-
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.
Official Bulldozer Reviews
- Thread starter ATIorNvidia
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 10,823
- Location
- Nottingham
Not with current power consumption they aren't.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,358
- Location
- Planet Earth
I doubt it as IBM with its multi-threaded POWER based CPUs will probably win the contract for all the consoles. All the current consoles use IBM POWER based CPUs and the PS3 and XBox 360 use highly multi-threaded CPUs with weak single thread performance.
Funny enough it looks like the server Interlagos CPUs have much lower power consumption than their desktop versions due to the lower clockspeeds:
http://www.cpu-world.com//news_2011/2011100401_AMD_Opteron_4200_lineup_revealed.html
8 core Opteron CPUs have TDPs between 35W to 95W dependent on the clockspeeds. It seems that Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the US is changing over to the newer Opterons as is Cray.
It seems as with Llano,the 32NM GF process sucks power at higher clockspeeds. If it is not fixed this will lead to a lot of issue with future AMD CPUs IMHO.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
Associate
- Joined
- 8 May 2011
- Posts
- 1,068
- Location
- London
If it wasn't for the all too common More cores = more speed from your average I-just-want-a-fast-pc-and-you-can-charge-me-£1000-for-8gb-ram Joe I would predict a price drop pretty soon after release...
Let's not talk poobrown. A 6970 sucks just as much as a 580 does (in comparison to the cards before it) and aren't really upgrades for people who have say 5870s already. They're aimed at people who had/have low end cards and want to upgrade from them.
The 6970 and GTX580 are only interim cards (in the case of the 580, nVidia had to get something out to replace the 480 because of how much of a mess it was) to bridge the gap until their next generation cards on a smaller process are ready. But either way, you really can't claim the 6900s suck considering the 580 quite a bit more expensive for a minor difference in performance.
The only way a 6970 sucks is in relation to the unlockable 6950s, but I have no idea if the lastest 6950s unlock any more, but if they do it's just more reason to say the 580 is quite poor value for money, they're nearly 2x the price of 6950s for again, not that great a performance increase.
As for Bulldozer, these are clearly awful chips. There's either something incredibly wrong on the software side of them, or AMD have messed up really badly with them. More than likely the latter.
I was intending to upgrade to Bulldozer because I didn't think they'd be this bad, I was expecting at least the per core performance of Phenom IIs but it looks like the 1090T is a better CPU than the 8150, which means once again I'm not sure what to go for now.
2500K or 1090T? Or even 2600k?
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 173
- Location
- UK
Dissapointing, was looking forward to maybe picking one of these up in the not so distant future. Will stick with the 955 until ivy then.
Seems like l will have to wait for Ivy Bridge for an upgrade. I could live with the luckluster performance of Bulldozer if the power consumption when overclocked was reasonable.
Piledriver, along with a more mature 32nm process might help AMD's position but it seems like it will be 2013 until AMD gets another shot at delivering something competitive.
Piledriver, along with a more mature 32nm process might help AMD's position but it seems like it will be 2013 until AMD gets another shot at delivering something competitive.
Another Fail from AMD 
"To make matters worse, in some heavily threaded applications the improvement over the previous generation Phenom II X6 simply isn't enough to justify an upgrade for existing AM3+ platform owners"
"To make matters worse, in some heavily threaded applications the improvement over the previous generation Phenom II X6 simply isn't enough to justify an upgrade for existing AM3+ platform owners"
Last edited:
This is disapointing, I would have loved for AMD to be back on par with intel, especially on the gaming front.
It does however make me glad I got my 2500K when I did.
I wonder what the chances are of AMD re-spinning and refining this chip into a winner later down the line...
It does however make me glad I got my 2500K when I did.
I wonder what the chances are of AMD re-spinning and refining this chip into a winner later down the line...
If they can half the power consumption and get 20% performance boost with a refresh they would have a winner....just cant see that happening.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 5,756
One word is AMD - RIP!
Some of those reviews are a right mixed bag. The legit reviews article is mildly optimistic of the chip:
For me, I spend more time now multitasking and working in Windows than gaming, and will no doubt be going to Windows 8, which shows a performance boost. I also work in Photoshop, do the odd bit of music & video encoding, so I need to try and do an FX-8150 vs current CPU (Q6600) comparison in my head.
Surely FX-8150 or i7 2600k is going to be better than the Q6600?
The only thing that I hate is that overclocked power consumption that the chip draws; and I would be wanting to overclock it if I were to get one.
I've got 8GB of DDR3 RAM sitting in my draw here and I still don't know what route to take.
Do I go i7 2600k? Does the 1155 socket still have life left in it (i.e. it won't be being replaced anytime soon)?
Should I wait for Ivy Bridge?
Should I wait for Pile Driver?
It's just unfortunate that more software does not take advantage of multiple threads. When it does, it looks like the FX-8150 performs. Single threads (aka Games) is where it falls down. But I just don't know... it would be nice to have a time machine and go into the future and see what way the industry goes, will we get more applications that final take advantage of this kind of architecture? Or do we stick with outright core clock performance?
For me, I spend more time now multitasking and working in Windows than gaming, and will no doubt be going to Windows 8, which shows a performance boost. I also work in Photoshop, do the odd bit of music & video encoding, so I need to try and do an FX-8150 vs current CPU (Q6600) comparison in my head.
Surely FX-8150 or i7 2600k is going to be better than the Q6600?
The only thing that I hate is that overclocked power consumption that the chip draws; and I would be wanting to overclock it if I were to get one.
I've got 8GB of DDR3 RAM sitting in my draw here and I still don't know what route to take.
Do I go i7 2600k? Does the 1155 socket still have life left in it (i.e. it won't be being replaced anytime soon)?
Should I wait for Ivy Bridge?
Should I wait for Pile Driver?
Not good news at all AMD needed something that was faster, better value, or lower power per performance metric - they have delivered none of these things, and in some cases taken a step back from the previous gen. Shocked by the current pricing: between and i5 and an i7, while losing to both in the majority of scenarios? Madness.
Dunno how a 6 core BD would shape up vs a Phenom II quad... Maybe there's a potential power saving for similar performance there?
AMD needed something that was faster, better value, or lower power per performance metric - they have delivered none of these things, and in some cases taken a step back from the previous gen. Shocked by the current pricing: between and i5 and an i7, while losing to both in the majority of scenarios? Madness.Dunno how a 6 core BD would shape up vs a Phenom II quad... Maybe there's a potential power saving for similar performance there?
Either way I can't see much changing in the realistic lifetime of these cpus.
In terms of the Win8 thing it didn't look like HUGE gains a few percent here and there (I wouldn't expect more but just to point out it isn't magically going to make this CPU competitive overnight) and it may be that other chips may get some gains from Win8 too (haven't researched it so don't know if anyone has tested it)
As for whether you should wait for xyz, my attitude would be to get a 2500k if you really feel like you need an upgrade now, otherwise hold fire.