# AMD Bulldozer benched



## Fatal (Jun 14, 2011)

AMD BULLDOZER benched maybe.
Not sure if any one has seen this but here ya go. Found this on HWBOT 
http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?t=27276

wPrime v2.04 32M = 5.866
Super PI = 15.412s
CINEBENCH R11.5 64bit = 7.86
CINEBENCH R10 64bit = 27678 CB-CPU


----------



## _JP_ (Jun 14, 2011)

As far as I can tell, those could be tests made with 8-core opteron CPUs, print-screened and then pasted to another pc with a 990FX chipset, but running any AM3 cpu.
Because CPU-Z doesn't support entirely (I think) all bulldozer processors, it would be sort of safe to show the CPU tab, while still respecting the NDA (since the program would be able to identify the CPU correctly).


----------



## Fatal (Jun 14, 2011)

_JP_ said:


> As far as I can tell, those could be tests made with 8-core opteron CPUs, print-screened and then pasted to another pc with a 990FX chipset, but running any AM3 cpu.
> Because CPU-Z doesn't support entirely (I think) all bulldozer processors, it would be sort of safe to show the CPU tab, while still respecting the NDA (since the program would be able to identify the CPU correctly).



Yeah could be I was just searching around on hwbot and saw that who knows.


----------



## Rapidfire48 (Jun 14, 2011)

Until they officially release the chip why waste the space?


----------



## seronx (Jun 14, 2011)

Since, we are talking about Bulldozer being benched

Lets talk about the prominent B0 rumor

This is the one most people have been looking at WCCFtech went over it most other places went over it

In the FX E3 news topic we went over it

Well from Chiphell where the first "B0" benchmarks come from







AMD Bulldozer has

16MB of L2
8MB of L3
Doesn't do SSSE3, SSE4.1/4.2, or AVX/SSE5

Then in the CPU-Z

We see the Southbridge says SB850

on a 990FX board that is impossible since 990FX is paired with SB950


----------



## _JP_ (Jun 14, 2011)

seronx said:


> Then in the CPU-Z
> 
> We see the Southbridge says SB850
> 
> on a 990FX board that is impossible since 990FX is paired with SB950


Oh man, I totally missed that. Nice find!


----------



## seronx (Jun 14, 2011)

_JP_ said:


> Oh man, I totally missed that. Nice find!



I can tell you right now

if SB i7 2600K does 5pts in R11.5 and does 15s in SuperPi 4s in wPrime 32M

Do to the properties of CMT and of the Flex FPU

then AMD FX will do 10pts in R11.5 and will do 7.5s in SuperPi 2s in wPrime 32M

Clocks have to be equal though

These numbers only work in Cinebench R11.5(Once R12 or R11.6 with AVX support comes out the i7 should score the same as the FX) and SuperPi and wPrime


----------



## Nesters (Jun 14, 2011)

seronx said:


> Clocks have to be equal though



You know that different architectures doesn't have same IPC count, right?


----------



## seronx (Jun 14, 2011)

Nesters said:


> You know that different architectures doesn't have same IPC count, right?



They may be the different architectures but they output the same IPC @ 256bit

AMD FX in 128 bit and legacy is 2x faster than the i7 SB-E in 128 bit and legacy



To go in depth about IPC it is a weird story

2 thread apps will use 4 ALUs for AMD and 3 ALUs for Intel
while in 1 thread apps 2 ALUs for AMD and 1 ALU for Intel

and somehow this comes out even in IPC


----------



## seronx (Jun 19, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I can clearly tell that AMD is better because tilldeath used way more exclamation points.
> 
> Try arguing with that logic.



Less is more

You might be getting a quad-core from intel but you can damn well expect to get 8 threads and be able to overclock to 5.2GHz on a H80/H100 setup and absolutely destroy

i7 Sandy Bridge 2600K/2500K = 216 mm² <-- die size
AMD Bulldozer FX-8110/8130P = ~294 mm² <-- die size

Like come on AMD yeesh


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jun 19, 2011)

seronx said:


> Less is more
> 
> You might be getting a quad-core from intel but you can damn well expect to get 8 threads and be able to overclock to 5.2GHz on a H80/H100 setup and absolutely destroy
> 
> ...



What does die size have to do with exclamation points?


----------



## Fatal (Jun 19, 2011)

seronx said:


> Less is more
> 
> You might be getting a quad-core from intel but you can damn well expect to get 8 threads and be able to overclock to 5.2GHz on a H80/H100 setup and absolutely destroy
> 
> ...



Have you seen any thing on any new coolers for bulldozer? I guess you couldn't use old stuff to mount on it.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jun 19, 2011)

Fatal said:


> Have you seen any thing on any new coolers for bulldozer? I guess you couldn't use old stuff to mount on it.



Actually, you should be able to use your old coolers. The socket design is the same.


----------



## Fatal (Jun 19, 2011)

Cool thanks I just saw how the chips are not square and wondered about that.


----------



## Funtoss (Jun 19, 2011)

WOW, those results looks pretty good, how about the price??


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jun 19, 2011)

Funtoss said:


> WOW, those results looks pretty good, how about the price??



This is the latest rumored price list as far as I know.


----------



## Nesters (Jun 19, 2011)

That's Llano pricelist 

but there's also rumored Bulldozer price list which suggests that 8-core will cost around ~$300.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jun 19, 2011)

Nesters said:


> That's Llano pricelist
> 
> but there's also rumored Bulldozer price list which suggests that 8-core will cost around ~$300.



It's Bulldozer and Llano. Bulldozer are the last 4 on the chart


----------



## Nesters (Jun 19, 2011)

I guess i didn't get enough sleep.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jun 19, 2011)

Nesters said:


> I guess i didn't get enough sleep.



It happens to the best of us.


----------



## Fatal (Jun 20, 2011)

If those are the prices things will be sweet lol. Looks like I will build a third rig!


----------



## zpnq (Jun 22, 2011)

seronx said:


> We see the Southbridge says SB850
> 
> on a 990FX board that is impossible since 990FX is paired with SB950



afaik the sb850 and 950 are the same piece of silicon nothing is changed.  cpuz probably doesn't know the difference.


http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-sabertooth-990fx-am3-motherboard-review.html

_"It is paired with a 950 Southbridge which is nothing more than a rebadged SB850 chip"_


from the  ASUS sabertooth 990fx owners club thread over at overclock.net

_"Can anyone go into their CPUZ and under the mainboard tab see if it says SB850 or SB950? A couple of us with CHVs are hoping that it's just a bad readout and will be fixed later. It's giving us SB850."_

_CPU-Z has not updated yet they will there mite even be a new version if so post link for rep+
_

http://www.overclock.net/amd-motherboards/1035333-asus-sabertooth-990fx-owners-club-13.html


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jun 22, 2011)

zpnq said:


> afaik the sb850 and 950 are the same piece of silicon nothing is changed.  cpuz probably doesn't know the difference.
> 
> 
> http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-sabertooth-990fx-am3-motherboard-review.html
> ...



Even though I still wouldn't go so far as to call this real, that is a nice find.


----------



## seronx (Jun 22, 2011)

950 has 1 Watt over 850

that 1 watt is because the higher internal FSB

It will show SB850 with a K10
and
It will show SB950 with a Bulldozer


----------



## theeldest (Jun 22, 2011)

seronx said:


> 950 has 1 Watt over 850
> 
> that 1 watt is because the higher internal FSB
> 
> ...



Also, the 950 studied hard, took the test, and got it's license for SLI.


----------



## Nesters (Jun 25, 2011)

:? Looks like 1.55V


----------



## tilldeath (Jun 25, 2011)

looks legit to me! That being said I'm not sure what 1million super pi times are down to currently so I have no idea if this is good or not. Seem to remember an i7 2600k running 5.1ghz doing it in like 7.3 or 7.4 so if this is legit it's amazing.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 25, 2011)

clearly FLEXin some muscels there, i hope thats legit as its progress, it might sway me from patience yet.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Jun 25, 2011)

It's not amazing. He photoshoped the second digit so you have a value between 10.029 and 19.929 which is way below an i7 clocked the same.


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jun 25, 2011)

Interesting thread read-through, but I want to know, what happenned to the speculated June 20th release?!


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 25, 2011)

JrRacinFan said:


> Interesting thread read-through, but I want to know, what happenned to the speculated Juno 20th release?!



That was FUD?(but not really)

That date was pandered about before they fired Dirk right after CES. Then they said they fired him because of the lack of mobile platform support.



> AMD's board had been concerned for the past year over Meyer's seeming lack of motivation and interest in expanding the company's reach into mobile devices.



http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-20028285-92.html

Dirk, @ CES 2011, said they didn't quite have any interest in the mobile platform. Shortly after, he resigned(rumour says he was forced to do so).

Since then, we've heard, and have had confirmed, that APUs, which are intended for the mobile platforms, were coming first.

So, what happened? AMD shifted strategy, and WAAAAAY back in January.


----------



## Nesters (Jun 25, 2011)

JrRacinFan said:


> Interesting thread read-through, but I want to know, what happenned to the speculated Juno 20th release?!




Juno 19th was the speculated release date but Bulldozer is pushed back to Q3. Two possible reason - problems with early B0/B1 stepping or they can't provide enough chips for consumer demand (they're releasing both Llano and Bulldozer).

Aand yes strategy has also been changed.


----------



## v12dock (Jun 25, 2011)

B0 stepping FPU is still half clocked, expect faster super pi results.


----------



## seronx (Jun 25, 2011)

Nesters said:


> Juno 19th was the speculated release date but Bulldozer is pushed back to Q3. Two possible reason - problems with early B0/B1 stepping or they can't provide enough chips for consumer demand (they're releasing both Llano and Bulldozer).
> 
> Aand yes strategy has also been changed.



Llano is more profitable, so yes they delayed Bulldozer



v12dock said:


> B0 stepping FPU is still half clocked, expect faster super pi results.



Well more the Engineer Samples have the half fpu



Nesters said:


> http://www.eteknix.com/attachments/5201d1308958089-bd-@-4-6ghz-png/?
> 
> :? Looks like 1.55V


----------



## seronx (Jul 8, 2011)

*AMD Bulldozer Benched @ Donanimhaber*

@ http://www.donanimhaber.com/islemci...li-Bulldozer-FX-islemci-ve-test-sonuclari.htm






Donanimhaber in English

This is for discussion till the news article pops up





It is a B1 revision because of the 45
43 = A1
44 = B0
45 = B1


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 8, 2011)

http://www.donanimhaber.com/islemci...ulldozer-FX-islemcisi-icin-test-sonuclari.htm






Donanimhaber just posted a bunch of benches from an ES chip. whether these will be representative of final performance or not, I have no idea, but this chip doesn't look to great.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 8, 2011)

Hahahaha, I just dug up a dead thread to post the same thing. I didn't think it was worth a new one.

Still not very impressive though.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 8, 2011)

Damnit i can't find the fritz benchmark to compare. Anyone have it?


----------



## seronx (Jul 8, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Hahahaha, I just dug up a dead thread to post the same thing. I didn't think it was worth a new one.
> 
> Still not very impressive though.



Yes but at least we get scores this time not blacked out or inked out scores leaving us guessing lol


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 8, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> http://www.donanimhaber.com/islemci...ulldozer-FX-islemcisi-icin-test-sonuclari.htm
> 
> http://img.donanimhaber.com/ImageTh.../bulldozertest12_a_dh_fx57.jpg&p1=4&p2=0&p3=0
> 
> Donanimhaber just posted a bunch of benches from an ES chip. whether these will be representative of final performance or not, I have no idea, but this chip doesn't look to great.



Ofcourse it doesn't. Its Amd


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 8, 2011)

seronx said:


> Yes but at least we get scores this time not blacked out or inked out scores leaving us guessing lol
> 
> http://img.donanimhaber.com/thumbnails/beb797ba6d92013ab00d97fbe4c42fc3_600.jpg



True that. I just hope the real thing performs better though.


----------



## seronx (Jul 8, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> True that. I just hope the real thing performs better though.



It will but there is one thing I am liking about this benchmark






The i7 2600K only gets 100 FPS in this benchmark stock

the turbo core for this cpu is 3.2GHz->3.6GHz and with 2 modules turned off 4.2GHz






This one is a lot more credible than OBRs


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 8, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Ofcourse it doesn't. Its Amd



That was cheap.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 8, 2011)

seronx said:


> It will but there is one thing I am liking about this benchmark
> 
> http://img.donanimhaber.com/images/haber/bulldozertest7_a_dh_fx57.jpg
> 
> ...



Well, if a busted ES chip can beat Sandy in anything, I won't give up hope.


----------



## seronx (Jul 8, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Well, if a busted ES chip can beat Sandy in anything, I won't give up hope.








Now to find an SB Fritz










This crippled ES does a pretty good job in what ever Fritz and x264 workloads are


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 8, 2011)

seronx said:


> http://img.donanimhaber.com/images/haber/bulldozertest11_a_dh_fx57.jpg
> 
> Now to find an SB Fritz
> 
> ...



I guess Fritz likes cores. I'm surprised that hyperthreading puts Sandy that close to Bulldozer. This ES anyway.

It is nice to see it beating a higher clocked 2600k though.


----------



## seronx (Jul 8, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I guess Fritz likes cores. I'm surprised that hyperthreading puts Sandy that close to Bulldozer. This ES anyway.



It's slightly above Sandy and I believe Fritz and X264 are FPU benchmarks if I remember

So, equal floating point with SMT is a big big plus


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 8, 2011)

I hope we get some real info about the real chip from that event they're having on the 16th.


----------



## seronx (Jul 8, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I hope we get some real info about the real chip from that event they're having on the 16th.



Hopefully they will have the production chip on LN2 overclock it to the max so we can know the headroom of the Bulldozer


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 8, 2011)

Not very good prospects for BD, when it can only barely beat a 4 core processor in Fritz and is miles away from Intel's last gen 6 core chip. Sadly this is looking more and more like Phenom 2, a good chip (competitive) when it was released but that was destroyed soon after.

Despite the pricing no one should compare BD to Sandy and call it competitive, because BD is significantly bigger according to estimates, even 50% bigger. A pricing war is not sustainable against Sandy let alone Ivy.

Hmm next time I guess, at least they are closer now.


----------



## seronx (Jul 9, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> Not very good prospects for BD, when it can only barely beat a 4 core processor in Fritz and is miles away from Intel's last gen 6 core chip. Sadly this is looking more and more like Phenom 2, a good chip (competitive) when it was released but that was destroyed soon after.
> 
> Despite the pricing no one should compare BD to Sandy and call it competitive, because BD is significantly bigger according to estimates, even 50% bigger. A pricing war is not sustainable against Sandy let alone Ivy.
> 
> Hmm next time I guess, at least they are closer now.



It beated Sandy Bridge 2600K in
Cinebench R10
Fritz
and x264

Do take note tho that the L3 is still "broken" or underused <-- Donanimhaber


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 9, 2011)

seronx said:


> It beated Sandy Bridge 2600K in
> Cinebench R10
> Fritz
> and x264
> ...



All of them very sensitive to number of cores and not very representative of real world performance anyway. 2600k is faster than 980X in most real world applications while it's significantly slower on these.

6 core Intel chips will simply rape 8 core BD in raw performance and perf/die area and the sooner we get used to this idea the better. I don't like shattered expectations.

AMD is going to price BD very competitively but the only thing Intel needs to do is lower prices, the same way they did against Phenom 2. It's time to be realistic.


----------



## seronx (Jul 9, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> All of them very sensitive to number of cores and not very representative of real world performance anyway. 2600k is faster than 980X in most real world applications while it's significantly slower on these.
> 
> 6 core Intel chips will simply rape 8 core BD in raw performance and perf/die area and the sooner we get used to this idea the better. I don't like shattered expectations.
> 
> AMD is going to price BD very competitively but the only thing Intel needs to do is lower prices, the same way they did against Phenom 2. It's time to be realistic.



You do realize this is an engineer sample right lol

Engineer sample = quality issues and lower clock they only need it to function

Production sample = Binned higher and higher clock and can function out of spec


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 9, 2011)

seronx said:


> You do realize this is an engineer sample right lol



Bah, I've heard the same thing over and over. Engineering samples have been used in the past and have ALWAYS represented actual performnce with very small variations. You can hope for 10% more performance from production chips. Realistically you can expect 300 mhz more from them. How many ES samples with different revisions have we seen alredy? And all of them show similar performace for BD. This is B1, the other chips was arguably A0 or A1, or you constantly defended that idea anyway. When exactly are we supposed to see the huge magical improvement. Leaks from china using ES have been very accurate in the past. Until I see some facts that point in the other direction I will mantain my expectations low.

Like I said it's time to be realistic. I'd like AMD to beat Intel as much as anyone else but evidences point in the absolute opposite direction. Selling any other idea other than that is simply misleading other users and at your rate of posting you are almost starting to sound like AMD PR staff.


----------



## seronx (Jul 9, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> Bah, I've heard the same thing over and over. Engineering samples have been used in the past and have ALWAYS represented actual performnce with very small variations. You can hope for 10% more performance from production chips. Realistically you can expect 300 mhz more from them. How many ES samples with different revisions have we seen alredy? And all of them show similar performace for BD. This is B1, the other chips was arguably A0 or A1, or you constantly defended that idea anyway. When exactly are we supposed to see the huge magical improvement. Leaks from china using ES have been very accurate in the past. Until I see some facts that point in the other direction I will mantain my expectations low.
> 
> Like I said it's time to be realistic. I'd like AMD to beat Intel as much as anyone else but evidences point in the absolute opposite direction. Selling any other idea other than that is simply misleading other users and at your rate of posting you are almost starting to sound like AMD PR staff.



I'll be pretty damn realistic

*You're wrong*

AMD is going to beat intel with this and it already does

Fritz/x264/Cinebench R10

Cinebench R10 doesn't even use the latest SSE! lol

Bulldozer based on this is very close to completion

Memory is still a problem but everything else is fixed

These scores might seem mediocre to you

But, they are amazing
an AMD CPU finally beating SMT


----------



## erocker (Jul 9, 2011)

I'm not impressed with the posts in this thread at all. Reading most of them I feel like* I LOSE*. I mean, I love FUD information as much as the next guy, but what I really like seeing are people getting worked up over it. Now that's internet gold.


----------



## seronx (Jul 9, 2011)

erocker said:


> I'm not impressed with the posts in this thread at all. Reading most of them I feel like* I LOSE*. I mean, I love FUD information as much as the next guy, but what I really like seeing are people getting worked up over it. Now that's internet gold.



Lol, FUD what?
Fear -> Bulldozer excels in what it does so no fear
Uncertainty -> We know it's a Bulldozer and it's B1 W8K45 

8 means 8 core and 45 means B1

Doubt -> I can see this one because of the memory(L1-L3) issue no doubt on the benchmark run 8 threads goes perfectly against 8 threads

But we already know the memory issue will be fixed no doubt there

It's not FUD and it is the closest to what we got

I can't even read the 3DMark


----------



## erocker (Jul 9, 2011)

seronx said:


> But we already know the memory issue will be fixed no doubt there



Do we and is it really an issue?


----------



## seronx (Jul 9, 2011)

erocker said:


> Do we and



We do and


erocker said:


> is it really an issue?



It won't be because we won't be sold that issue

We are getting the production model which is binned a lot higher over this B1

Scores only go up!


----------



## PaulieG (Jul 9, 2011)

I really do hope that AMD pulls this off. It would be an extraordinary to see them beat the power that SB brings to the table. However, I'm not gonna get all excited since we don't even know if this info is REAL. If it is, I'll be happy to say hello to AMD again.


----------



## seronx (Jul 9, 2011)

Paulieg said:


> However, I'm not gonna get all excited since we don't even know if this info is REAL.



It is real but it is not the final processor

The asus leak told us we the consumers will be able to buy 3.6GHz->4.0GHz FX-8110
and 3.8GHz-4.2GHz FX-8130P

The P after research means it is the highest binned version, so if you can get away with the 8110 and OC it to whatever the ceiling is(got to wait till the reviews are out) then bam!

Because if the 8110 can OC to the 8130P OC clocks then there is no point to spend that extra $40

Reason I am excited is because these scores are below what we are actually going to get

You will see this when the Reviews come out


----------



## ShiBDiB (Jul 9, 2011)

seronx said:


> It is real but it is not the final processor
> 
> The asus leak told us we the consumers will be able to buy 3.6GHz->4.0GHz FX-8110
> and 3.8GHz-4.2GHz FX-8130P
> ...



How are u still allowed to post here... Last I read pulling info out of ur ass was frowned upon.


----------



## seronx (Jul 9, 2011)

ShiBDiB said:


> How are u still allowed to post here... Last I read pulling info out of ur ass was frowned upon.



I am not pulling info out of my ass unfortunately







The clocks are
3.8GHz->4.2GHz
3.6GHz->4.0GHz
3.6GHz
3.6GHz
Turbo cores for the last two are unknown and can be higher than the 8000s but they also can be the same


----------



## ShiBDiB (Jul 9, 2011)

seronx said:


> I am not pulling info out of my ass unfortunately
> 
> http://news.mydrivers.com/Img/20110522/01290849.jpg
> 
> ...



So U just broke an NDA by distributing information... bringing attention to a legitimate forum.. Go you


----------

