Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 17 to 32 of 44

Thread: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

  1. #17
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,879
    Thanks
    1,503
    Thanked
    936 times in 806 posts

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Intel have a tendancy to charge ridiculous prices for their high-end stuff so even if the high end Sandy Bridge chips are faster, Bulldozer will likely offer much better value.

  2. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    London (almost)
    Posts
    1,078
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked
    34 times in 28 posts

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Competition is good!

    I would be surprised if AMD's absolute fastest will match intel (come april no doubt Intel will be topping what they have now), but hopefully in the mid and mid/high we'll see competitive performance/pricing and especially as motherboards should be cheaper.

    The drastically different architectures could produce some interesting results too, and different applications will suit these.

    However there's no doubt the new SB is a good chip, if you want a PC now I don't think waiting for bulldozer is really an option... if it is then you don't actually need a new pc

    It's a shame the release isn't closer to Sandy Bridge but 5 months time is going to be a great time for a new build!

  3. #19
    Bows out! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Hopefully somewhere less backstabby
    Posts
    28,789
    Thanks
    3,203
    Thanked
    4,456 times in 3,442 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Quote Originally Posted by krazy_olie View Post
    Competition is good!

    I would be surprised if AMD's absolute fastest will match intel (come april no doubt Intel will be topping what they have now), but hopefully in the mid and mid/high we'll see competitive performance/pricing and especially as motherboards should be cheaper.

    The drastically different architectures could produce some interesting results too, and different applications will suit these.

    However there's no doubt the new SB is a good chip, if you want a PC now I don't think waiting for bulldozer is really an option... if it is then you don't actually need a new pc

    It's a shame the release isn't closer to Sandy Bridge but 5 months time is going to be a great time for a new build!
    Exactly.

    However,sadly there are enough people on this forum and others like OcUK who don't want the new AMD CPUs to be good and want AMD to fail. They seem to want to gloat every time AMD makes a mis-step and make excuse for any decision Intel makes whether it is good for the consumer or not. Point any out flaws with an Intel system and they seem to get really defensive for some reason.

    They tend to forget it was the alternate x86 CPU companies such as Cyrix and AMD which helped create the lower end market not Intel. It just shows you how important competition is.

    Having used Intel based systems for the last few years AMD coming out with decent stuff is good for all us.

    Even in 2008 I hardly recommended any AMD systems but in the last two years for the DIY on a budget AMD has been a very good option.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 14-01-2011 at 12:56 PM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  4. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    10,389
    Thanks
    601
    Thanked
    302 times in 211 posts

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    tbh I'm not interested in AMD for my desktop, the Althon line did what was needed as far as competition was concerned, imagine how fast our PC's would be now if AMD hadnt been around..
    What I want is the AMD stuff for netbooks to provoke a decent Atom/Fusion type fight where performance goes up and price comes down..

  5. #21
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,191
    Thanks
    518
    Thanked
    1,051 times in 895 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Quote Originally Posted by Random_guy View Post
    I'd love it if this were true. Sadly the realist in me won't let me get excited until I see some real numbers from 3rd parties.

    The realist in me also says that if AMD had samples performing like this prior to CES, then it would be insane from a marketing perspective not to give the world a sneak peak and rain on Intel's Sandy Bridge parade.

    For anyone about to buy Sandy Bridge though, this news might have been enough to make them hold off a little bit longer.
    But for AMD the news at CES was about the Zacate E-350 chip and all the low end lappies and tablets etc that it will go into. Best to leave Bulldozer for another venue rather than blowing all their announcements in one go.

  6. #22
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,879
    Thanks
    1,503
    Thanked
    936 times in 806 posts

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    @Cat: Yeah I really don't get that either, unless they're completely stupid they must realise that AMD doing good is good even for Intel fanboys - they will get better performance cheaper anyway!! I try as best I can not to side with companies, I get nothing in return so why should I? However, Intel's filthy anti-competitive tactics, ridiculous high-end prices and just because they're near a monopoly makes me not like them. Anyone who wants AMD out of the market and for Intel to be the only CPU MFR must be a butty short of a picnic, there would be no competition so the trend in speed advancements would slow right down and it would leave them free to charge whatever they like, much as they do with their high-end parts now. It would be bad for everyone but Intel, and PCs wouldn't be near as cheap or fast as they are today without AMD. Also I've received excellent customer support from AMD on a number of occasions, and they're happy to go beyond what they need to to help you. IIRC I couldn't even find an Intel contact email to actually speak to a person rather than a glorified search engine. That doesn't make me an AMD fanboy though, I quite like ARM, VIA, etc for example and would like to see them do better in the 'proper' computer (i.e. desktop/laptop) market. It's a similar story with Nvidia but not to the same extent - I don't like that they engineered PhysX to work on only their cards and make it perform very poorly on CPUs, and the number of fanboys also puts me off but I can't really blame Nvida for that, I just don't like people who post the unfounded 'why did you go for AMD, Nvidia would have been much better...' comments you often see. Hiding Youtube comments with an AdBlock rule did help that though...

  7. Received thanks from:

    CAT-THE-FIFTH (14-01-2011)

  8. #23
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    29,230
    Thanks
    1,526
    Thanked
    2,945 times in 2,386 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte X58A UD3R rev 2
      • CPU:
      • Intel Xeon X5680
      • Memory:
      • 12gb DDR3 2000
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2311H
      • Internet:
      • O2 8mbps

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    However,sadly there are enough people on this forum and others like OcUK who don't want the new AMD CPUs to be good and want AMD to fail.
    er.. who? I've hardly seen any posts that stupid on Hexus forums, it would be folly to tar more people than needed with that brush!

  9. #24
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,879
    Thanks
    1,503
    Thanked
    936 times in 806 posts

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    I have seen a few posts like that, although on here I find most are more low expectations or distrust in AMD's claims rather than pure fanboyism. I do remember reading a few though, but I've found it's best to just ignore them.

  10. #25
    Pre-Cambrian nibbler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,668
    Thanks
    913
    Thanked
    266 times in 216 posts
    • nibbler's system
      • CPU:
      • i5-2410m
      • Memory:
      • 6GB ddr3 1333mhz
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Plextor M5S SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 1GB 6650M
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 64 bit

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    I don't know why but I just prefer amd to intel. Really can't decide why, but bulldozer should be good!
    Join the HEXUS Folding@home Team!!


  11. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,598
    Thanks
    146
    Thanked
    313 times in 251 posts
    • badass's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8Z77-m pro
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 2TB WD Green
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon RX 580
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX520W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone SG02-F
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 X64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Del U2311, LG226WTQ
      • Internet:
      • 80/20 FTTC

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Quote Originally Posted by watercooled View Post
    I have seen a few posts like that, although on here I find most are more low expectations or distrust in AMD's claims rather than pure fanboyism. I do remember reading a few though, but I've found it's best to just ignore them.
    It's not a distrust of AMD's claims in my part - it's just that there is no information avaiable about what their benchmarks are, there's no official backing on these figures from AMD and they haven't been independently verified. Secondly, they have compared their not out yet CPU to one that's now been superseded by a newer CPU all ready.
    Compare this to Intel's launch of the Core2 duo. At about this point they had 2.67GHz CPU's up against AMD's fastest (therefore the fastest CPU's available) and were showing gains of around 40% in performance in demonstrations that weren't closed door.
    I suspect that Bulldozer will make AMD competitive in the high end again but i doubt they will take the performance crown from Intel.
    "In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."

  12. #27
    Bows out! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Hopefully somewhere less backstabby
    Posts
    28,789
    Thanks
    3,203
    Thanked
    4,456 times in 3,442 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Here is a slide from AMD which hints at the performance of Bulldozer:

    http://www.techpowerup.com/139053/Bu...ering-AMD.html


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  13. #28
    ALT0153™ Rob_B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,876
    Thanks
    301
    Thanked
    645 times in 439 posts

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Here is a slide from AMD which hints at the performance of Bulldozer:

    http://www.techpowerup.com/139053/Bu...ering-AMD.html
    More 'pinch-of-salt' time though. It's a marketing slide so we know performance won't be as great as they say. Most companies pick the best benchmarks for their platform then cherry-pick. I imgine it'll still be a cracker though but I'm not sure how much it'll live up to expectations after this 'leak'

    Surely they'd have demo'd it as someone mentioned before to rain on the SB parade but they haven't why? What is this improvement in 'gaming' or 'render' ?
    It does even state 'estimates & projections' so we can't be sure.

  14. #29
    Bows out! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Hopefully somewhere less backstabby
    Posts
    28,789
    Thanks
    3,203
    Thanked
    4,456 times in 3,442 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    It seems AMD Bulldozer will unveiled at Cebit in March:

    http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-B...1-180651.shtml

    It probably means that there is only a few more months until we find out whether Bulldozer succeeds or not.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 27-01-2011 at 02:37 AM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  15. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,598
    Thanks
    146
    Thanked
    313 times in 251 posts
    • badass's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8Z77-m pro
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 2TB WD Green
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon RX 580
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX520W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone SG02-F
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 X64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Del U2311, LG226WTQ
      • Internet:
      • 80/20 FTTC

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Here is a slide from AMD which hints at the performance of Bulldozer:

    http://www.techpowerup.com/139053/Bu...ering-AMD.html
    Hmmmmmm
    The slide there says the intel Quad core i7 is on socket 1156.
    Certainly not an i7 950 then. Maybe an i7 880 but probably not. Mind you the difference in performance between an i7 880 and an 860 isn;t that much TBH. More e-peen than a meaningful difference.
    Note all of the other sources reference the i7 950 but the only one with the slide so far shows the Socket 1156 so I suspect someone's made a mistake and everyone else has copied it.
    "In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."

  16. #31
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    15,070
    Thanks
    1,200
    Thanked
    2,250 times in 1,851 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 1x 8GB DDR4 2400
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    The feature list refers to socket 1156, but the performance numbers refer to i7 950 (yes, it says "i7 950" on the slide, so it's not a perpetuated mistake, unless AMD are making mistakes on their own marketing slides now...). Socket 1156 is the platform that current Phenom IIs target in market-segment terms, so when comparing a feature set it kind of makes sense to talk about that one. Given that all the performance figures are indicative I'd guess they simply chose a higher-end processor for performance figures to try to make themselves look better (real world there's very little difference between the i7 8xx and i7 9xx performance anyway...)

  17. #32
    AMD representative
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    4 times in 3 posts

    Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    It seems AMD Bulldozer will unveiled at Cebit in March:

    http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-B...1-180651.shtml

    It probably means that there is only a few more months until we find out whether Bulldozer succeeds or not.
    Don't expect an "unveiling" of Bulldozer at CeBIT. I am not sure what the Europe team is doing but the official launch is in Q2, at most they might have a running system or show off motherboards, but HQ own the rollout of information and I am not aware of any plans at this point to release more information.

  18. Received thanks from:

    Biscuit (09-02-2011),dfour (08-02-2011)

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 24-05-2011, 02:33 AM
  2. new HD x264 video encoding benchmark
    By graysky in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 05-10-2008, 09:28 PM
  3. My PC won't fold...
    By Nemz0r in forum Software
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 18-01-2008, 10:02 PM
  4. Removing CPU retention module on Giga-byte motherboard
    By JPreston in forum Help! Quick Relief From Tech Headaches
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-12-2005, 12:33 AM
  5. CPU TIM Guide
    By Steve in forum Help! Quick Relief From Tech Headaches
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30-05-2004, 02:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •