Lets see if we can't inject some positive AMD news in here.
The first (indications) of Bulldozers replacement (Piledriver) are out. so how does it stack up?
First Per-Core Performance Bulldozer
iTunes.
All @ 3.3Ghz
1# i7 2600K = 1.09
2# x6 1100T = 1.35
3# FX-8150 = 2.03
Piledriver core vs Bulldozer core @ 3.8Ghz
3.8Ghz is stock for this Piledriver core (without Turbo core)
As you can see the performance is up 15% clock for clock and core for core.
The FX-8150 runs 3.6Ghz stock. so take off about 8% to BD's 3.3Ghz iTunes time and you get about 1:54. (114sec + 8% = 123sec)
Trinity stock is 1:31, thats 26% faster overall than Bulldozer (91sec + 26% = 114sec)
The new chart now looks like this
(all CPU's at stock)
1# i7 2600K = 1:08
2# Piledriver = 1:31
3# x6 1100T = 1:35
4# FX-8150 = 1:54
As you can see the FX-8150 is about 40% behind the 2600K and Piledriver now replaces the x6 1100T in second place (all be it by about 2%)
Its a vast improvement on Bulldozer, keep in mind that Trinity has no L3 and that the FX-8350 is likly to be clocked at 4Ghz stock, the indications are a real gain on Thuban even if its not a big one.
Multithreaded Productivity
FX-8150 = 1:50
Trinity
Piledriver Core = 3:0
Its difficult to predict Core scaling, But Trinity has 50% less cores than the FX-8150 and again no L3 cache, if one was to double it up the FX-8350 would score 1:30, be that as it may it actually beats the 2600K. i would say its probably a dead match., perhaps slightly better, certainly it would continue to out class the Thuban and 2500K.
That's just a couple, but there is plenty more there, if you take your time and think you can see the Piledriver core is a vast improvement over Bulldozer, its even an Ivy Bridge vs Sandy Bridge level of improvement over Thuban (tho not in all areas), a step in the right direction...
The first (indications) of Bulldozers replacement (Piledriver) are out. so how does it stack up?
First Per-Core Performance Bulldozer
iTunes.
All @ 3.3Ghz
1# i7 2600K = 1.09
2# x6 1100T = 1.35
3# FX-8150 = 2.03
Piledriver core vs Bulldozer core @ 3.8Ghz
3.8Ghz is stock for this Piledriver core (without Turbo core)
As you can see the performance is up 15% clock for clock and core for core.
The FX-8150 runs 3.6Ghz stock. so take off about 8% to BD's 3.3Ghz iTunes time and you get about 1:54. (114sec + 8% = 123sec)
Trinity stock is 1:31, thats 26% faster overall than Bulldozer (91sec + 26% = 114sec)
The new chart now looks like this
(all CPU's at stock)
1# i7 2600K = 1:08
2# Piledriver = 1:31
3# x6 1100T = 1:35
4# FX-8150 = 1:54
As you can see the FX-8150 is about 40% behind the 2600K and Piledriver now replaces the x6 1100T in second place (all be it by about 2%)
Its a vast improvement on Bulldozer, keep in mind that Trinity has no L3 and that the FX-8350 is likly to be clocked at 4Ghz stock, the indications are a real gain on Thuban even if its not a big one.
Multithreaded Productivity
FX-8150 = 1:50
Trinity
Piledriver Core = 3:0
Its difficult to predict Core scaling, But Trinity has 50% less cores than the FX-8150 and again no L3 cache, if one was to double it up the FX-8350 would score 1:30, be that as it may it actually beats the 2600K. i would say its probably a dead match., perhaps slightly better, certainly it would continue to out class the Thuban and 2500K.
That's just a couple, but there is plenty more there, if you take your time and think you can see the Piledriver core is a vast improvement over Bulldozer, its even an Ivy Bridge vs Sandy Bridge level of improvement over Thuban (tho not in all areas), a step in the right direction...
Last edited: