Official Bulldozer Reviews

DigitalPrime · 12 Oct 2011 at 11:23

The last AMD i owned was the AMD Athlon 1333. I really thought this new CPU could turn everything around. I have owned an Intel from the P4 and is looking to make a new build with 2k to spend. With the talk of the bulldozer an the ivy I thought we would have another slap fest between the companies. I've been buying my time hoping for a decent right hook from AMD. But... It doesnt look like thats going to happen with this gen chip.

There is nothing like a well matched fight to keep the consumers happy. Monopoly is never good !!

biuro74 · 12 Oct 2011 at 11:33

LOL, "FX" brand is not lucky.

GeForce FX, Bulldozer FX....

HeX · 12 Oct 2011 at 11:38

Gandeh said:
I think I'm pushing it with 16gb as it is

Okay let me put it this way, say the difference between the 1090t and 1100t is £20. I have £20 to spend if it doesn't go on this it isn't being used on anything else. Is there any argument to be made for going for the 1100t over 1090t or is the 1090t just better all round and in oc

Honestly, they are the same CPU.

The ONLY reason to get the 1100T over the 1090T is if it is really going to bug you that your BIOS/CPU-Z doesn't say 1100T when you look at them

Both clock pretty much exactly the same, you are going to get 4GHz+ out of either of them.

End of the day, you've got £20 spare, and you are gutted about Bulldozer, i'd say sod it and get the fastest Phenom II they made and be done with it

Though there is no logical reason to get he 1100T over the 1090T.

mothermachine · 12 Oct 2011 at 11:44

Oh dear. Lack of competition is always a bad thing. I've always been an Intel guy (for speed alone, not for any kind of fanboy nonsense) but was hoping that AMD would at the very least hit the mark and come in slightly cheaper... ah well.

Gandeh · 12 Oct 2011 at 11:50

HeX said:
Honestly, they are the same CPU.

The ONLY reason to get the 1100T over the 1090T is if it is really going to bug you that your BIOS/CPU-Z doesn't say 1100T when you look at them

Both clock pretty much exactly the same, you are going to get 4GHz+ out of either of them.

End of the day, you've got £20 spare, and you are gutted about Bulldozer, i'd say sod it and get the fastest Phenom II they made and be done with it

Though there is no logical reason to get he 1100T over the 1090T.

Thanks Hex

that has summed it up nicely for me. I will think it over carefully!

Hagar · 12 Oct 2011 at 11:58

Gandeh said:
The real trajedy is it's far too late for me to swap my motherboard. I've only unboxed it and screwed it in my supposedly new rig but I'm well past the return time.

So I'm stuck with a Sabertooth 990FX board wishing I could get a Intel i5 or i7 processor. Can anyone say Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa?

Well I'm going to have to figure out something to buy.

If you are thinking of a hex core, I think you are wrong to discount the FX6100

It is the same price as the 1100T, at the same stock speed.

Chances of an overclock up to 4.6Ghz are quite good. Better than the Thuban.

Motherboard bios for the bulldozer and software compatibility can only get better.

AM3 socket CPU's are EOL.

andy.

Gandeh · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:02

Hmmm that's an interesting point. But I thought when the BDs have been overclocked the Power usuage gets into the ridiculous figures?

shadow_boxer · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:03

@OP. Thanks for posting, dread to go into the other BD thread and look for reviews in there...

555BUK · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:04

Happy days for Intel.

HeX · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:06

nkata said:
If you are thinking of a hex core, I think you are wrong to discount the FX6100

It is the same price as the 1100T, at the same stock speed.

Chances of an overclock up to 4.6Ghz are quite good. Better than the Thuban.

Motherboard bios for the bulldozer and software compatibility can only get better.

AM3 socket CPU's are EOL.

andy.

Point is, the BD needs that extra core speed to make up for its poor IPC. So a 4.6GHz BD is probably not going to be as fast as a 4.2GHz X6, or they will be very similar. Except the X6 will have stronger per core performance, run cooler, and use less power... =/

Also if you were going to go BD I wouldn't look at anything other than the 8120 for £167. It's the best value BD by far.

Hagar · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:08

Gandeh said:
Hmmm that's an interesting point. But I thought when the BDs have been overclocked the Power usuage gets into the ridiculous figures?

maximum system power draw at 4.5GHz = 550w. under 3dmark 11, normal load condition 450w

That is whole system with a single graphics card or 700w using 80% efficiency

Gandeh · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:14

So so so so lost

Gerard · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:19

Not all that suprising why theyve focused on overclocking so much, massive "MEH" to say the least.

teejay73 · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:20

So a massive fail for AMD then! I, like many decided to get the i5 2500k, Though had hoped that Bulldozer would bring some competition to the cpu table, If only to give Intel some challenge, Now though it seems that AMD have banged another nail in their proverbial coffin and to think that Sandybridge E has not shown it`s face yet.

A bad day for us consumers it would seem.

remy87 · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:22

ops sorted

BGRicky · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:25

terminator2k2 · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:33

the processor (8150) itself is ok......just the price is wrong......it cant compete with sandybridge.......if it was half the price of a 2600k , around £125 it would sell.....but not at £200.........

Gerard · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:38

layte · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:42

The FX has almost 1bn more transistors (and worse performance) than the Intel parts as well, so not a cheap chip to manufacture.

mothermachine · 12 Oct 2011 at 12:44

Reminds me a bit of the original 1st gen Fermi... hot, quite good but not amazing and not exactly cheap. Hopefully the next revision (if they bother) will be 1) cooler 2) faster 3) cheaper. But this is AMD we're talking about....