will do excellent in low thread and high thread?
Skylake 6700k
(5 items)
 
3770k ex-system
(14 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770K 4.5ghz 1.21v GA-Z77X-UD5H GeForce GTX 660 Ti WINDFORCE 2X OC 16GB Gskill Sniper 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
M4 128gb SSD Hyper212+ Antec BP550 Plus CM Storm Enforcer 
  hide details  
Reply
Skylake 6700k
(5 items)
 
3770k ex-system
(14 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770K 4.5ghz 1.21v GA-Z77X-UD5H GeForce GTX 660 Ti WINDFORCE 2X OC 16GB Gskill Sniper 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
M4 128gb SSD Hyper212+ Antec BP550 Plus CM Storm Enforcer 
  hide details  
Reply
post #53 of 194
I love how those who say that Windows 8 is going to fix BD's problems don't seem to realize that it should also increase Intel's multi-core performance as well. This is the first article I've seen that acknowledges the fact that, relatively speaking, Windows 8 might not make any difference in relation to the gap AMD is behind SB at the moment....
post #54 of 194
@the people using the q6600 vs e8400 argument:
Isn't this situation a bit different? While the basic outlook is similar (non-utilized cores), I really doubt AMD has any headroom left to easily improve the BD chips.
Think about it. Taking the most easily understandable numbers into consideration, Intel started the quad core line at 65nm, 2.4GHz, 1066FSB and 8 megs of L2 cache. There was PLENTY of room to work on. And they DID improve those numbers quite a lot (the reduced cache in a number of lower-end models being the sole exception) and on the same old socket, no less.

BD already runs at very high clocks, has loads of cache and is manufactured using the 32nm process. I might be wrong in my following statement, so please correct me, but if it is as rumoured and BD yields are poor even now, wouldn't a die shrink be out of the question?
The only improvement I'm really expecting for this particular line is a (somehow)reduced power draw. Not enough info on Piledriver to consider the potential improvements, but I'm thinking of it as a separate line of CPUs, independent from BD.

Long story short, Intel greatly improved their C2Q line over time. I'm really doubtful whether AMD will be able to pull off something similar with BD.

However, if I end up being wrong, feel free to come back and slap this quote into my face
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
QX6850 E0 3.60GHz @1.45v Asus P5Q Pro Turbo Gigabyte R6870 OC 2x2GB G.Skill DDR2-1066, 5-5-5-15 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 840 EVO 120GB Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Lite-On iHAS122 CoolerMaster Hyper 212+ 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64-Bit Acer X243H 24" Microsoft SideWinder x4 Chieftec BPS-650C 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Aerocool X-Warrior Black Edition Steelseries Kana Skyrim-pad Asus Xonar DG 
AudioOther
Creative Inspire T3100 PS3 controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Pentium 4 HT Northwood 3.4 @ 3.5GHz ASRock P4i48 Club3D Radeon HD4670 AGP 1GB 2x1GB PQI DDR400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
SAMSUNG HD320LJ 320GB SATA Lite-On iHAS122 Scythe Katana 3 Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 32Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Samsung SyncMaster 795mb 17" Microsoft Internet Keyboard Gigabyte GE-R460-V1 460W Caseless 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech RX1000 Generic black mouse pad Onboard Creative Inspire T3100 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
QX6850 E0 3.60GHz @1.45v Asus P5Q Pro Turbo Gigabyte R6870 OC 2x2GB G.Skill DDR2-1066, 5-5-5-15 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 840 EVO 120GB Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Lite-On iHAS122 CoolerMaster Hyper 212+ 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64-Bit Acer X243H 24" Microsoft SideWinder x4 Chieftec BPS-650C 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Aerocool X-Warrior Black Edition Steelseries Kana Skyrim-pad Asus Xonar DG 
AudioOther
Creative Inspire T3100 PS3 controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Pentium 4 HT Northwood 3.4 @ 3.5GHz ASRock P4i48 Club3D Radeon HD4670 AGP 1GB 2x1GB PQI DDR400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
SAMSUNG HD320LJ 320GB SATA Lite-On iHAS122 Scythe Katana 3 Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 32Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Samsung SyncMaster 795mb 17" Microsoft Internet Keyboard Gigabyte GE-R460-V1 460W Caseless 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech RX1000 Generic black mouse pad Onboard Creative Inspire T3100 
  hide details  
Reply
post #55 of 194
I was scared for a moment that bulldozer was going to pull ahead, now I'm kind of just sad that they didn't pull this off.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k @ 4.6Ghz INTEL DP67BG - Intel Extreme Motherboard 2 x XFX 5850 1GB DDR5 4096MB OCZ GOLD 1600 DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
800GB SATA Drives Lite-on 16x DVD-R/W windows 7 professional 3x Dell ST2210 in eyefinity 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Zboard Merc Thermaltake W0315RU thermaltake V9 black razer Naga gaming mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k @ 4.6Ghz INTEL DP67BG - Intel Extreme Motherboard 2 x XFX 5850 1GB DDR5 4096MB OCZ GOLD 1600 DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
800GB SATA Drives Lite-on 16x DVD-R/W windows 7 professional 3x Dell ST2210 in eyefinity 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Zboard Merc Thermaltake W0315RU thermaltake V9 black razer Naga gaming mouse 
  hide details  
Reply
post #56 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedros View Post
lordikon... maybe you should say that this chip sucks ...
saying that the architecture as an all sucks... it's way over the edge unless you can really argument with proofs. And since this is a really new born architecture, it's a little too soon to say anything at all about the architecture.

Yes, this chip sucks big time.
But as Masked said ... sometimes a step back is needed to take 4 steps ahead.

Lets w8 and see... i think that everyone already knows what these first version of BD is in terms of performance.

As for the prices... i think they will lower the prices but it will always be more expensive than the 2500k.
This is what I am expecting. That this round of with the new Bulldozer process is a mild step back or best a side step, but piledriver will start it moving forward. Though unless Intel gets really lazy it will never be a competitor for the best perforamnce in the desktop market, but will likely get the price crown as ussual.

Though just watch...in a year or two Intel will release a CPU that copies Bulldozer on some level. I think AMD is on to something with this super HT that isn't HT...good concept, but poor delivery...at least on the first run.

Heh...I can't help but wonder if this was the source of the "Reverse HT" rumor that spread wild a few years ago. It would have been about the time that Bulldozer would have hit the drawing board.
Edited by Vagrant Storm - 10/17/11 at 7:11am
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
Reply
post #57 of 194
It's hilarious how this is a thread about a price cut, which first of all is unsubstantiated since the prices are still MUCH HIGHER THAN MSRP & AMD hasn't dropped their MSRP (that would def be in the news.)

And people are arguing over benchmarks...

THE STORY'S TITLE IS FALSE; AMD IS DOING NOTHING, RETAILERS ARE.

Go to the AMD reviews thread to argue about benchmarks. This thread needs to die because it's misinformation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lightsout View Post
Yes they are trying to gain sales because it won't sell at its current price. Because of performance.
Case in point, thread needs to die. People don't even read the article, they just read the title & think AMD is doing it for this and that and the other. AMD did nothing, it never happened!
Edited by pale_neon - 10/17/11 at 7:15am
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9550 GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R eVGA GTX 560 Ti 4GB Patriot Viper II DDR2 1066 5-5-5-15 2.1V 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB 64MB 7200 RPM Lite-On 22X DVD+/-RW XP Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate, Ubuntu Lucid Lynx Samsung UN46B8000 240Hz LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Natural Elite PC Power & Cooling 750W Silencer Antec Nine Hundred Logitech G9 
Mouse Pad
Razer Mantis Speed 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q9550 GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R eVGA GTX 560 Ti 4GB Patriot Viper II DDR2 1066 5-5-5-15 2.1V 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB 64MB 7200 RPM Lite-On 22X DVD+/-RW XP Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate, Ubuntu Lucid Lynx Samsung UN46B8000 240Hz LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Natural Elite PC Power & Cooling 750W Silencer Antec Nine Hundred Logitech G9 
Mouse Pad
Razer Mantis Speed 
  hide details  
Reply
post #58 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by tout View Post
It is more than likely AMD trying to get prices down in Europe to gain sales. Even these 'reduced' prices are far higher than what Americans can buy the CPUs for.

People really should think before posting.
Yes they are trying to gain sales because it won't sell at its current price. Because of performance.
550D
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2700K Gigabyte Z77X-UD3H EVGA GTX 970 ACX 2.0+ SSC 4 x 4GB Samsung Green 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial 240gb Samsung EVO 250gb Corsair H80 Win7 Ultimate 64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Qnix 2560x1440p Quickfire TK MX Brown XFX 750w Black Edition Corsair 550D 
MouseMouse Pad
Lefty Deathadder X Trac Ripper XXL 
  hide details  
Reply
550D
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2700K Gigabyte Z77X-UD3H EVGA GTX 970 ACX 2.0+ SSC 4 x 4GB Samsung Green 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial 240gb Samsung EVO 250gb Corsair H80 Win7 Ultimate 64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Qnix 2560x1440p Quickfire TK MX Brown XFX 750w Black Edition Corsair 550D 
MouseMouse Pad
Lefty Deathadder X Trac Ripper XXL 
  hide details  
Reply
post #59 of 194
the best chip AMD has released since PhenomII was introduced, i'd say its definitely the 710 or 720BE. it was definitely the hype and it lived up to what it promised - even us, users, knew that it was gonna lose against nehalem, but the 720BE definitely gave ppl what they purchased was a great deal. the x4 and x6 thuban's were a bit still a fail.
IVY
(10 items)
 
3rd's a Charm
(13 items)
 
My 1st.
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570K@4.5Ghz Z77 Extreme4 Radeon HD 5770 Patriot VIPER 16GB - 2x 8gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 830 128GB Xigmatek Dark Knight - Night Hawk Win7 x64 Seasonic XGold 650 
CaseAudio
Corsair Carbide 500 HT Omega Striker 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
720BE @ 3.64Ghz x4@ 1.5V MA-790X-UD4P Gigabyte ATI 5770 Corsair 1066 2x 2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
64GB OCZ SLD3|| 2.5TB of Storage LG WIN7 Ultimate x64 samsung BX2450 + 226bw 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX620 ANTEC-300 LOGITECH 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
OPTY165@2.8Ghz - CCB1E - more to go! Dfi LP Ultra -D HD2600 XT G.skill HZ PC4000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorPower
WD320 16Mb LG 20x DVD-RW Samsung 226bw OCZ 700 GXstream 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
IVY
(10 items)
 
3rd's a Charm
(13 items)
 
My 1st.
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570K@4.5Ghz Z77 Extreme4 Radeon HD 5770 Patriot VIPER 16GB - 2x 8gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 830 128GB Xigmatek Dark Knight - Night Hawk Win7 x64 Seasonic XGold 650 
CaseAudio
Corsair Carbide 500 HT Omega Striker 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
720BE @ 3.64Ghz x4@ 1.5V MA-790X-UD4P Gigabyte ATI 5770 Corsair 1066 2x 2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
64GB OCZ SLD3|| 2.5TB of Storage LG WIN7 Ultimate x64 samsung BX2450 + 226bw 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX620 ANTEC-300 LOGITECH 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
OPTY165@2.8Ghz - CCB1E - more to go! Dfi LP Ultra -D HD2600 XT G.skill HZ PC4000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorPower
WD320 16Mb LG 20x DVD-RW Samsung 226bw OCZ 700 GXstream 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #60 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymaxwell View Post
but why would i not just buy an intel who will do excellent in low thread and high thread?
And this is what it all boils down to. No matter the reasons. No matter the excuses. Clock per Watt per Dollar, SB dominates.
Veda
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2600k @ 4.8 GHz HT on Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3 EVGA GTX580 x2 in SLi 8GB Corsair Vengence 1600MHz at 1.5v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX Sata3 120Gig SSD Asus Windows 7 Home Acer HN274Hbmiiid Black 27" 3D Full HD 120Hz 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Eclipse II Illuminated Keyboard Corsair Professional Series AX850 Corsair 600T SE Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
Reply
Veda
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2600k @ 4.8 GHz HT on Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3 EVGA GTX580 x2 in SLi 8GB Corsair Vengence 1600MHz at 1.5v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX Sata3 120Gig SSD Asus Windows 7 Home Acer HN274Hbmiiid Black 27" 3D Full HD 120Hz 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Eclipse II Illuminated Keyboard Corsair Professional Series AX850 Corsair 600T SE Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [SP]AMD Is Already Cutting 8-Core FX-8150 Bulldozer CPU Price