• 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!

In fact, same performance with less cores is surely better cos it means you get better performance in single-threaded applications too.

Unless someone like me who runs many applications at the same time & even my hex core at stock smoked my quad OC @4'Ghz when running multiple.
 
Well, when Intels 4 core is spanking an AMD 6 core, you've got to stop and think.

One (Thuban) is nearly 2 year old tech on a 2 and a half year old process which was miles behind Intel's 45nm process anyway.

One (Sandy Bridge) is brand new and on a brand new 32nm process which is even further ahead of AMD's ancient 45nm process.

Fail to see how a large performance gulf is either noteworthy or surprising.

Bulldozer being a completely new architecture (in the short term) is of far less import than AMD catching up to 32nm AND their 32nm actually being just as good as Intel's. As far as process technology is concerned, AMD have been years behind for the last 10 years, almost. Bulldozer / Llano will be breaking new ground for them in this respect.

I don't expect to see much joy for Intel in any multi-threaded applications from next month on ...
 
Last edited:
I wonder if the two module Bulldozer has access to all of the 8MB L3 cache that the four module Bulldozer has??

If this the case the 2 module Bulldozer will have the best IPC per module and higher clockspeeds.
 
But we are talking about AMDs range & the AMD 8 core will be better than AMDs 4 core.

That's a stupid analogy. It's twice the amount of cores with a turbo, so it can't be worse.

The 45NM process used by AMD seems fine especially when you consider the number of transistors and die size the Phenom II has.

Exactly, and why so many X2's unlock to X4's. Their 45nm fabrication is fine.
 
The thing is a 4 module Bulldozer is comprised of 8 cores of which each pair shares resources. Supposedly, the second core adds another 70% to 80% extra performance under ideal conditions. So basically,a 4 module module Bulldozer seems to be closer to a CPU with 7 separate cores under ideal conditions (I know this is a simplistic way of looking at this).
 
The thing is though the results from multi-threaded benchmarks are not going to give a good idea of the single threaded performance of Bulldozer.

If you look at the per thread performance of a Core i7 in CineBench when compared to a Core i5 it will be lower. However,this does not mean the Core i7 has slower cores.

On top of this Turbo Core is going to be more aggressive for applications which use less threads.

One thing I am not sure about, is whether in lightly threaded applications it means only a single thread through is run through each module. If this is the case wouldn't this would mean better performance??
 
Last edited:
Lol I remember when I got my Q6600 people were going you don't need quad core blah blah blah.....Also now you see people with EXXXX upgrading to QXXXX now.
 
Lol I remember when I got my Q6600 people were going you don't need quad core blah blah blah.....Also now you see people with EXXXX upgrading to QXXXX now.

Most people still don't need quad core, there's a difference between needing something and wanting it though lol
 
dont know if this is news but i was talking to my local computer shop owner with apparent connections, and he said that he has seen bulldozer and it makes the i7 look stupid, didnt mention witch i7 tho, 1336? or sandy?
 
Well, lucky me, I was at the Red Hat Summit in Boston a few weeks ago, and saw the AMD booth. Naturally I went and pestered them, and they had a machine with Bulldozer in it (one of the server chips), and were doing a demo where they live transferred VMs between boxes extremely rapidly.

I didn't get anything out of them we didn't know already, but they seemed very positive about the performance. However, they would do, wouldn't they heh.

I took a couple of snaps of the booth, nothing exciting to see really but I'll share them sometime if anyone cares.

Oh, and I got an AMD pen and branded chewing gum (lol!) for my troubles.
 
If it performs as it is expected it to be, i.e. better than sandy, and if the price is right. Then why not? :p

thats what im thinking lol, but how will you know which one is their flagship best performnce//price chipp? do they come out in the US before everywhere else like everything else? or china?
 
Back
Top Bottom