Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 44

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

  1. #1
    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

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

    Supposedly this was leaked from AMD:

    http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-S...s-177958.shtml

    http://www.techpowerup.com/138328/Bu...Phenom-II.html

    http://www.donanimhaber.com/islemci/...daha-hizli.htm

    I am now officially confused at the supposed performance of AMD Bulldzoer.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  2. #2
    Headless Chicken Terbinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    7,324
    Thanks
    1,096
    Thanked
    672 times in 550 posts
    • Terbinator's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASRock H61M
      • CPU:
      • Intel Xeon 1230-V3
      • Memory:
      • Geil Evo Corsa 2133/8GB
      • Storage:
      • M4 128GB, 2TB WD Red
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte GTX Titan
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AX760i
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster 130
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 8.1 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell Ultrasharp U2711H
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 60Mb.

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

    So was it 8 cores, or 8 modules ?

    Why can nothing be simple
    Kalniel: "Nice review Tarinder - would it be possible to get a picture of the case when the components are installed (with the side off obviously)?"
    CAT-THE-FIFTH: "The Antec 300 is a case which has an understated and clean appearance which many people like. Not everyone is into e-peen looking computers which look like a cross between the imagination of a hyperactive 10 year old and a Frog."
    TKPeters: "Off to AVForum better Deal - £20+Vat for Free Shipping @ Scan"
    for all intents it seems to be the same card minus some gays name on it and a shielded cover ? with OEM added to it - GoNz0.

  3. #3
    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 Terbinator View Post
    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!
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 13-01-2011 at 02:02 PM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  4. #4
    Senior Member dfour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sunny Bracknell
    Posts
    1,685
    Thanks
    105
    Thanked
    98 times in 92 posts
    • dfour's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Crosshair 6 Hero
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 5 1600@3.87 Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 16gb Dark pro
      • Storage:
      • Crucial MX512 ssd+Corsair 256GB SSD + 3 TB storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • HIS R9-290x water cooled
      • PSU:
      • OCZ ZX 1000 gold
      • Case:
      • NZXT Switch 810 custom water cooled
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • DGM IPS-2701 + Dell U2311H
      • Internet:
      • Zen Fibre @72 meg

    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

  5. #5
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    15,044
    Thanks
    1,194
    Thanked
    2,246 times in 1,847 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!

    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...

  6. Received thanks from:

    CAT-THE-FIFTH (13-01-2011)

  7. #6
    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 scaryjim View Post
    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.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 13-01-2011 at 02:19 PM.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  8. #7
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,118
    Thanks
    505
    Thanked
    1,044 times in 888 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 CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    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.

  9. Received thanks from:

    CAT-THE-FIFTH (13-01-2011)

  10. #8
    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 DanceswithUnix View Post
    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.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  11. #9
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,867
    Thanks
    1,502
    Thanked
    935 times in 805 posts

    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.

  12. #10
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,118
    Thanks
    505
    Thanked
    1,044 times in 888 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 CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    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.

  13. Received thanks from:

    CAT-THE-FIFTH (13-01-2011)

  14. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    102
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked
    6 times in 6 posts
    • Random_guy's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • i7 3770
      • Memory:
      • Corsair Vengence Low Profile 16GB
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M4 512GB, 2x 1T Cavier Green RAID 1
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus GTX 670 DCII
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic X560
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design R4
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 8 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung T220 + Samsung SyncMaster B2030

    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.

  15. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    10,351
    Thanks
    600
    Thanked
    294 times in 204 posts

    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...

  16. #13
    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 [GSV]Trig View Post
    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.


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  17. #14
    Senior Member kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    29,196
    Thanks
    1,520
    Thanked
    2,933 times in 2,376 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
    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.

  18. #15
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    20
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    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

  19. #16
    Senior Member Blackmage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,934
    Thanks
    202
    Thanked
    65 times in 45 posts
    • Blackmage's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI P67-GD65
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core I7 2600k
      • Memory:
      • 8 Gb Hynix DDR3 1333
      • Storage:
      • Crucial m4 120Gb, 2TB Samsung F4
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ATI HD5830
      • PSU:
      • 700w Coolermaster Gold Plus
      • Case:
      • Xclio/Aplus Windtunnel
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Professional
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic VX2239WM 22" LCD Monitor
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Broadband 10mbit

    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.

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •