Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [DON] AMD Bulldozer 8-Core CPU 50% Faster Than Core i7 950
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[DON] AMD Bulldozer 8-Core CPU 50% Faster Than Core i7 950 - Page 15  

post #141 of 195
How can we still discuss this post?

Me no compute.

There are much more reliable sources out there.
   
AGP bencher
(14 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen R7 1700 Gigabyte GA-AX370-Gaming 5 Sapphire HD 6950 2GiB 2x8GB KFA2 HOF DDR4-3600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Crucial MX100 256GB Seagate 600 Series 240GB Seagate 7200.14 2TB Samsung F3 1TB 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
EKWB Supreme HF XSPC Rasa GPU EK XT360 EK 4.0 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
W10 Pro LG IPS235 LG E2250V KUL ES-87 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
SF Leadex II 650W Lian Li PC-A05NB Logitech G9 Xonar DX 
AudioAudio
SMSL SA-S3+Technics CB-250 Sennheiser HD555 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD A10-5700 Gigabyte F2A75M-HD2 G.SKILL Ares 2133 CL9 Hitachi 5K750 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Momentus .7 200GB Noctua NH-L9a Server 2012 R2 Standard AUO B156HW01 
PowerCaseOther
PicoPSU-80-WI-25V AIO Aluminium Handmade TP-Link Archer Something Something Wi-Fi AC 
CPUCPUCPUMotherboard
Core2Duo E6400 Core2Quad Q6600 Pentium Dual Core E5200 AsRock 4COREDUAL-SATA2 R2.0 
GraphicsRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
A dumpload of ancient AGP cards Kingston Value DDR2-667 CL4 2T @CL3 1T Seagate 160GB 7200.10 LG IDE DVD-ROM 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Ghettomade CPU waterblock 49cc 2stroke engine copper radiator WinXP SP2 32bit ProView 17" 
PowerCase
Tacens Radix V 550W Ghetto aluminium bench 
  hide details  
   
AGP bencher
(14 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen R7 1700 Gigabyte GA-AX370-Gaming 5 Sapphire HD 6950 2GiB 2x8GB KFA2 HOF DDR4-3600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Crucial MX100 256GB Seagate 600 Series 240GB Seagate 7200.14 2TB Samsung F3 1TB 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
EKWB Supreme HF XSPC Rasa GPU EK XT360 EK 4.0 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
W10 Pro LG IPS235 LG E2250V KUL ES-87 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
SF Leadex II 650W Lian Li PC-A05NB Logitech G9 Xonar DX 
AudioAudio
SMSL SA-S3+Technics CB-250 Sennheiser HD555 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD A10-5700 Gigabyte F2A75M-HD2 G.SKILL Ares 2133 CL9 Hitachi 5K750 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Momentus .7 200GB Noctua NH-L9a Server 2012 R2 Standard AUO B156HW01 
PowerCaseOther
PicoPSU-80-WI-25V AIO Aluminium Handmade TP-Link Archer Something Something Wi-Fi AC 
CPUCPUCPUMotherboard
Core2Duo E6400 Core2Quad Q6600 Pentium Dual Core E5200 AsRock 4COREDUAL-SATA2 R2.0 
GraphicsRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
A dumpload of ancient AGP cards Kingston Value DDR2-667 CL4 2T @CL3 1T Seagate 160GB 7200.10 LG IDE DVD-ROM 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Ghettomade CPU waterblock 49cc 2stroke engine copper radiator WinXP SP2 32bit ProView 17" 
PowerCase
Tacens Radix V 550W Ghetto aluminium bench 
  hide details  
post #142 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artikbot View Post
How can we still discuss this post?

Me no compute.

There are much more reliable sources out there.
Reliable Rumors? from foreign sites?
Ryzen
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 1700 Gigabyte AX370 Gaming K5 Nvidia GTX 770 G.Skill Trident Z 16GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung Evo 960 M.2 Stock AMD Windows 10 Pro Superflower 650W 
  hide details  
Ryzen
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 1700 Gigabyte AX370 Gaming K5 Nvidia GTX 770 G.Skill Trident Z 16GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung Evo 960 M.2 Stock AMD Windows 10 Pro Superflower 650W 
  hide details  
post #143 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcrew3002 View Post
8 core CPUs are great but.... many games are just starting to support 4 cores, GTA4, COD, Black Ops, etc. so from what I've seen ALL games support at least 2 cores and a select few support 4 cores, but they are already pushing 8 cores. thats 4-6 cores wasted gaming wise. The developers wont catch up to 8 cores for a while.. then when 16 cores come out ALL games will be 4 core ready and a select few will be 8 core ready.. then when 32 core comes out all games will be 8 core ready.. see a pattern
look under the performance tab on your task manager. tell me how many threads and processes are happening?

Mine currently says:
Threads: 751
Processes: 56

And this is on a near clean install of windows 7. Absolutely no bloat what so ever. No, you do need a LOT more cores. Windows does an amazing job at core use, and games are going to begin to use 4 cores intensive.

An AMD 555 should walk over BC2, but an entire core is dedicated to audio. Running all the crap in the background just makes BC2 run horricly slow (I grab about 40 fps avg on max settings) because of this. You always want more cores then what the application allows, as it improves the overall system speed.

PII Thuban users probably notice how easy it is for them to alt-tab out of games or run mutliple applications without a hitch.
post #144 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artikbot View Post
How can we still discuss this post?

Me no compute.

There are much more reliable sources out there.
Please post any sources you know of that are more reliable.

So far everything ever posted related to bulldozer benchmarks has been written off as bull poo.
Chewy's Chomper
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel I7 6700k Asis Z170 Deluxe MSI GTX 1080 Gaming x 16GB Corsair vengence DDR4 3200 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung M2 256gb nvme Custom loop, 360+120 rads Windows 10 64bit Asus 28" MG28UQ 4K 
PowerCase
Seasonic X series 750w gold Corsair 400c 
  hide details  
Chewy's Chomper
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel I7 6700k Asis Z170 Deluxe MSI GTX 1080 Gaming x 16GB Corsair vengence DDR4 3200 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung M2 256gb nvme Custom loop, 360+120 rads Windows 10 64bit Asus 28" MG28UQ 4K 
PowerCase
Seasonic X series 750w gold Corsair 400c 
  hide details  
post #145 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD View Post
no



There are two different design philispohies, one says more cores is the route to better performance. The other says you can do it with higher clock speeds and fewer cores.

You need to stop looking at the specs and start looking at the price tags. When it comes to compeition, it is not HOW you get the performance as much as it is what the performance is at a particular price level.

I have never seen someone say "I need four cores, what is the best performance that I can get for that?" But these forums are littered with people asking "what is the best performance for $300."



A wise man.



8 cores.



AM2 = DDR-2
AM3 = DDR-3
AM4 = welll, you get the picture.

Do you have any idea what DDR-4 schedules look like?



Transistor count is meaningless; while you can compare, transistor price does not correlate to anything that impacts a customer. There is price, there is performance and there is power.



No, Bulldozer has AVX.




If you took four cores out of a zambezi you'd have ~95% of the total silicon space. So implementing bulldozer and adding additional cores is just as efficient as adding HT from a silicon perspective. But cores scale way better than HT.
All hail the slayer of disinformation!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brutuz View Post
Actually, it does...The heat put out by HT could possibly have been used to fit something else that would have improved performance more.

And the more heat, the higher temperatures...And I'm pretty sure anyone with half a brain realizes that it means OCs won't go as high.
Anyone remember how hot Pentium 4's got?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maelthras View Post
I found an interesting benchmark that is claimed to be the server part of bulldozer arch. Then right after the post was made it was removed and said that there was a NDA in place. Plus it did wprime 1024m prime in 44 seconds, that's mind blowingly fast. Even if it is a octomodule that was hardware hyperthreading like bulldozer is supposed to like the cpu-z is showing for 16 threads. Amd 955 does 1024 in about 310 seconds, this is much faster by around 7.5 and at only 3ghz.
So I estimate the the quad core version would be able to complete 1024 in 175 seconds, still much faster clock for clock then even the amd 955 I have overclocked to 3.8ghz.
So this would mean that the estimated 50% speed increase from previous amd proccessors would be nearly right on the mark. Rejoice, amd you have become our savior!
That is really fast.
post #146 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomfix View Post
Reliable Rumors? from foreign sites?
You're posting on a foriegn site, or did you think ocn is based in Wales?! LOL
Purpleannex
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k Z68 Extreme4gen3 Gainward GTX 470 @ 740Mhz 8GB Mushkin Blackline LV (2x4GB) DDR3 1600MHz 9... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
128GB Crucial M225 SSD 2 x 500gb 500GbB samsung 500GbB samsung Samsung SH-B083L 8x BD Combo 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64-bit LG W2486L LED 24" 1080p Antech True power new 750W FT-02 B-W 
  hide details  
Purpleannex
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k Z68 Extreme4gen3 Gainward GTX 470 @ 740Mhz 8GB Mushkin Blackline LV (2x4GB) DDR3 1600MHz 9... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
128GB Crucial M225 SSD 2 x 500gb 500GbB samsung 500GbB samsung Samsung SH-B083L 8x BD Combo 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Windows 7 64-bit LG W2486L LED 24" 1080p Antech True power new 750W FT-02 B-W 
  hide details  
post #147 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain_clayman View Post
wait...

8 is twice as fast as 4.
so why is an 8 core only 50% faster than a 4 core with hyperthreading.

does that mean hyperthreading is only half as fast as a real physical core, equaling like about 6 cores? or is my math way off.
LOL, 8 is not twice as fast but twice as much... more threads or cores does not mean anything unless the software it supports takes full advantage... which there are not much that takes advantage of more than 4 cores...
Even though this is a rumor, if it's really 50% faster than an i7 950, i'll really be impressed... and it would obviously be in something like a cinebench benchmark... Gaming would also point in a different direction as I cannot name a game that takes advantage of more than 4 cores... which is why Sandy Bridge kills in games...
Gamer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 970 @ 4GHZ Asus P6X58D-E 2X EVGA GTX 970 SC w/ACX 2.0 Cooler 6GB Corsair XMS3 CAS 7 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
2X OCZ Vertex 30GB RAID 0 Corsair H100 Win 7 Ultimate 64-bit S23A950D + 55" LED 240Hz 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G710+ Corsair AX 1200 Corsair Carbide Series Air 540 case Razor Deathadder 3500dpi 
  hide details  
Gamer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 970 @ 4GHZ Asus P6X58D-E 2X EVGA GTX 970 SC w/ACX 2.0 Cooler 6GB Corsair XMS3 CAS 7 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
2X OCZ Vertex 30GB RAID 0 Corsair H100 Win 7 Ultimate 64-bit S23A950D + 55" LED 240Hz 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G710+ Corsair AX 1200 Corsair Carbide Series Air 540 case Razor Deathadder 3500dpi 
  hide details  
post #148 of 195
Everything I've seen show that they'll be dual cores with 4 individually clocked physical pipelines each. It's AMD's physical take on Hyper Threading. Since all the cores share the same resources, the resources can be allocated to the cores that need it the most as where most current CPUs have it where if a core isn't being used it's resources are wasted. I do think that the Bulldozers will be faster, but only as a result of current software being behind the power curve. If more software was able to utilize all available cores in a CPU to their full potential then I suspect things would be about even.
NEO 1
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500K AsRock Fatal1ty Professional P67 ASUS Matrix GTX 580 @ 816/1632/1002 2 x 4GB G.Skill RipJaws X 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4128GB SSD 500GB Seagate Barracuda LiteOn DVD-RW Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home 64bit SP1 Hanns-G 27.5" @ 1920x1200 Microsoft Sidewinder X4 SeaSonic X750 Gold 750W 
CaseMouseAudioOther
NZXT Tempest 410 Elite Saitek R.A.T. 5 Logitech G930 D-Link Xtreme DWA-556 
  hide details  
NEO 1
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500K AsRock Fatal1ty Professional P67 ASUS Matrix GTX 580 @ 816/1632/1002 2 x 4GB G.Skill RipJaws X 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4128GB SSD 500GB Seagate Barracuda LiteOn DVD-RW Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home 64bit SP1 Hanns-G 27.5" @ 1920x1200 Microsoft Sidewinder X4 SeaSonic X750 Gold 750W 
CaseMouseAudioOther
NZXT Tempest 410 Elite Saitek R.A.T. 5 Logitech G930 D-Link Xtreme DWA-556 
  hide details  
post #149 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleannex View Post
You're posting on a foriegn site, or did you think ocn is based in Wales?! LOL
What's Wales got to do with foreign unreliable news?

I believe OCN is originated in the UK, and Wales is part of the UK.
Ryzen
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 1700 Gigabyte AX370 Gaming K5 Nvidia GTX 770 G.Skill Trident Z 16GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung Evo 960 M.2 Stock AMD Windows 10 Pro Superflower 650W 
  hide details  
Ryzen
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 1700 Gigabyte AX370 Gaming K5 Nvidia GTX 770 G.Skill Trident Z 16GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung Evo 960 M.2 Stock AMD Windows 10 Pro Superflower 650W 
  hide details  
post #150 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddville393 View Post
I do think that the Bulldozers will be faster, but only as a result of current software being behind the power curve. If more software was able to utilize all available cores in a CPU to their full potential then I suspect things would be about even.
You're saying two opposite things here. Most programs are not coded for efficient multi-core use - which would mean fewer, faster cores would provide the best performance.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [DON] AMD Bulldozer 8-Core CPU 50% Faster Than Core i7 950