-
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
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 443
Whilst this chip hasn't turned out to be everything we hoped I think it's an interesting development.
Has anyone got any benchmarks of how it fairs against the older Intel CPUs?
I currently have a Q6600 at 3.6GHz and was wondering if the 4 core version might be a worthwhile upgrade also overclocked on water? If AMD get the price right I think they might have something here. Only seen the 8 core reviewed but it seems to hit 4.5GHz on air (I would use water), be interesting to see a comparrison with the 6600.
Has anyone got any benchmarks of how it fairs against the older Intel CPUs?
I currently have a Q6600 at 3.6GHz and was wondering if the 4 core version might be a worthwhile upgrade also overclocked on water? If AMD get the price right I think they might have something here. Only seen the 8 core reviewed but it seems to hit 4.5GHz on air (I would use water), be interesting to see a comparrison with the 6600.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,540
- Location
- Dormanstown.
It'd be no different, possibly worse than your 3.6GHZ Q6600. I did say the day before launch, that it's lower than a Q6600 clock for clock.
And it is.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/85?vs=53
Phenom II is faster clock for clock than the FX4, and this is as close to a stock Q6600 I can see.
And it is.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/85?vs=53
Phenom II is faster clock for clock than the FX4, and this is as close to a stock Q6600 I can see.
Last edited:
4 core BD won't be any good has it is now
6 core BD oc'ed would be ok if u got a low end 2x or 4x
8 core BD oc'ed would be ok if u got a higher end 2x or 4x
basicly a 8 core BD @ 4.5ghz = a ~phenom II 6 core @ 4ghz
if u already got a phenom II 6 core don't bother with BD
yes a 8 core BD may oc to 4.8ghz - 5ghz but it's not worth the very small boost
6 core BD oc'ed would be ok if u got a low end 2x or 4x
8 core BD oc'ed would be ok if u got a higher end 2x or 4x
basicly a 8 core BD @ 4.5ghz = a ~phenom II 6 core @ 4ghz
if u already got a phenom II 6 core don't bother with BD
yes a 8 core BD may oc to 4.8ghz - 5ghz but it's not worth the very small boost
Last edited:
I know we're all aware of BD's poor performance but here's some more benchmarks from a few days back by a user who isn't a professionally paid benchmarker. It really emphasises what a waste of money this chip currently is. What's really amazing is that my humble little phenom xII 550 got about the same Super PI 1M result when I had it overclocked to 3.7 or 3.8GHz, can't remember what my overclock was exactly.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?276002-Compare-1090T-and-FX-8150
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?276002-Compare-1090T-and-FX-8150
1090t
8150
My God, AMD should do an Atari and bury these Bulldozers in the desert. That is appalling for an 8 core processor.
Am I reading his results/using super pi right?
AS a 1meg super pi run on my stock 2600k takes 10 seconds.
His results say that BD takes nearly twice as long running at a GHZ faster than my 2600k turbo speed.
also no heat issues, stayed at 49c , ... i guess the people who got a 8150 and saying it as heat issues clearly don't know what they doing.
Thats a bold statement.
I am finding that at low voltages the power consumption and thermal output stays under control.
However when pushing the clocks and volts they quickly get out of control.
Gareth try running a notch higher say 4.6Ghz and use sufficient vcore to maintain IBT stability.
Dont just run CB, temps will be a lot higher running IBT.
I am finding that 4.6Ghz is where i have to start upping the vcore (1.4v under load for my chip) and the problems begin.
At 4.5 i need less vcore and the temps are similar to those you have shown.
PS
Performance is as awful as others have already reported.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,806
- Location
- Planet Earth
Bulldozer lacks x87 hardware so it will be slower.
In his last post he says he doesn't know to throw it off a cliff or put it on ebay.
He seems to think that BD is a dog.
Did Atari really do this?
If so, what machine was it that was buried?
I remember when the Atari ST and Amiga 500 were all the rage.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 6,139
- Location
- Birmingham
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 32
- Location
- The Moon
Bulldozer was an almighty let down and Intel has continued it's "willy waving" precedent set down with the i7 990X with the i7 2700K.
Although I've heard about a B3 stepping? Could this be what makes BD a credible alternative to Sandy Bridge? If so, bloody galling. I've just lost patience and ordered an MSI Z68 board.
Although I've heard about a B3 stepping? Could this be what makes BD a credible alternative to Sandy Bridge? If so, bloody galling. I've just lost patience and ordered an MSI Z68 board.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,325
- Location
- Billericay, UK
New steppings can turn very good CPU's into great ones such as the Q6600 G0 stepping but it can't turn a turd into a diamond. At the moment AMD has the it’s flagship CPU massively overpriced by about £50, until they start to retail these CPU’s below that of 2500K levels then very few enthusiasts will rush to buy these.
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 32
- Location
- The Moon
I'm ordering my i5 2500K tonight. AMD have had their chance now. Looks like Trinity will be ***** too.