Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [AtomicPC] AMD's new chip: what a load of Bulldozer
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[AtomicPC] AMD's new chip: what a load of Bulldozer - Page 10  

post #91 of 109
Quote:
AMD has lost this round of the performance battle to its far more embiggened opponent. previous generation.
fixed
post #92 of 109
We wouldn’t be surprised if the fact that Intel is set to launch Sandy Bridge-E before the end of the year played a part in AMD’s timing.

Another quote, this makes a lot of sense actually. This explains why AMD had to release it now. Imagine if on all these charts BD was being compared against an SBE or IB?
post #93 of 109
I'm wondering where these esteemed gentlemen, who obviously are here to have intelligent, thoughtful discourse regarding the merits of a particular product at initial release, were at during the Cougar Point fiasco (which Intel took a 1 Billion hit on)...
post #94 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlells01 View Post
I'm wondering where these esteemed gentlemen, who obviously are here to have intelligent, thoughtful discourse regarding the merits of a particular product at initial release, were at during the Cougar Point fiasco (which Intel took a 1 Billion hit on)...
As I recall all those mother boards were replaced without charge to the consumers. That is the type of company I want to support. I am curious to see how AMD responds to the BSOD issues with BD. If it's an issue with the chip, will they replace all of them? Did this have something to do with all the seals being broken upon arrival of the Metal Tins? (Which again, were very nice.)
Edited by Steak House - 10/21/11 at 8:48am
post #95 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steak House View Post
I am curious to see how AMD responds to the BSOD issues with BD.
Now that's a genuine post; I'm with you there.
post #96 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steak House View Post
Did this have something to do with all the seals being broken upon arrival of the Metal Tins? (Which again, were very nice.)
Anyone sensible would of sent the item back...i would of.
Was this all vendors or one in specific? Either way, that is a no-no.
MILSPEC II
(8 items)
 
| LUMO |
(6 items)
 
CLoS3 IMPACT
(8 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
5820k X99m WS 980ti strix 980ti strix 
RAMHard DrivePowerCase
KLEVV Cras DDR4  3tb Red Corsair 600w SFX + 450w SFX Caselabs BH4 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4970k Z97 Gryphon GTX 680 x2 Crucial Ballistix Elite 16Gb 
PowerCase
Be Quiet Dark Power 850 InWin D Frame Mini 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770k ASUS Impact ITX R9 290 Gskill Trident 2400 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCase
Samsung EV0 250 x2 WD black Loop.....oh yes...... Caselabs S3....modded 
  hide details  
MILSPEC II
(8 items)
 
| LUMO |
(6 items)
 
CLoS3 IMPACT
(8 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
5820k X99m WS 980ti strix 980ti strix 
RAMHard DrivePowerCase
KLEVV Cras DDR4  3tb Red Corsair 600w SFX + 450w SFX Caselabs BH4 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4970k Z97 Gryphon GTX 680 x2 Crucial Ballistix Elite 16Gb 
PowerCase
Be Quiet Dark Power 850 InWin D Frame Mini 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770k ASUS Impact ITX R9 290 Gskill Trident 2400 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCase
Samsung EV0 250 x2 WD black Loop.....oh yes...... Caselabs S3....modded 
  hide details  
post #97 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlells01 View Post
I'm wondering where these esteemed gentlemen, who obviously are here to have intelligent, thoughtful discourse regarding the merits of a particular product at initial release, were at during the Cougar Point fiasco (which Intel took a 1 Billion hit on)...
Intel caught that problem quickly and B3 motherboards were on the market a few months after the initial B2 stepping. They also stepped up and publicly acknowledged the problem, and then offered free motherboard replacements for all P67 boards (I actually got my Gigabyte P67 board replaced for free back in April). Now compare that to AMD's handling of the Phenom I TLB problem, which was to issue a BIOS fix that hindered performance instead of replacing all affected chips for free.

Plus, the P67 SATA bug was nothing like the random BSODs that people are experiencing now, even with their BD chips at stock settings. As far as I know, there was not one known case of someone actually losing data because of the SATA bug, as the deterioration would not have occurred until after a year or two. Plus, the issue only affected the onboard SATA 2.0 Gbps ports, so if you didn't have a huge # of hard drives it was easy to simply use the SATA 3.0 ports for a couple months until you could RMA your board for a B3 stepping one.
Edited by 996gt2 - 10/21/11 at 9:08am
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
post #98 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by pursuinginsanity View Post
1. You're overlooking the PhII 955/965. Can be had a bit cheaper (I paid $120 for my 965) than the FX 4100, and trashes it in benchmarks. You did see where a 4.9ghz 4100 couldn't keep up with a stock 965.. right? (Yes, it was Cinebench, not a "gaming benchmark" but Cinebench is much better at showing CPU potential than "gaming benchmarks.") At 4.9ghz I'd be surprised if it didn't consume quite a bit more power than the 955/965 does at stock, too.
Not overclocking--I'm talking about stock-for-stock comparisons. I don't rely on overclocking in a general way of achieving performance for 24/7 everyday use.

I put absolutely no stock in synthetic benchmarks. Why? Because my laptop that runs an i3-330UM@ 1.6GHz beats my desktop e2180@ 3GHz in superpi and cinebench. Yet in actually transcoding a video, my dekstop mops the floor with it--even when my desktop CPU is at a stock 2GHz.

Actual CPU gaming potential is rarely--if ever--inferred by other synthetic benchmarks. And if it were, then my i3 at 1.6GHz should be able to beat my e2180 at 3GHz in gaming--which it can't even if it had a GPU better than a G310M

Quote:
Originally Posted by pursuinginsanity View Post
2. I agree with you about the marketing, the hype, etc. It stinks. They need to clean out their marketing department along with the rest of upper management. Then they may once again be a competent CPU manufacturer. I didn't expect it to wipe the floor with SB, but I DID expect it to meet/beat my i5 760 - and it DOESN'T.
Your math doesn't make sense--the i5-760 runs at 2.8GHz. In FC2 and Crysis 2, The FX-4100 has been shown to beat an i5-661 which runs at 3.3GHz. http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-fx...ance-review/10

With the 8150 pretty much closing in on 2500/2600k performance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pursuinginsanity View Post
3. How on earth are you getting it for less money? I've already pointed out 955s and 965s are less expensive. Sure, if you want to compare it to a 2500k it's cheaper - but who's going to have to upgrade first in the future? The guy with the "FX" (ugh, they ruined a legacy) or the guy with the 2500k? I bet my i5 760 and 965 BE will both outlast the 4100 and the 6100 for that matter.
I'm not at all considering Ph2, since it is often (but not always) surpassed in performance by BD in actual practical applications.

2500k costs $220 (newegg). FX-4100 is $130 (newegg). $130 < $220. That's what I meant. Perhaps you could argue that the 4100 is way below the 2500k class--okay, then if you compared an i3 2100, they're the same price. And I'd say it's a tough sell between the two for a new system. Edge might go to the BD because it's overclockable whereas the 2100 is locked. Yes, the FX-8150 is $280, but that's more on-par with a 2600k, which goes for $320.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pursuinginsanity View Post
4. There is no "hotfix." (maybe one to fix the BSODs) Not one that's going to dramatically increase performance. Do you think they've been sitting on their hands since January with crappy CPUs and taking THIS LONG to release what you're calling a "hotfix"?
Hotfix to fix the BSOD problem. I didn't mean a hotfix that will magically improve performance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pursuinginsanity View Post
5. A roadbump?! When Llano and Phenom I both destroy it in single threaded performance, that's a ROADBUMP? What would it take to be a real disaster? Man, Phenom I got stomped by the first generation C2D/C2Qs. Those chips (PhI) are faster than BD, clock for clock, to give you an idea of just how far behind the curve BD is right now. It would have been laughed at during the Q9550s heydey.
I love how everyone goes back to "single threaded performance" as the biggest world-ending problem that BD has. Yes, we're still surrounded by poorly-optimized programs for multi-core processors. But there's no denying the gains any computer has as more cores are added. Okay, if we disable all but one core and run at stock, it can't match up to Phenom 2. Fine. But what about when we run the CPU's in their intended configurations? BD does just fine. Do I think it's kinda sad that it needs 4 "modules" and 8 cores to do so? Sure. But

You don't need a 4.5ghz 2500k for gaming. My 3.5ghz i5 destroys any game thrown it's way. My stock clocked 965 BE does pretty well too considering how much cheaper it was. That still doesn't make the 4100 a good deal.[/quote]
Where does the 965 beat the 4100 in gaming benchmarks?


I've gotten so tired of the mindless drivel from people that didn't see the 10x performance results from a new release. And shame on AMD for not being better about their pre-release info, but even so, BD is not the major fail everyone is talking it out to be. And I see very rare occasions where stock-for-stock or even clock-for-clock that it is surpassed by Ph2.

Did BD stumble? Yes. Does it have relative power consumption problems? Sure. Is it disappointing that it didn't wow everyone like the core i processors did? Sure. Does all that make it a bad upgrade path? Not at all, especially when it delivers the performance that a user wants and can expect.

All of this BD performance results bashing is entirely overstated and overrated, and it's disappointing the mob mentality that the computer enthusiast community often takes on. But I guess it's easier to have others think for you instead of thinking for yourself.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
post #99 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyladouche View Post
Not overclocking--I'm talking about stock-for-stock comparisons. I don't rely on overclocking in a general way of achieving performance for 24/7 everyday use.

I put absolutely no stock in synthetic benchmarks. Why? Because my laptop that runs an i3-330UM@ 1.6GHz beats my desktop e2180@ 3GHz in superpi and cinebench. Yet in actually transcoding a video, my dekstop mops the floor with it--even when my desktop CPU is at a stock 2GHz.
What are you talking about?

An i3-330UM's Super Pi 1M time is like 35 seconds. An e2180 @ 3 GHz should easily do it in under 20 seconds.

I'd like to see some screenshots of your i3-330UM beating your E2180 in Super Pi.
Edited by 996gt2 - 10/21/11 at 11:09am
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
post #100 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyladouche View Post
Did BD stumble? Yes. Does it have relative power consumption problems? Sure. Is it disappointing that it didn't wow everyone like the core i processors did? Sure. Does all that make it a bad upgrade path?
YES

http://www.microcenter.com/single_pr...uct_id=0354589

^^^ That's $180 of pure performance. Why anyone would want to mess with anything else is beyond me...

What kind of Kool-Aid are they serving at AMD?
Edited by Steak House - 10/21/11 at 12:05pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [AtomicPC] AMD's new chip: what a load of Bulldozer