• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

8 Core Bulldozer @ 4.63ghz

Hmm, 186w TDP? Doesn't that seem strangely... high?

Interesting to see it can be overclocked pretty high, but now I'm curious to what cooling it needs :p.
 
Hmm, 186w TDP? Doesn't that seem strangely... high?

Interesting to see it can be overclocked pretty high, but now I'm curious to what cooling it needs :p.

It's incorrect.

I'm just going to wait for solid test results i hope it's good since i have already bought a 900fx am3+ board.
 
OK so if its 10. something then why blank out the zero, as we know it has to be at least 10 so if it was a zero theres no need to blank it out, so i reckon its more than 11.something

just my 2 pence worth.
 
Why do people continually read the **** speculation or just sheer nonsensical stories that are on the internet.
It doesn't matter if it's a positive or negative story, you can pretty much guarantee it's just worthless.

In other news, I was speaking to one of my sources at AMD tonight. He was saying that Bulldozer will hit 5ghz on air with ease, it can also turbo to 10ghz.
Offers more than three times the performance of the top end Sandybridge.

*insert crudely drawn picture of AMD chip with crayon shaded CPU-Z picture*
 
Why do people continually read the **** speculation or just sheer nonsensical stories that are on the internet.
It doesn't matter if it's a positive or negative story, you can pretty much guarantee it's just worthless.

In other news, I was speaking to one of my sources at AMD tonight. He was saying that Bulldozer will hit 5ghz on air with ease, it can also turbo to 10ghz.
Offers more than three times the performance of the top end Sandybridge.

*insert crudely drawn picture of AMD chip with crayon shaded CPU-Z picture*

very true,
and the mad thing is people will get excited over any positive amd news false or true will not matter as long as its POSITIVE,negative news is automatically false/rejected. :confused::eek:
 
i am not sure why people so obsessed about super pi , witch is kinda old and probably don't show real world performance, bulldozer ends up 20% ~25% faster then turban aka 1090 , 1100 processors, and clocks as high as it shown we have a winner even if its tad slower then sandi (bear in mid as i dont know how much faster sandi is over turban cpus in %)
 
Turban? Sandi?

You mean Thuban and Sandy right?

The reason SuperPi is important is not due to it's massive load on a CPU, nor it's ability to show extensive processing using extended instruction sets. SuperPi is a great way to show that you are getting no data corruption or electron migration on a heavily overclocked CPU. The values are quickly checksummed and easily verified to be Pi. It's historically been put forward as the "challenge" for extreme overclocked CPUs to beat, and will most likely remain so for a long time yet.
 
Last edited:
Turban? Sandi?

You mean Thuban and Sandy right?

The reason SuperPi is important is not due to it's massive load on a CPU, nor it's ability to show extensive processing using extended instruction sets. SuperPi is a great way to show that you are getting no data corruption or electron migration on a heavily overclocked CPU. The values are quickly checksummed and easily verified to be Pi. It's historically been put forward as the "challenge" for extreme overclocked CPUs to beat, and will most likely remain so for a long time yet.

But superPI is only Important in that regard & is not important for brand comparison so in that context its not important.
 
But superPI is only Important in that regard & is not important for brand comparison so in that context its not important.

Agreed if all programmers did pure fp maths on everything, software would run slow and not take advantage on on chip enhancements, chips have features and instructions sets for a reason and while obviously are just fast calculators, there needs to be intelligence behind what it can do and not just brute force.

This will be more prevalent when we hit the limits of how small we can make them (nm) and how fast they will go, hence why multicore is the way forward now, brute force by distribution will eventually be the only way as clock speeds will eventually (and within 10 years I think) be limited by physics.
 
I wasn't intending to portray SuperPi as anything other than an extreme overclock validity tester (and something of a "trophy" for the WR beaters). I was merely defending it in the context of the post which basically asked "why does anybody use it".
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13906169

dont use pi use tau.

pi is the ratio of a diameter to a circumference however circles are defined by a radius from a point. Therefore it is much more convenient to use tau which is the ratio of the radius to the circumference. In fact it is twice pi by definition and would take just as long to calculate.

Just thought it would be interesting even if off topic.
 
surely on this case we talking about super pi times being relevant because that is what the original article is showing. it wouldn't matter if it was road cones per mile or frames per second, we can only go by the metric that has been given.

anyway just to give a reference of sorts heres mine super pi score on my i7 920@4GHz i have no idea how much faster a sandy bridge chip is @4.6GHz maybe someone would run it and show us.

 
Sure, that's why I said it may not be applicable.

Still, 10+ second Super PI at 4.6 GHz is disappointing if this screenshot is accurate.

What? Even if Bulldozer matched Sandybridge IPC (which it will not) it would not match it in SuperPI as it's always been skewered towards Intel.

Either way, 1.5 V sounds high for 4.6 GHz, considering early Sandy Bridge overclocks showed 5-5.2 GHz at these kinds of voltages (that no sane person would use for a 24/7 overclock anyway). I suppose Intel's 32 nm voltages may not be applicable as a comparison though.

Stop comparing clock speeds, voltages, and nodes between the two companies.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom