Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Leaked Vision-FX/Bulldozer Performance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Leaked Vision-FX/Bulldozer Performance - Page 10

post #91 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlawleZ View Post
Um, just no.

The future is more threads thus more cores. We're doing more things at one time today on a single modern computer than entire farms were doing just 10 years ago. Have you looked at a regular home user's computer lately? Not YOUR machine or another gamer's heavily tweaked and OC'ed PC, but an actual everyday computer that just as OS and program installs and is used everyday. If you have, what you'll find is a plethora of programs set to boot with the machine, antivirus, antispyware, backup programs, imaging programs, office and adobe products, OEM bloatware, etc. etc. The list just goes on. It's nothing to find the average Vista or Win 7 PC running 80+ processes and services at boot without a single program launched by the user.

The future of PC's isn't only about how fast you can process one task, but how well your PC can handle 100+ wanting processing power all at the same time.
I work on everyday peoples computers, many of their issues go beyond start up time, which isn't a big factor when it comes to overall computing experience. More cores isn't even the answer to that problem, its SDD's and knowing how to maintain your startup programs.

I have problems with my laptops core2duo when I attempt to multi-task like I do on a x4 chip, and there is merit in that fact. However I've yet to encounter a problem with my multi-tasking on an x4, not on my 965, nor my i5-2500k.

Adding 4 more cores to my current cpu isn't going to do anything for me. I don't need them. I understand this is America and people always think more is better, but its just not always the case. You and I both know you'd rather have a x4 chip running at 2GHz than a x8 chip running at 1GHz. Sure the overall power would be the same, but when it came to doing normal tasks the x4 would be the better choice. That applies here as well, yes, an x8 sandy bridge chip will completely destroy my x4 chip, but since I'm not maxing out an x4 having the x8 would be pointless.

The point is as a person who has an average of 10 tabs in Chrome going, Foobar 2000 playing, several gadgets running, folding at home going, I've still not reached a point were I can't open a program as fast as I could without any of them running. I want to see faster cores, better branch prediction, faster out of order processing, because those things improve my experience, adding more cores doesn't at this point in time and buying computer parts for the "future" was a bad idea 10 years ago, and it's still a bad idea today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenixlight View Post
Well AMD aren't targetting people's mothers with their high end CPU's :/
I'm aware, but if a high end cpu isn't going to improve her situation much then whats their low end cpu gonna do for her?
Edited by BallaTheFeared - 1/26/11 at 1:14pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
post #92 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared View Post
I'm aware, but if a high end cpu isn't going to improve her situation much then whats their low end cpu gonna do for her?
Well with the better architecture the lower end quad cores will be much quicker for normal tasks.
Koneko
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD R5 1600 Gigabyte GA-AB350M-Gaming 3 Sapphire RX560 (2GB) Corsair CMK16GX4M2B3200C16W (16GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveMonitorKeyboard
Samsung 840 Pro (256GB) Seagate ST3000DM001 (3TB) Alienware OptX AW2310 (120Hz) Generic Dell 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX750 Corsair Carbide 88R Mionix Naos 7000 Steelseries Qck 
  hide details  
Reply
Koneko
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD R5 1600 Gigabyte GA-AB350M-Gaming 3 Sapphire RX560 (2GB) Corsair CMK16GX4M2B3200C16W (16GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveMonitorKeyboard
Samsung 840 Pro (256GB) Seagate ST3000DM001 (3TB) Alienware OptX AW2310 (120Hz) Generic Dell 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX750 Corsair Carbide 88R Mionix Naos 7000 Steelseries Qck 
  hide details  
Reply
post #93 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsychoKilla666 View Post
it says "epic performance" = fake LOL

also I think Slappa might be a genius
while BallaTheFeared would make an epic marketing manager
i say, that slide does not hold graphical standard with genuine AMD slides, total weird
- "Cinibench" etc..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slappa View Post
Sigh. Intel users are so ignorant.

Just because AMD does not seal the performance crown, doesn't mean they don't compete.

You get a better performance/dollar ratio with AMD. A $229 6 core cpu that can overclock to 4gigs on an overall cheaper platform without the need of triple channel ram and an expensive motherboard? And it turns out that for the users that just play games and play music, movies etc it performs almost identically to intel's offerings? (I purposely excluded video rendering and stuff)
dark blue tinted glasses sucks. (no wonder they running blind)
i always wonder, why Sandy users "measure" performance their CPUs with old / singlethreaded software
there must be hidden purpose
Quote:
Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared View Post
What am I ignorant of?

My i5-2500k beats the 1090T in ever aspect, from top to bottom, and did not require any expensive board or ram that you speak of.

Now you'll say thats new gen and while that is true, AMD is still charging a lot for x6 and x4 chips that don't perform well compared to the new standards.

Also if you want to go by last gen the i5-750 was the best price/performance chip on the market when looking at chips around $200.
If a synthetic benchmark shows insane numbers for your cpu, that DOES NOT mean your CPU is great..

FYI Anand_tech is known for weird metrics (in their database are old CoreDuos faster than modern CPUs..)
SuperPI is sooo 1995
----------------
i hope you enjoy "brand new" SB platform.. IMO, differences are practically nonexistent and intel could make SB compatible with nehalems
still pciex2.0 only , no native USB 3.0... nothing

FYI, my real 8cores are same price like yours 4
Edited by pietro sk - 1/26/11 at 3:16pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
Reply
post #94 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared
My mom complains that her computer is too slow when loading programs programs and doing basic non core intensive tasks, adding more cores doesn't change this. So whats the selling point to Joe Everyday? You don't need to sell me on the business applications or the server side, but I'm confused on why adding more cores will improve the experience for my mother - when what she needs is faster cores - not more of them.
ever heard about disk cleaning/defragmenting ?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
Reply
post #95 of 154
Nope, whats that?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
post #96 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slappa View Post
You get a better performance/dollar ratio with AMD. A $229 6 core cpu that can overclock to 4gigs on an overall cheaper platform without the need of triple channel ram and an expensive motherboard? And it turns out that for the users that just play games and play music, movies etc it performs almost identically to intel's offerings? (I purposely excluded video rendering and stuff)
Right now, we already have excess CPU power for common tasks. The storage subsystem is probably the biggest bottleneck in most PC's currently. Most folks could easily get by with Athlon II X3's and X4's and this is part of what makes Llano so attractive. Thuban, has to compete with Intel's mid-range to high-end in the enthusiast market and unfortunately, for a lot of people in that market segment, single-threaded performance matters.

Oh well, competition is alive and well in CPU-land (even if it's not in the form of price cuts as is common in GPU-land). If AMD didn't release the Phenom II X4 Deneb, Intel would probably still have only dual-cores w/HT in the $200 price range. AMD released Deneb, Intel released Core i5 Lynnfield in response. AMD released Thuban, Intel released Core i5 Sandy Bridge to compete. I have a feeling the reason Intel is holding off on high-end Sandy Bridge is because they're waiting to see how Bulldozer performs. AMD gave Intel a beating with Athlon vs Pentium 4 and Intel is desperate not to let AMD get the upper hand again (hence, the aggressive Tick-Tock roadmap).

Yes, the future is more cores. However, right now, software still haven't caught up and by the time the future arrives, you can probably get faster hexa-cores for $100.
Garnet
(11 items)
 
Lucifiel
(13 items)
 
Metatron
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-3450S Intel DQ77KB Corsair 16GB DDR3 1600 SO-DIMM Samsung 830 256GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial m4 256 mSATA Samsung 840 500GB Intel BXHTS1155LP Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
KeyboardCaseMouse
Logitech K800 Lian Li PC-Q05B Logitech M570 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Gigabyte GA-H55N-USB3 EVGA GTX 460 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x4GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
G.SKILL Phoenix Pro 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Silverstone ST45SF 450W Silverstone Sugo SG05B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Biostar TH55B HD MSI GT 240 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x2GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Intel X25-M 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x86 Samsung 22" Antec EA-380D 
Case
Rosewill R101-P-BK 
  hide details  
Reply
Garnet
(11 items)
 
Lucifiel
(13 items)
 
Metatron
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-3450S Intel DQ77KB Corsair 16GB DDR3 1600 SO-DIMM Samsung 830 256GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial m4 256 mSATA Samsung 840 500GB Intel BXHTS1155LP Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
KeyboardCaseMouse
Logitech K800 Lian Li PC-Q05B Logitech M570 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Gigabyte GA-H55N-USB3 EVGA GTX 460 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x4GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
G.SKILL Phoenix Pro 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Silverstone ST45SF 450W Silverstone Sugo SG05B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Biostar TH55B HD MSI GT 240 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x2GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Intel X25-M 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x86 Samsung 22" Antec EA-380D 
Case
Rosewill R101-P-BK 
  hide details  
Reply
post #97 of 154
^ I like you and agree with you.

Shall we hug now, or in private?



Quote:
Originally Posted by pietro sk View Post
i hope you enjoy "brand new" SB platform.. IMO, differences are practically nonexistent and intel could make SB compatible with nehalems
still pciex2.0 only , no native USB 3.0... nothing

FYI, my real 8cores are same price like yours 4
Sandy Bridge chips have a gpu built into them. While I don't use it, it changed some things, like you can't overclock with the fsb at all hardly now. I don't believe they could have made it work on 1366 or 1156, and I'm glad they didn't.

Why would it be pcie 2.0? We've yet to see cards with 3.0, 3.0 will probably be backwards compatible, and the difference much like 1.0 vs 2.0 will be pretty weak.

No native, but my board has usb 3.0, don't use it though - non issue for me.


$280 is not $225. Fyi my 4 cores are exactly what I need, no more, no less.

What kind of overclock are you getting with that anyways?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i5 2500K P8P67 PRO NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 
GraphicsRAMRAMRAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT G-Skill A-Data G-Skill 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
A-Data Crucial M4 64GB + 1TB F3 Spinpoint $155 LS/DL DVD RW $?? Windows 8 64-bit "Epic Registry" Edition 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS 21.5 1920x1080 2ms $135 CORSAIR HX850 $120 Mother Earth $free 
  hide details  
Reply
post #98 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared View Post
Because we haven't seen the projected 10GHz cores would be my guess.

Intel may be releasing 6/8 core sandy bridge chips later this year, but its not really something I myself am interested in. And more to that point - not only is an x6 or x8 chip not really something I need, but Intel being the folks they are - are providing the 2011 socket with only those chips, so in order to get pci-e 3.0 and some other gaming goodies, you need to purchase their high end platform, with chips you don't really even need.

Games currently do use 2 and at most 4 cores, because most games are now ports of console games that were designed for less cores. I believe xbox 360 games are coded for 3 cores.

There is no question 8 core chips are awesome, and will be amazing in multi-threaded apps, the problem isn't AMD or INTEL releasing 6/8 core cpus, the problem is older software doesn't scale with more cores, and generally newer software still isn't being coded to utilize 4 cores let alone more. There is obviously another side to this - which is things like encoding (which Quick Sync *gpu supported* has shown to be amazing effective - albeit currently limited in every scope) rendering, and other general tasks.

However for the gamer, and general home users 8 cores doesn't really do much for us. Not yet anyways, for instance my 1090T was able to encode video much faster than my connection was able to upload them - what took only a few minutes on a 1090T could take up to an hour to upload to youtube... The point is why does my mom need a 8 core bulldozer chip? My mom complains that her computer is too slow when loading programs programs and doing basic non core intensive tasks, adding more cores doesn't change this. So whats the selling point to Joe Everyday? You don't need to sell me on the business applications or the server side, but I'm confused on why adding more cores will improve the experience for my mother - when what she needs is faster cores - not more of them.
having read several of your posts, you seem to be a biased person and are subtly bashing the AMD crowd (sometimes, it's not so subtle). usually when i read your posts i can tell who it is before looking at the username... please stop and frequent the sandy bridge subforum, you are doing the rest of us a disservice.
post #99 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by pietro sk View Post
i say, that slide does not hold graphical standard with genuine AMD slides, total weird
- "Cinibench" etc..
dark blue tinted glasses sucks. (no wonder they running blind)
i always wonder, why Sandy users "measure" performance their CPUs with old / singlethreaded software
there must be hidden purpose
If a synthetic benchmark shows insane numbers for your cpu, that DOES NOT mean your CPU is great..

FYI Anand_tech is known for weird metrics (in their database are old CoreDuos faster than modern CPUs..)
SuperPI is sooo 1995
----------------
i hope you enjoy "brand new" SB platform.. IMO, differences are practically nonexistent and intel could make SB compatible with nehalems
still pciex2.0 only , no native USB 3.0... nothing

FYI, my real 8cores are same price like yours 4
I am not biased towards Intel or AMD. Just had a 1090t 2 weeks ago and loved it. I wanted to give Sandy out a try and see if it was indeed better... It is better, granted I agree that benchmarks aren't everything but they are supposed to evaluate a cpu's performance-however some are just straight geared to work better with Intel.

Simply put: 2500k>1090t
Don't use "it's just benchmarks" as an argument, it's just a better processor- it's as simple as that.

Sorry, I was getting tired of these senseless arguments so I decided to chime in.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500k @ 5GHz ASRock P67 Extreme4 GTX 580 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws X @ 1600 8-8-8-24 
Hard DriveMonitorPowerCase
64GB Crucial SSD/1 TB WD Caviar Black Asus VG236H 23" 3D Corsair 850 TX 800D 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500k @ 5GHz ASRock P67 Extreme4 GTX 580 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws X @ 1600 8-8-8-24 
Hard DriveMonitorPowerCase
64GB Crucial SSD/1 TB WD Caviar Black Asus VG236H 23" 3D Corsair 850 TX 800D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #100 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerITGuy View Post
Ehhh no.

In CPU demanding games like COD: Black Ops, Starcraft II, WoW.... There's a significant difference between K10 processors and Bloomfield/Sandy Bridge processors.

Keep in mind that the K10 architecture is nothing more than a tweaked version of the old K8 architecture from 2003.
You are talking about games that are playable at max details with cards from 2 generation ago.
WIth GPU intensive games, the cpu will mostly be within 5-10% +/- performance of each other.
If you are building a budget Gaming system, it is more wise to put money into the GPU then a CPU.
THough there are lots of factors to weight in on where money should be better spent. Mainly, what resolution you will be playing in.
At 1900x1200, its better to spend money on the GPU, lower resolution, go with a better CPU since a faster GPU at lower resolution is just wasteful cash.
Edited by RotaryKnight - 1/26/11 at 8:55pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k 4.6ghz 1.376v Msi Z68A-G43 (cheap board!!) MSI 390 Gaming 16gb G.skill Ripjaws X 1866 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Multiple HHD and SSD over 12tb LG GGC-H20L Custom cpu water loop Windows 8 pro 
MonitorPowerCase
AOC u2879vf Corsair tx-750 HAF 912 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k 4.6ghz 1.376v Msi Z68A-G43 (cheap board!!) MSI 390 Gaming 16gb G.skill Ripjaws X 1866 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Multiple HHD and SSD over 12tb LG GGC-H20L Custom cpu water loop Windows 8 pro 
MonitorPowerCase
AOC u2879vf Corsair tx-750 HAF 912 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Leaked Vision-FX/Bulldozer Performance