AMD Bulldozer Finally!

gareth170 · 23 Aug 2011 at 17:57

with Phenom II if turbo is enable cpu-z only shows the higher clock when the 1,2, ect cores are only in use

Martini1991 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:01

gareth170 said:
with Phenom II if turbo is enable cpu-z only shows the higher clock when the 1,2, ect cores are only in use

BD isn't a conventional approach though, and the turbo could work differently, and as such, report differently, but that's guess work. I'm hoping it's 3.6GHZ purely because it's a better result and I'm hoping the results are legit, as it'd be a let down if they were real, and it was 4.2GHZ.

We'll have to wait until release I believe until we'll see just how it performs, sadly, just under 30 days away.

gareth170 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:02

also look at the ranking in cinebench , theres one at 3.6ghz, same cpu

Martini1991 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:07

Yeah mate, I can't find a reference to BD with an 8 core at 3.6GHZ turbo.
Looks like the results are at 4.2GHZ.

Damn goes my optimism

If they are real, then that's pretty poor, and I'm sure you could work out the percentage to your Thuban cores per clock.

gareth170 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:18

on cinebench i get 6.32 pls at 4ghz

:confused:

Martini1991 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:19

gareth170 said:
on cinebench i get 6.32 pls at 4ghz

That's why I hoped they were at 3.6GHZ.

I've had an inside joke with a few that it's going to be an 8 cored deneb, obviously we were kidding, but it's be very disturbing if it was.

gareth170 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:28

i tryed 3.6GHZ but got the same 6.32 pls :confused:

do i need to close it then run the program again

Martini1991 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:29

gareth170 said:
i tryed 3.6GHZ but got the same 6.32 pls

I can't comment really, I don't know what's happened there

.

gareth170 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:37

i've close it then run the program again , now im get 5.67 pls @ 3.6ghz

Martini1991 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:41

Seems like it's working.
So, what's your verdict on todays benchmarks? I'm sceptical about their validity, but there's no way to be sure.

gareth170 · 23 Aug 2011 at 18:50

Martini1991 said:
Seems like it's working.
So, what's your verdict on todays benchmarks? I'm sceptical about their validity, but there's no way to be sure.

if its true then i really think the extra 2 cores are not giving really any extra performance. but we don't know what motherboard they using.

anyway i'm 99% sure it's fake

MichaelM · 23 Aug 2011 at 19:29

Martini1991 said:

It's the CPU-Z where it says

Name: AMD FX-8130P
Specification: AMD FX(tm)-8150 Eight Core Processor

That caught my eye at first, contradicting names and then stating "Eight Core" seems a bit out of the ordinary.

two00lbwaster · 23 Aug 2011 at 20:57

At full turbo speed you'll be running 4 cores. So 4.2GHz results, unless manually overclocked, will be a result of 4 cores at that speed. However, the 3.6GHz result would be with all 8 cores at turbo.

Anyway we'll find out soon enough where the truth lies.

Trunks9486 · 23 Aug 2011 at 21:33

Per core performance will not improve i think. And if ti does it will not be by a lot. This is supposed to be a design that focuses on multi threading and high clocks.

I have a bad feeling that even overclocked it will not be beating Sandy (overclocked sandy at least).

It could be good for the cheaper models as intel offers no unlocked i3s or pentiums yet.

gareth170 · 23 Aug 2011 at 21:53

two00lbwaster said:
At full turbo speed you'll be running 4 cores. So 4.2GHz results, unless manually overclocked, will be a result of 4 cores at that speed. However, the 3.6GHz result would be with all 8 cores at turbo.

Anyway we'll find out soon enough where the truth lies.

but cinebench uses all the cores/threads so turbo won't be kicking in. so it has to be manually overclocked to 4.2ghz

the only time turbo kicks in is when a app only uses 1/2/3 or 4 cores/threads

but as i said i'm 99% sure theses are fake

DragonQ · 23 Aug 2011 at 22:28

gareth170 said:
but cinebench uses all the cores/threads so turbo won't be kicking in. so it has to be manually overclocked to 4.2ghz

the only time turbo kicks in is when a app only uses 1/2/3 or 4 cores/threads

but as i said i'm 99% sure theses are fake

According to the slides linked to in the last page or so, Turbo works with 8 loaded cores, it just doesn't go as high as when you're using 4 or less cores. 3.2 GHz rising to 3.6 GHz with 5-8 cores and 4.2 GHz with 1-4 cores makes sense.

gareth170 · 23 Aug 2011 at 22:51

DragonQ said:
According to the slides linked to in the last page or so, Turbo works with 8 loaded cores, it just doesn't go as high as when you're using 4 or less cores. 3.2 GHz rising to 3.6 GHz with 5-8 cores and 4.2 GHz with 1-4 cores makes sense.

if thats the case then good

but stock clock is 3.6ghz , i think,

also cinebench uses all the cores/threads so if theses benchmarks are true that person must have manually overclocked it to 4.2ghz

dave_beast · 23 Aug 2011 at 23:05

MichaelM said:
It's the CPU-Z where it says

Name: AMD FX-8130P
Specification: AMD FX(tm)-8150 Eight Core Processor

That caught my eye at first, contradicting names and then stating "Eight Core" seems a bit out of the ordinary.

Martini1991 said:
I hope for you lot waiting for BD, these are fake, however they're new as of today;

Wow, that's a really pants score on Fritz :eek:

iakhtar · 24 Aug 2011 at 00:31

Gotta be fake

Mollari · 24 Aug 2011 at 00:43

Still waiting for Bulldozers b'cause they will be awesome

Too much fake info available right now dont be fooled guys !