There were reviews, they're worse off.
-
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.
AMD Bulldozer Finally!
- Thread starter AceTK
- Start date
There were reviews, they're worse off.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 7,661
- Location
- London
Not that I can see... I'm just guessing off the part named fx-4170 from here
http://www.techspot.com/review/452-amd-bulldozer-fx-cpus/page12.html
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,779
- Location
- Planet Earth
The reviews thread has no FX4100 and FX6100 series reviews.
There are, the one linked above has a 4.2 FX4XXX, and it's terrible.
Phenom II 980 trounces it in everything. So snag an £85 955BE, slap it at 3.8GHz, and you will thrash a FX4100 OC'd @ 4.2.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,583
Well...so AMD has basically drove the Bulldozer down the lake and sinked it 
If anyone MUST go AMD, they'd better off just grab a Phenom II X4/X6 and overclock them, considering they are faster on the same clock speed...
If anyone MUST go AMD, they'd better off just grab a Phenom II X4/X6 and overclock them, considering they are faster on the same clock speed...
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 16,214
- Location
- Paisley
This is where you are spinning, taking out some of the tests to make it 8 out of 11 is spinning
And do it fast, as AMD have EOL the Phenom II's... which is looking to be a terrible idea.
They could have saved themselves a ton of development costs and just brought out a 32nm high clocked Phenom II and it'd have been better than Bulldozer
Not even as good as previous AMD chips, it has twice as many transistors, it's twice as hot and runs on-par or slower, it's a complete and utter fail of a chip, that is all.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Oct 2003
- Posts
- 16,411
- Location
- Chengdu
Still trundling along on the 955BE on AM2+, doesn't look like any reason for me to upgrade yet.
Found the Anandtech end bit showing the performance boost in Windows 8 Quite interesting.
Looks like this could be a good CPU for some folks, not for Joe Average though.
Can we start a Piledriver thread now so we can still have a comedy thread in CPUs filled with nothing but speculation and OT stuff? The BD thread is actually relevant now that NDA is up.
Quite disappointed with the gaming performance but I suppose they did warn us...
Found the Anandtech end bit showing the performance boost in Windows 8 Quite interesting.
Looks like this could be a good CPU for some folks, not for Joe Average though.
Can we start a Piledriver thread now so we can still have a comedy thread in CPUs filled with nothing but speculation and OT stuff? The BD thread is actually relevant now that NDA is up.
Quite disappointed with the gaming performance but I suppose they did warn us...
This is where you are spinning, taking out some of the tests to make it 8 out of 11 is spinning
I completly agree with drunkenmaster on this.
Why on earth would you ever run Cinenama4D or any other renderer on a single core? Frankly speaking this single thread rendering is pointless from the start but it's left there so you can feel nice when you see how much improvement there is if you run it in multi scenario.
Either way, I still haven't decided as my usage is a mix of workstation and gaming (mainly low res - 1680x1050 or 1920x1080 later on)...
I'd love to see a proper benchmark of a standard office usage, with PS, Excel, multi-tab web browsing, email etc in one go between 2500K and FX 8150.
Add to this a 3d modelling software rendering something in the bg and it would seem like 2500K is going to lag behind...
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 7,661
- Location
- London
They could have saved themselves a ton of development costs and just brought out a 32nm high clocked Phenom II and it'd have been better than Bulldozer
No it's an architecture win for AMD as ....
AMD has just proved that it can win at threading but at the same time fail at single core performance.
The ball is now in Intel's court for them to prove that they can also scale horizontally
The Single Thread benchmarks are for enthusiast interpretation and are a decent way to speculate on how the architecture might scale as/if more cores are added. It's not exactly great news.
Can the chip handle a day-to-day workload? Sure. I do not think anyone is debating that, does it make it a good chip and a good socket to invest in now? No.
Also, BD as a server chip? Not with that power draw.
Can the chip handle a day-to-day workload? Sure. I do not think anyone is debating that, does it make it a good chip and a good socket to invest in now? No.
Also, BD as a server chip? Not with that power draw.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,779
- Location
- Planet Earth
I just saw it. OTH,how far can an FX4100 overclock? The FX4170 in the gaming tests was not always behind at 1920X1080 for gaming. In half the games tested it was actually ahead of the Phenom II X4 980.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 7,661
- Location
- London
* Think this thread should be split up into several camps.
Those with remedial maths skills and those without
Those with remedial maths skills and those without
...and can you believe, there are some people who actually took days off work to usher in the arrival of the BullDozer CPU.
Never before in my life have I seen such high anticipation of a CPU (judging by the length of this thread).
Even Sandybridge (2500k/2600k), which is basically the best CPU that has ever been released, in terms of performance and value for money, wasn't subject to this much anticipation.
Never before in my life have I seen such high anticipation of a CPU (judging by the length of this thread).
Even Sandybridge (2500k/2600k), which is basically the best CPU that has ever been released, in terms of performance and value for money, wasn't subject to this much anticipation.
And a quick side note regarding power usage at home and care of.
I do not care all that much for power draw as long as it does not mean I need to invest £££ in bigger PSUs. I ran a Q6600 overclocked with no SpeedStep for years and years.
The fact is Intel proved with Sandybridge that you can have a killer chip which absolutely flies with a huge overclock but also retain all of the power saving features and have a decent full load Wattage draw.
I have had that now, and if I can retain it in the future I will. Why would anyone say no to power savings with zero drawbacks?
I do not care all that much for power draw as long as it does not mean I need to invest £££ in bigger PSUs. I ran a Q6600 overclocked with no SpeedStep for years and years.
The fact is Intel proved with Sandybridge that you can have a killer chip which absolutely flies with a huge overclock but also retain all of the power saving features and have a decent full load Wattage draw.
I have had that now, and if I can retain it in the future I will. Why would anyone say no to power savings with zero drawbacks?