-
Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
So was it 8 cores, or 8 modules ?
Why can nothing be simple :(
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Terbinator
So was it 8 cores, or 8 modules ?
Why can nothing be simple :(
8 module AFAIK.
I added some extra links BTW.
Edit!!
It should be 4 module! Doh!
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
If this is anywhere near true I will definatly be upgrading later this year. Bulldozer FX FTW :D
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
From the links it looks like 8 core, so 4 module. 8 module would be 16 core and should be a lot more than 50% faster than anything currently available - in multithreaded tasks, at least ;)
If an 8 core is 50% faster than an i7 950, then a 6 core would only be about 12% faster, assuming perfect per-core scaling and a benchmark suite that uses all the cores. Given that the X6 1100T is not that far behind the i7 950 in single threaded tasks and just ahead of it in heavily threaded tasks, I'm actually not massively impressed at that. Essentially, if they release 6-core bulldozer at whatever clocks they ran these benchmarks, they'll only be 10% faster than the existing 6-core Thubans?
Of course, if these tests were conducted at the kind of clock speeds their entry level chips will be using, and they can clock them much higher for top end chips, then we have a different story. But until we see some figures that are actually comparative, I'm going to put the champagne back on ice...
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
scaryjim
From the links it looks like 8 core, so 4 module. 8 module would be 16 core and should be a lot more than 50% faster than anything currently available - in multithreaded tasks, at least ;)
If an 8 core is 50% faster than an i7 950, then a 6 core would only be about 12% faster, assuming perfect per-core scaling and a benchmark suite that uses all the cores. Given that the X6 1100T is not that far behind the i7 950 in single threaded tasks and just ahead of it in heavily threaded tasks, I'm actually not massively impressed at that. Essentially, if they release 6-core bulldozer at whatever clocks they ran these benchmarks, they'll only be 10% faster than the existing 6-core Thubans?
Of course, if these tests were conducted at the kind of clock speeds their entry level chips will be using, and they can clock them much higher for top end chips, then we have a different story. But until we see some figures that are actually comparative, I'm going to put the champagne back on ice...
The document cited compared an 8-core processor based on the "Bulldozer" high-performance CPU architecture with a 4-core, 8-thread, Intel Core i7 950 and with a six-core Phenom II X6 1100T CPU, in three different usage scenarios (media, rendering and games).
50% faster than a Phenom II X6 in games looks quite a decent increase TBH.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CAT-THE-FIFTH
8 module AFAIK.
I added some extra links BTW.
It says 8 core, so that would be 4 modules with each module giving 2 cores.
Given the difference in how these chips get their 8 threads each, the interesting metric to me would be how big the die is to get that performance.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DanceswithUnix
It says 8 core, so that would be 4 modules with each module giving 2 cores.
Given the difference in how these chips get their 8 threads each, the interesting metric to me would be how big the die is to get that performance.
I edited my answer.
Hopefully,Bulldozer will be smaller than the Phenom II X6.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Wow this is great news for AMD, Bulldozer really does look promising. About this core vs thread vs module thing, I think it's more fair to compare a module to an Intel core and a Bulldozer 'core' to an Intel thread. I know there's more to a module than there is to a HT core but I do think this is a better comparison. Of course TDP/price/die+core size will prove/disprove that when they are released.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CAT-THE-FIFTH
I edited my answer.
Hopefully,Bulldozer will be smaller than the Phenom II X6.
From Anandtech some time back:
"AMD tells us that the second integer core increases the Bulldozer module die by around 12%, despite significantly increasing performance in threaded integer applications."
I don't think we will ever see a Phenom II on 32nm so a direct comparison to their previous gen might be hard.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
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.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
By the time its out who will care?
Not being funny, I used to love my AMD chips but since C2D they havent been close to my main machine...
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
[GSV]Trig
By the time its out who will care?
Not being funny, I used to love my AMD chips but since C2D they havent been close to my main machine...
They are meant to be released in April 2011.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CAT-THE-FIFTH
I am now officially confused at the supposed performance of AMD Bulldzoer.
Why the confusion? It's consistent with the last piece of 'leaked' info regarding the 6 core i7s. Bulldozer has a phenomenal (heh) int throughput if you can parallelise the job - really acts like an 8 core machine which you'd expect to beat a 4 core (950) or 6 core (970) in the right task.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Nice one amd! I was just about to go intel for my new build, but 50% more performance than i7 is worth waiting for :)
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
The question is does it compete with Sandybridge Ex? This is where the real battle will commence, the Sandybridge architecture is where the real problem is not the last gen Core i processors.
-
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.
-
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 :p
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!
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
krazy_olie
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 :p
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.
-
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..
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Random_guy
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.
-
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...
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CAT-THE-FIFTH
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!
-
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.
-
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!
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
watercooled
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.
-
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
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CAT-THE-FIFTH
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.
-
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.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CAT-THE-FIFTH
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.
-
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...)
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CAT-THE-FIFTH
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.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Go on drop a few hints please!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/birmingham/cont...03_203x152.jpg
Go on go on go on go on.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
We have an AMD rep at Hexus? :O
Nice to see you, hope you stick around! :)
Welcome to Hexus!
Edit: Just noticed your join date was last year. (Doh)
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
It would be nice to know exactly what month the AM3+ motherboards will be released.
However,JF-AMD is connected more with the server side of things AFAIK.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Nice to get some clarification.
As long as AMD have no TLB errors badly handled like last time or sata problems the chip should sell .
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dfour
Nice to get some clarification.
As long as AMD have no TLB errors badly handled like last time or sata problems the chip should sell .
That was a cheap shot.
That issue happened 4 years ago. Since that time we released Shanghai, Istanbul and Magny Cours, all ahead of schedule and all above promised frequency. As a matter of fact, Istanbul launched on first run silicon (a rarity in this business), bringing it in 5 months early.
In light of some of the other issues out in the market today, that was uncalled for, wouldn't you agree?
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JF-AMD
In light of some of the other issues out in the market today, that was uncalled for, wouldn't you agree?
I think he was referring to those other issues in his post - it wasn't a go at just AMD :p
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JF-AMD
That was a cheap shot.
In light of some of the other issues out in the market today, that was uncalled for, wouldn't you agree?
Hardly an untruth, and if like myself fed up being a treated like a beta tester rather than a end user by companies that pump out erroneous hw.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
It's not just hardware either, I'm way beyond fed up with games publishers who release complete crap knowing they can just release a patch when they feel like a few months down the line when they already have your money - what about the people without broadband? It shouldn't be a requirement, games should work out of the box like they used to back in the PS1/2 days!
Yes, stuff like that does badly annoy me and sours my opinion of companies but I think AMD learned their lesson with the TLB bug, they probably do a lot more testing now and they'd be stupid to let the same thing happen twice, especially with them playing the big catch-up game with Intel now, they can't afford any mistakes!
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
There is a picture of a 4 module Valencia chip in this article:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02...er_core_isscc/
Since each module is supposed to be 30.9MM2 it looks like an 8 module Bulldozer CPU will be smaller than a Phenom II X6.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Too many problems with rev 1 hardware over the years to have much trust. I do confess to having more confidence in AMD and their CPU manufacture than I do in the board partners getting a stable motherboard with no issues. Maturity only comes in time through end user feedback so early adopters are beta tester whether you admit it or not.
Cheap pre-orders on bulldozer CPU and motherboard ie a financial incentive = OK definitely maybe buy now.
Day 1 release with typical price gouging ie price premium and zero HW maturity = NO thanks will wait for prices to come down and hardware/software repairs to roll out.
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
The motherboards as I understand should be out before the cpus no? Presumably by the time the cpus are out the motherboards won't be revision one anymore anyway?
-
Re: Bulldozer 8 module CPU 50% faster than Core i7 950!
Here are the first pictures of the box art:
http://www.amdforum.se/artikel/exklu...och-fx-4-1025/
Looks like the 4 module processors have an unlocked multiplier.