AMD Bulldozer - Dissapointing?

my cpu debuted 3 years ago and it beats bulldozer... this is not good. I was really rooting AMD to at least beat that handily. it struggles against Phenom II...
 
I'm disappointed with the results. That said, however, I'm wondering if it's more a lack of processor support in the software than the processor itself. I was really surprised to see the current Phenom II X6 outperform the Bulldozer; as such, I think I'll be sticking with the Phenom II for now.
 
So it beats it in some tests while it loses in others.
I don't think anyone here is surprised.
 
I'll be waiting to see how it does in the long run. While they may have been working on it for a long time. It doesn't seem like anybody really prepared for it.

They're supposed to use AM3+ right? While there are tons of AM3+ Mobos out there already. Are they truly Bulldozer ready? Or just compatible?
 
bergauk
They're supposed to use AM3+ right? While there are tons of AM3+ Mobos out there already. Are they truly Bulldozer ready? Or just compatible?
Click to expand...

Nah they're ready, Bulldozer chips were delayed. Some AM3 'Nonplus' boards may also be compatible, depends on the manufacturer.

AMD plainly don't have the budget to go with Intel any more. as the manufacturing dies get smaller it's only going to cost more and more. Intel had $43 Billion revenue last year, compared to $6.4 Billion from AMD. Do the math. Making microprocessors isn't a cheap business.

Intel's 22nm microprocessors aren't even that far away from shipping (Within 3-6 months), AMD haven't even announced a 22nm chip yet. The 22nm chip from Intel is even looking more amazing at this stage with its Tri-Gate Transistors, it will smash the AMD line-up so hard in speed, power consumption and price.

For AMD to compete they need to continue advancing the On-Die GPU solution which currently is one area they beat Intel on. Which would make them a lot more enticing in the lower priced hardware segment.
 
Casio
For AMD to compete they need to continue advancing the On-Die GPU solution which currently is one area they beat Intel on. Which would make them a lot more enticing in the lower priced hardware segment.
Click to expand...

But that is due to them having their GPU line of radeons to thank for it.

But only few will need the onboard GPU solution.

Gamers and PC enthusiasts will go with an Intel CPU and then go for either a nVidia or AMD GPU.

AMD chip based notebooks/netbooks have better battery life than intel and their netbook range of CPUs are good performers with good battery life as well.
 
I was very disappointed with AMD when the reviews came in because basically Bulldozer is nothing special, its more expensive and also slower than Intel's top offerings. I bet prices will tumble pretty quick, then they probably will be worth buying.
 
I thought Bulldozer would at least get somewhat close to SB CPUs, but it struggles to beat their AMD's old 4 and 6 core offerings. They might have been better off holding these units and skipping straight to Piledriver. Like they said, I hope Piledriver can offer at least 15% improvement, because these seem like a step backwards. They sacrificed individual core efficiency for more cores and they failed.
 
I found this on guru3d's review:

To put it very simple, the hardware needs the software in order to shine. However, the problem remains that most software anno 2011 certainly doesn't multi-thread as well as we all would have hoped.

Most applications go for two, maybe four cores. It's already hard to utilize six threads simultaneously, let alone eight. As such, per-core performance is much more important than more processor cores.

That is a matter of time though, I mean we had the single core to dual-core revolution, quickly followed by four, six and thus now eight cores. So where multithreaded applications are programmed right AMD really starts to shine with the FX series.
Click to expand...

Personally I think the software is not updated for 6 core or 8 core cpu's. This seemed the same when we transitioned from single core to dual cores where the software was not adjusted for the use of more cores. One thing for sure Handbrake and other video editing software was where bulldozer excelled from being able to make good use of it's 8 core CPU. That is my thought on the bulldozer CPU's.
 
I'd like to see BF3 benchmarks since Frostbite 2 is supposed to be CPU heavy.
 
They would probably be disapointing. I mean, there is the factor of software that doesn't actually use the architecture taht the CPU was made for.
 

Similar threads

Gabkicks
Asus Leaks Bulldozer (Zambezi-FX) Specs?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Robin
Robin
nick09
Nick's AMD FX-8120 Bulldozer Build
2 3 4
Replies
94
Views
15K
nick09
nick09
amar212
Fanatec CSR Elite Review: A League of its Own
6 7 8
Replies
211
Views
136K
menos | M6
menos | M6

Latest Posts

Back