Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Officially official FX-8150 Bulldozer benchmarks WITH Microsoft hotfix patches
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Officially official FX-8150 Bulldozer benchmarks WITH Microsoft hotfix patches - Page 2

post #11 of 61
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-7-hotfix-bulldozer-performance,3119-2.html
Outdated Applications:

iTunes Newest Version: 10.5.3
Lame MP3 Newest Version: 3.99
Adobe Photoshop Newest Version: CS5.5, 13?
Autodesk 3ds Max Newest Version: 2012, 13?
WinZIP Newest Version: 16
WinRAR Newest Version: 4.1
ABBYY FineReader Newest Version: 11

My little rant so far. I can't call them off on using a different PSU or using a HDD as they have it accurately listed. :\

353

Interesting that power draw dropped with the patches. Microsoft said it would increase the power draw.

Now to wait for Komodo for some Integrated Northbridge and Downclocking Southbridge!!
Edited by Seronx - 1/25/12 at 8:22pm
AMD FX ~Seronx
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9800P Acer Wasp R7 M440 SK Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N Stock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Microsoft Windows 10 Home Build 14393 Viewsonic XG2401 24 Hz-144 Hz Ducky Channel Shine 3 Stock 65W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Acer Exoskeleton Steelseries Rival 300 Razer Megasoma AMD-Realtek ALC255 
  hide details  
Reply
AMD FX ~Seronx
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9800P Acer Wasp R7 M440 SK Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N Stock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Microsoft Windows 10 Home Build 14393 Viewsonic XG2401 24 Hz-144 Hz Ducky Channel Shine 3 Stock 65W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Acer Exoskeleton Steelseries Rival 300 Razer Megasoma AMD-Realtek ALC255 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by computerparts View Post

Nothing new about it. Do some research. Intel's compilers have been far more popular since the days of Core 2 Duo. The majority of developers got lazy and chose to use the Intel compilers vs compiling and optimizing manually. That's all there is to it.

Then it's a non-issue. The rest of the world isn't responsible for how developers make software and AMD doesn't get a pass for it. If AMD sold enough processors to make it worth doing developers would.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6700k (EK Supremacy Evo) *4.7 @ 1.312 Asus Maximus VIII gene GTX 1080 FE (EK nickel/plexi)* 2075/5401 16gb Corsair 3200  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 950pro M.2 256gb Samsung 850 Evo - 512 - Steam Samsung 850 Evo - 512 - Other Apps EK Res 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK pump top XSPC EX 360 XSPC EX 240 10 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 3 TKL  EVGA 650 Fractal Arc Mini 2 G303 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6700k (EK Supremacy Evo) *4.7 @ 1.312 Asus Maximus VIII gene GTX 1080 FE (EK nickel/plexi)* 2075/5401 16gb Corsair 3200  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 950pro M.2 256gb Samsung 850 Evo - 512 - Steam Samsung 850 Evo - 512 - Other Apps EK Res 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK pump top XSPC EX 360 XSPC EX 240 10 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 3 TKL  EVGA 650 Fractal Arc Mini 2 G303 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtom320 View Post

Then it's a non-issue. The rest of the world isn't responsible for how developers make software and AMD doesn't get a pass for it. If AMD sold enough processors to make it worth doing developers would.

The amount of cpus AMD sells has nothing to do with it. Ever met an Intel rep? I have and they can be quite persuasive. Besides, if you were a developer and had a choice of compiling and optimizing code manually or using a compiler which does all the work for you, which would you choose?
Edited by computerparts - 1/25/12 at 8:26pm
post #14 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by computerparts View Post

Nothing new about it. Do some research. Intel's compilers have been far more popular since the days of Core 2 Duo. The majority of developers got lazy and chose to use the Intel compilers vs compiling and optimizing manually. That's all there is to it..

Totally false. Do you have sources to back up the claim?

Keep the drum rolling. Next we're going to have to wait for Windows 10.
 
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 #15 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by computerparts View Post

The amount of cpus AMD sells has nothing to do with it. Ever met an Intel rep? I have and they can be quite persuasive. Besides, if you had a choice of compiling and optimizing code manually or using a compiler which does all the work for you, which would you choose?

Of course it has to do with how many processors they are selling. I don't care how "persuasive" they are that's a horrible argument and you know it.

Anyway I don't want to ruin the new BD benchmarks party I really don't I just get tired of seeing excuse after excuse for Bulldozer performance so I'll leave you boys to it.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6700k (EK Supremacy Evo) *4.7 @ 1.312 Asus Maximus VIII gene GTX 1080 FE (EK nickel/plexi)* 2075/5401 16gb Corsair 3200  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 950pro M.2 256gb Samsung 850 Evo - 512 - Steam Samsung 850 Evo - 512 - Other Apps EK Res 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK pump top XSPC EX 360 XSPC EX 240 10 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 3 TKL  EVGA 650 Fractal Arc Mini 2 G303 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6700k (EK Supremacy Evo) *4.7 @ 1.312 Asus Maximus VIII gene GTX 1080 FE (EK nickel/plexi)* 2075/5401 16gb Corsair 3200  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 950pro M.2 256gb Samsung 850 Evo - 512 - Steam Samsung 850 Evo - 512 - Other Apps EK Res 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK pump top XSPC EX 360 XSPC EX 240 10 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 3 TKL  EVGA 650 Fractal Arc Mini 2 G303 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129 View Post

Totally false. Do you have sources to back up the claim?

You have Microsoft C/++ Compiler, Intel C/++ Compiler, and PGI C/++

The Intel one is the most advanced and supposedly the most easiest to use as if you are application developer you can pretty much get a free Intel Software Engineer to help you

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/gaming/overclocking/games-optimized-for-intel.html

If you see an Intel logo if you buy retail on the box that means it is compiled with the Microsoft C/C++ Compiler with the ICC as back end or with the Intel C/C++ Compiler
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-ipp-functions-optimized-for-intel-avx-intel-advanced-vector-extensions/
AMD FX ~Seronx
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9800P Acer Wasp R7 M440 SK Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N Stock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Microsoft Windows 10 Home Build 14393 Viewsonic XG2401 24 Hz-144 Hz Ducky Channel Shine 3 Stock 65W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Acer Exoskeleton Steelseries Rival 300 Razer Megasoma AMD-Realtek ALC255 
  hide details  
Reply
AMD FX ~Seronx
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9800P Acer Wasp R7 M440 SK Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N Stock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Microsoft Windows 10 Home Build 14393 Viewsonic XG2401 24 Hz-144 Hz Ducky Channel Shine 3 Stock 65W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Acer Exoskeleton Steelseries Rival 300 Razer Megasoma AMD-Realtek ALC255 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by computerparts View Post

The amount of cpus AMD sells has nothing to do with it. Ever met an Intel rep? I have and they can be quite persuasive. Besides, if you were a developer and had a choice of compiling and optimizing code manually or using a compiler which does all the work for you, which would you choose?

I don't understand how you can look at those benches and blame the compiler. Skyrim and SC2 was totally limited by BD up to 1920x1080 and then evens out with the i5 at 2560x1600. You guys keep on making those excuses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seronx View Post

You have Microsoft C/++ Compiler, Intel C/++ Compiler, and PGI C/++
The Intel one is the most advanced and supposedly the most easiest to use as if you are application developer you can pretty much get a free Intel Software Engineer to help you
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/gaming/overclocking/games-optimized-for-intel.html
If you see an Intel logo if you buy retail on the box that means it is compiled with the Microsoft C/C++ Compiler with the ICC as back end or with the Intel C/C++ Compiler
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-ipp-functions-optimized-for-intel-avx-intel-advanced-vector-extensions/


First of all that's not a source.

Second, you're going to claim that every benchmark was written with Intel compilers to purposely introduce inferior codes to non-Intel CPUs? Do you guys wear tin foil hats?

Lastly it's a non-issue. If developers decide to use Intel compilers or Open64, it's up to them.
Edited by Clairvoyant129 - 1/25/12 at 8:42pm
 
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 #18 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129 View Post

I don't understand how you can look at those benches and blame the compiler.

The compiler dictates the performance of a CPU these days there is so much instructions in x86/x86-64

Your brain will explode trying to memorize them...

You can only see the ICC to compile to:
SSE3 for AMD CPUs
AVX2 for Intel CPUs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129 View Post

First of all that's not a source.
Second, you're going to claim that every benchmark was written with Intel compilers to purposely introduce inferior codes to non-Intel CPUs? Do you guys wear tin foil hats?

1st. It is sadly
2nd. No, it is simply the truth, Intel doesn't optimize for AMD and they aim to lower the scores
Quote:
Intel’s compilers may or may not optimize to the same degree for non-Intel microprocessors for
optimizations that are not unique to Intel microprocessors. These optimizations include SSE2,
SSE3, and SSSE3 instruction sets and other optimizations. Intel does not guarantee the
availability, functionality, or effectiveness of any optimization on microprocessors not
manufactured by Intel. Microprocessor-dependent optimizations in this product are intended for
use with Intel microprocessors. Certain optimizations not specific to Intel microarchitecture are
reserved for Intel microprocessors. Please refer to the applicable product User and Reference
Guides for more information regarding the specific instruction sets covered by this notice.

http://developer.amd.com/Assets/CompilerOptQuickRef-62004200.pdf
Scroll down to ICC

AMD is forced to use -msse3

If you use -mAVX you crash...with AMD CPUs
Edited by Seronx - 1/25/12 at 8:45pm
AMD FX ~Seronx
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9800P Acer Wasp R7 M440 SK Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N Stock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Microsoft Windows 10 Home Build 14393 Viewsonic XG2401 24 Hz-144 Hz Ducky Channel Shine 3 Stock 65W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Acer Exoskeleton Steelseries Rival 300 Razer Megasoma AMD-Realtek ALC255 
  hide details  
Reply
AMD FX ~Seronx
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9800P Acer Wasp R7 M440 SK Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N Stock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Microsoft Windows 10 Home Build 14393 Viewsonic XG2401 24 Hz-144 Hz Ducky Channel Shine 3 Stock 65W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Acer Exoskeleton Steelseries Rival 300 Razer Megasoma AMD-Realtek ALC255 
  hide details  
Reply
post #19 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seronx View Post

You have Microsoft C/++ Compiler, Intel C/++ Compiler, and PGI C/++
The Intel one is the most advanced and supposedly the most easiest to use as if you are application developer you can pretty much get a free Intel Software Engineer to help you
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/gaming/overclocking/games-optimized-for-intel.html
If you see an Intel logo if you buy retail on the box that means it is compiled with the Microsoft C/C++ Compiler with the ICC as back end or with the Intel C/C++ Compiler
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-ipp-functions-optimized-for-intel-avx-intel-advanced-vector-extensions/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seronx View Post

The compiler dictates the performance of a CPU these days there is so much instructions in x86/x86-64
Your brain will explode trying to memorize them...
You can only see the ICC to compile to:
SSE3 for AMD CPUs
AVX2 for Intel CPUs

I already understand that Intel compilers aren't optimized for non-Intel CPUs. Obiously Intel has no obligations to support competitor's products.

You still didn't give a source to the most widely used compiler.
 
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 #20 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129 View Post

I already understand that Intel compilers aren't optimized for non-Intel CPUs. Also Intel has no obligations to support competitor's products.
You still didn't give a source to the most widely used compiler and obviously you're not a reliable source due to the fact that you believe FX-8150 is faster than 3960X.

If I can do a minor overclock with the FX-8120 and recompile(or something like recompiling) the application to use AVX/FMA4 with PGI/YASM/Microsoft C++ Compiler

I'll will be beating a $1000 CPU with a $199 CPU
AMD FX ~Seronx
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9800P Acer Wasp R7 M440 SK Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N Stock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Microsoft Windows 10 Home Build 14393 Viewsonic XG2401 24 Hz-144 Hz Ducky Channel Shine 3 Stock 65W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Acer Exoskeleton Steelseries Rival 300 Razer Megasoma AMD-Realtek ALC255 
  hide details  
Reply
AMD FX ~Seronx
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9800P Acer Wasp R7 M440 SK Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N Stock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Microsoft Windows 10 Home Build 14393 Viewsonic XG2401 24 Hz-144 Hz Ducky Channel Shine 3 Stock 65W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Acer Exoskeleton Steelseries Rival 300 Razer Megasoma AMD-Realtek ALC255 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
  • Officially official FX-8150 Bulldozer benchmarks WITH Microsoft hotfix patches
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Officially official FX-8150 Bulldozer benchmarks WITH Microsoft hotfix patches