Monday, July 11th 2011
AMD FX-8130P Processor Benchmarks Surface
Here is a tasty scoop of benchmark results purported to be those of the AMD FX-8130P, the next high-end processor from the green team. The FX-8130P was paired with Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 motherboard and 4 GB of dual-channel Kingston HyperX DDR3-2000 MHz memory running at DDR3-1866 MHz. A GeForce GTX 580 handled the graphics department. The chip was clocked at 3.20 GHz (16 x 200 MHz). Testing began with benchmarks that aren't very multi-core intensive, such as Super Pi 1M, where the chip clocked in at 19.5 seconds; AIDA64 Cache and Memory benchmark, where L1 cache seems to be extremely fast, while L2, L3, and memory performance is a slight improvement over the last generation of Phenom II processors.
Moving on to multi-threaded tests, Fritz Chess yielded a speed-up of over 29.5X over the set standard, with 14,197 kilonodes per second. x264 benchmark encoded first pass at roughly 136 fps, with roughly 45 fps in the second pass. The system scored 3045 points in PCMark7, and P6265 in 3DMark11 (performance preset). The results show that this chip will be highly competitive with Intel's LGA1155 Sandy Bridge quad-core chips, but as usual, we ask you to take the data with a pinch of salt.
Source:
DonanimHaber
317 Comments on AMD FX-8130P Processor Benchmarks Surface
As for overclocking. Sandy Bridge processors are 95W TDP's, BD 8 core is 140W. Which do you think is going to have an easier time overclocking?By 1% to 2% ser. There will be no miracle 10% gains.
I personally blame the core to core performance "weakness" to the fact that in the test all 8 cores were used to the max, while a core to core performance should be tested using a single threaded application.
Maybe there's a memory bottleneck as they might be using slower DDR3, or the E. sample is configured for memory compatibility mode or something that degrades performance like that.
For those speculating about price, the chip being 32nm will make the price competitive and still be redituable for AMD.
Things look pretty good if those figures are for real.
A "fast enough" AMD CPU + mobo with nice amenities is roughly $250.
A "fast enough" Intel CPU + mobo with nice amenities is closer to $300.
In total system cost (if you're pairing it up with a $100 case, $80 PSU, $200 GPU, and $60 for 8GB of RAM) $50 isn't all THAT much. It's actually in non-gaming applications that AMD gets a performance lead with highly-threaded apps. Audio/video production, for example.
OTOH, I'm very hopeful that default clocks are higher than 3.2GHz.
L2 and L3 were below-par what they were expectingFX-8130P 3.8GHz
FX-8110 3.6GHz
Regardless, 3.8GHz Bulldozer would be good news. Hell, I'd still OC the crap out of a 3.2GHz Zambezi and be happy.Link? Also, the cache bandwidth tests already look pretty reasonable.That's just...not true...based on every published review. For example: here
And people that are comparing core for core, I don't think that's a valid comparison, since the "cores" in the modules aren't very similar to the real cores that we know (and AFAIK BD "core" has less transistors than Phenom II core).
edit: they need to be honest and talk about it to the public as a 4-core with an enhanced form of SMT - there's more hardware duplication than HyperThreading, but it's not 8 full-blown CPU cores.
Memory Bandwidth is higher and Latency is lower on AMD Chips always over Intel
AMD doesn't have a prefetcher/predictor
Zambezi does but how it works I don't knowIt is a full blown 8 core it is just that while they were looking away Intel caught up to CMP performance heck in CMP performance intel destroyed Phenom IIs just look at the i5 2500K vs Phenom II 980 BE
10 to 30 percent from just a new stepping? Not a chance Imo.
Don't get me wrong. I really want Bulldozer to be competitive. Really, truly, with all my heart. But I'm not going to delude myself into thinking there's a magical performance improvement coming without higher clocks. If, when the reviews FINALLY come, there's extra performance to be had, I'm totally a winner since this is the platform I'm betting on with my own money.
Stepping will only be 5% at least 10% at most but could be 30% if there is more tweaks, by C0 30% will be hit absolute
Engineer is 3.2GHz
Consumer Grade is 3.6-3.8GHz(8110-8130P)
All FX Chips are unlocked so who cares about 8130Ps
I feel technically bad about the competition good luck overclocking your Multiplier Locked LGA 2011 4-cores and 6-cores
30% improvement in performance is only 55-60% over Phenom II 1100T in real world don't get your socks overblown yeesh
and to get back on the L2 and L3
They want the 2MB L2 to have the same latencies at a 256KB Intel L2 but with 8x the capacity
They want the 8MB L3 to do the same as the L3 is divided up in to portions of the module to help module communication
Do you work for AMD? You may have access to information I don't in that case. Otherwise I've been reading the same stuff as you - plenty of great writeups by incredibly smart people and nothing that I can find anywhere says anything that you're saying. Lots of people are reading and writing, and I'm more apt to believe what's been repeated over and over.
1.) Bulldozer in general is not a full 8 cores
2.) AMD's memory theoretical bandwidth numbers are lower than Nehalem and Sandy Bridge. And they're not THAT far off of theoretical maxes; roughly 25% short or so.
3.) They're just theoretical numbers. Nothing actually uses memory bandwidth like that anyway.
Particularly, Kanter's awesome writeup (the RealWorldTech link) goes to great lengths to say specifically the opposite of what you're saying. There's tons of intelligently-shared resources.
Do you hear me Intel? We just want a 6 core. We don't NEED HT
2.) AMD's memory theoretical bandwidth numbers are substantially higher than Nehalem and Sandy Bridge
3.) Exactly but Applications can use AMD's memory to the theoretical limit unlike the competition
There is a big improvement to the NB and IMC in Zambezi a HUGE Improvement we won't see it till consumer grade
(From Phenom II "Black Edition" -> Zambezi "FX Black Edition Vision FX" Processors
I'm not an employee or work for AMD I just been looking a lot longer
Zambezi is damn as hell competing lol
The only LGA 2011 processor that is going to be unlocked is the Extreme Edition one($600-$1000)
I think your claim in #2 is that Zambezi supports DDR3-1866, and technically it does. The benchmarks show time and time again that it's irrelevant because Sandy Bridge + Nehalem both actually wring more bandwidth out of DDR3-1333 and DDR3-1600.