AMD FX-8130P Processor Benchmarks Surface

[erocker]

Let's keep on topic, shall we?

 

[Thatguy]

Nobody said life is fair, but if we are allowed enough time, we will master everything.

nothing like human arrogance, we aren't smart enough. deal with it.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Let's keep on topic, shall we?

Sorry about that.

Still waiting for final silicon to pass judgement on Bulldozer.

 

[seronx]

Let's keep on topic, shall we?

Topic is pretty much

Zambezi ES FX-8130P beats i7 2600K

Engineer Sample beats Retail Sample of competition



I think the effects haven't harvested much other than

ZOMG! AMD Zambezi has weaker scores in Super Pi/AIDA64 than my Sandy Bridge trolololol
(Not everyone is like this but majority is which is saddening)
Which might or might not be fixed by Retail

 

[ensabrenoir]

http://i1090.photobucket.com/albums/i365/Damn_Smooth/Frye.png

man throw in a super model and add a couple of explosions and this would b more entertaining than any summer block buster.

 

[Pestilence]

Are you fucking high ? seriously ? IGP to IGP who in their right mind would have said such a thing ? AMD can't produce silicon to meet the demand, why do you think bulldozer is delayed ? LACK OF FAB CAPACITY

AMD's 3rd/4th quarter profits are gonna be sweet

IGP to IGP? Buhahahahahahaha. Who gives a shit about the IGP's? People who can't afford to buy a 100 dollar GTX 460?

 

[Pestilence]

Topic is pretty much

Zambezi ES FX-8130P beats i7 2600K

Engineer Sample beats Retail Sample of competition



I think the effects haven't harvested much other than

ZOMG! AMD Zambezi has weaker scores in Super Pi/AIDA64 than my Sandy Bridge trolololol
(Not everyone is like this but majority is which is saddening)
Which might or might not be fixed by Retail

Your Fanboyism is showing

 

[seronx]

Your Fanboyism is showing

But it is true this Zambesi ES 8130P beats the Intel i7 2600K

In Intel "Biased" benchmarks(majority; lol)

 

[Pestilence]

But it is true this Zambesi ES 8130P beats the Intel i7 2600K

In Intel "Biased" benchmarks(majority; lol)

8 core vs 4 core.. I hope it does.

I can totally see Intel dropping prices on 1155 to make room for lower priced 2011. Thank you AMD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Come to MEEEEE 6 Core Sandy Bridge E!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[seronx]

8 core vs 4 core.. I hope it does.

I can totally see Intel dropping prices on 1155 to make room for lower priced 2011. Thank you AMD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Come to MEEEEE 6 Core Sandy Bridge E!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually that isn't really true

Intel has 8 cores but doesn't advertise it that way
they have a cpu core than can touch resources twice

AMD has 4 modules but doesn't advertise it that way
they have a two integer clusters(cores) that can touch resources twice

See what I did
CMT and SMT are the same thing trying to do it different ways

In reality beyond what AMD and Intel says

Microsoft is the actual resource to find out the exact amount of cores/threads/integer clusters there are

and Microsoft says

Intel's i7 2600K has 8 CORES/INTEGER CLUSTERS/THREADS
AMD 8130P-ES Zambezi has 8 CORES/INTEGER CLUSTERS/THREADS

They won't lower prices for LGA 2011
they will when Zambezi launches but who wants a weak CPU with a weak IGP pimple?

It is 12 cores not 6 cores

You have to go by what the third party says not what the first party says

 

[Pestilence]

Actually that isn't really true

Intel has 8 cores but doesn't advertise it that way
they have a cpu core than can touch resources twice

AMD has 4 modules but doesn't advertise it that way
they have a two integer clusters(cores) that can touch resources twice

See what I did
CMT and SMT are the same thing trying to do it different ways

In reality beyond what AMD and Intel says

Microsoft is the actual resource to find out the exact amount of cores/threads/integer clusters there are

and Microsoft says

Intel's i7 2600K has 8 CORES/INTEGER CLUSTERS/THREADS
AMD 8130P-ES Zambezi has 8 CORES/INTEGER CLUSTERS/THREADS

They won't lower prices for LGA 2011
they will when Zambezi launches but who wants a weak CPU with a weak IGP pimple?

It is 12 cores not 6 cores

You have to go by what the third party says not what the first party says

If Intel dropped the 2600K's price to 279.99 and the 2500K to 189.99 then that's playing the "Value" card that Amd has played for so long.

There's also advantages to SB over BD even if BD is faster in multithreaded apps which it better be.



Also still holding out for a 2100K

 

[seronx]

If Intel dropped the 2600K's price to 279.99 and the 2500K to 189.99 then that's playing the "Value" card that Amd has played for so long.

There's also advantages to SB over BD even if BD is faster in multithreaded apps which it better be.

Also still holding out for a 2100K

There is no advantages for SB

Everything is multithreaded in the real world these days
(Even the Windows OS, it schedules threads for most applications)

only the 2500K and 2600K have unlocked multiplier and the price drop won't be that big

FX-4110 is $220 max
FX-6110 is $240 max
FX-8110 is $280 max
FX-8130P is $320 max
On the price rumor/speculation list

And if the FX CPUs have a PCI-E Controller you know what is going to out perform in GPU performance

and to get back into the discussion of 4 SMT cores vs 8 CMT Cores

8 Cores is generally better in this case
AMD Cores can query the FPU twice(FPU is SMTish)(2 FP per clock)

While SMT Cores are stuck with 256 bit ADD or MUL and 128 bit ADD or MUL (1 FP per Clock)

Both have 4 Floating Point units but only 1 can mimic 8(*cough*AMD*cough*)

and what was that?

Intel is vouching for 256 bit but we all know

Bigger isn't better

 

[Pestilence]

There is no advantages for SB

Now i know you're delusional

1. IPC

Clock for clock, core for core amd can't compete which is why they throw more cores at it. Amd has even said "First 8 core desktop processor" and who am i to argue with that? You can make all the excuses you want but Hyperthreading is not a real core so it is in essence a 4c/8t vs 8c/8t debate. What page was that gaming comparo on? I remember quite fondly the 4Ghz 8 core BD getting its ass handed to it by a 980X which is slower then a 2600K in gaming. BD may win in cinebench but in gaming it's not even going to be close.

2. TDP's

80W vs 130W

Amd can "Say" that the 8 cores will have 130W TDP's but lets not even kid ourselves. The ES was 180W, Thuban was 150W even tho it was labeled a 130W and BD is easily going to be a 130W to 150W processor. Sandy Bridge on the other hand runs as cool as ice. Before you comment "It's 95W and not 80W". In the P67 chipset the IGP is disabled bringing TDP down to 80W. SB also clocks to 5Ghz on air. Think BD is going to do the same?


Shall i go on? It's Intel were talking about here. So they get beat in mainsteam by amd's top of the line processors. It's not that big of a deal. With 2011 and IB looming. All BD does for me is lower prices on 2011 which i'm anxiously awaiting. Mmmm Quad channel DDR3 2400

 

[seronx]

Now i know you're delusional

I ready through several pages of JF-AMD comments, I might be

1. IPC

Clock for clock, core for core amd can't compete which is why they throw more cores at it. Amd has even said "First 8 core desktop processor" and who am i to argue with that? You can make all the excuses you want but Hyperthreading is not a real core so it is in essence a 4c/8t vs 8c/8t debate. What page was that gaming comparo on? I remember quite fondly the 4Ghz 8 core BD getting its ass handed to it by a 980X which is slower then a 2600K in gaming. BD may win in cinebench but in gaming it's not even going to be close.

IPC doesn't matter when efficiency sucks
Zambezi is going to be the most efficient x86/x86-64 core on the market

Zambezi can use all of the IPC allocated to it
Phenom II couldn't
Nehalem couldn't
Sandy Bridge couldn't
but Zambezi can

2. TDP's

80W vs 130W

Amd can "Say" that the 8 cores will have 130W TDP's but lets not even kid ourselves. The ES was 180W, Thuban was 150W even tho it was labeled a 130W and BD is easily going to be a 130W to 150W processor. Sandy Bridge on the other hand runs as cool as ice. Before you comment "It's 95W and not 80W". In the P67 chipset the IGP is disabled bringing TDP down to 80W. SB also clocks to 5Ghz on air. Think BD is going to do the same?

First off, Intel's TDP is different from AMD's TDP
Intel TDP is average heat
AMD TDP is worst possible scenario

TDP on both sides doesn't equal power consumption as far as I know(It might be for Intel to make it easier for people to understand)

Zambezi Engineer Samples has been already proven to hit 5.1GHz on air 4.8GHz 100% stable on air all by OBR who I trust actually has Engineer Samples
That is on a Zambezi with a TDP of 185 @ stock clocks! overclocking that to 4.8GHz and only AMD knows, that overclocked TDP is probably 250+ TDP if it can handle those high temperatures on such a leaky silicon factor imagine how high it clocks on not so leaky production silicon

It is easier to consider AMD using intel's TDP factor being average heat even though it is in fact worst possible heat that can be produced at stock

and the fact that there is two eight core Zambezi's
8130P 3.8GHz@ 125 Watt TDP
8110 3.6GHz@ 95 Watt TDP

says the 8110 is the one grabbing the throat of the i7 2600K

and they are both overclockable

Shall i go on? It's Intel were talking about here. So they get beat in mainsteam by amd's top of the line processors. It's not that big of a deal. With 2011 and IB looming. All BD does for me is lower prices on 2011 which i'm anxiously awaiting. Mmmm Quad channel DDR3 2400

Have you looked up the technical specs of Zambezi?

It's integrated IMC has optimizations to make it perform like a tri-channel this isn't theoretical it is 100% real

The IMC got a 50% increase in performance not 30% what most people have thought

Screw buying a $600(Min possible) CPU

Unless, you are a Rockefeller, good luck

 

[btarunr]

Fun thread trivia. Someone has 50 posts in this thread (r)

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Fun thread trivia. Someone has 50 posts in this thread (r)

$10 on Seronx.

Edit: Should have checked the link. I was right though.

 

[seronx]

Fun thread trivia. Someone has 50 posts in this thread (r)

Well, I did take the time to translate 164 pages of nonsense into info I can use

Most websites have 164 pages worth of Bulldozer Rumors/Speculation/All other stuff

JF-AMD gives us hints here and there, and I tend to infer to them

But this is the most leaked, talked, and mourned over CPU since the "Hammers"

When he talks or refers or infers to the Client products...he is mostly right

I vist AMDZone sometimes just to see if those engineers are talking about stuff(Bulldozer)

I visit other places and learn more and more

and the more we get closer to the due date of Zambezi the more DATA I can find and exploit(learn from)

and I love typing and flaunting my intelligence

Most of my information are those from
I trust to either have/ know what they are talking about / or it is given to me directly through past references like PowerPoint Slides or leaked NDA documents

I also have alot more free time to look up stuff than most people

What I know:

1. Zambezi is a High IPC and High Clock design
The high IPC comes from the efficiency of the design, The high clock is because of less components in the design some items are shared thus less heat

2. Zambezi performance isn't final till it releases

These leaks only tell us what Zambezi will perform at that current time when it is slowly getting more and more supported and tweaked/fixed

3. Zambezi price isn't official but we do not need to worry as it will be a "cheap" processor to buy

Leaks say $220-$320
AMD says Cheap

4. Zambezi is the start of AMDs Tick-Tock Cycle

AMD uses an inverse of Intel's Tick-Tock Cycle

Zambezi 32nm HKMG -> Komodo 32nm HKMG -> NGBD 22nm Dark Silicon? HKMG maybe
2011 -> 2012 -> 2013

(Speculation on the Dark Silicon)

5. Server Products =/= Client Products

$10 on Seronx.

Edit: Should have checked the link. I was right though.

Like anyone would bet $10 that it wouldn't be

and like Zambezi's performance my post count increases over time

 

[cadaveca]

First off, Intel's TDP is different from AMD's TDP
Intel TDP is average heat
AMD TDP is worst possible scenario

WRONG. You got it backwards. AMD uses "ACP", not TDP. In fact, my 1100T draws 150w @ stock clocks, not the 125w.

 

[sneekypeet]

...
But this is the most leaked, talked, and mourned over CPU since the "Hammers"

I love typing and flaunting my intelligence

I also have alot more free time to look up stuff than most people

What I know:....

What i know....

You seem to be the one talking about it more than most, actually every time there is a lull in this thread, it seems you make it a point to put it on top

so you can talk more

Typing and intelligence in the same sentence that is in with broken lines, no punctuation, and double spacing pointless drivel to look more

important

We obviously know you have a ton of time from your round the clock posts on anything related to AMD:shadedshu

Lastly (and I made sure to look as important as you with my double spacing) i find you highly irritating and manipulative to justify whatever stance it

is you want to talk about to keep these threads alive. At this point when I see your posts in the list i know to follow behind with a broom a dustpan

and wait to close or mend yet another FUD AMD thread.

 

[seronx]

WRONG. You got it backwards. AMD uses "ACP", not TDP. In fact, my 1100T draws 150w @ stock clocks, not the 125w.

I'll just say you are right for this(I don't need to quote things to say you are right, right?)((Before this both companies used CPU Busting Programs to figure out TDP now they use weird Algorithms before P4/Athlon days)
ACP and TDP for K10h CPUs are skewered(and heck they don't call it TDP anymore it is just Wattage to them)

They might continue to be skewered on words to K15h(Zambezi)

AMD CPUs have qwacky TDPs, not all chips are the same

and it doesn't help they use programs to find out TDP(AMD)

Well we know the max voltage supported by AMD for Thuban is 1.475 and the max Amp is 110A for stock
K10.5h E0 Thuban:
1.475x110 Amps = 162.25 Watts so you have some room to go
K15h B1 Zambezi ES:
1.404x145 Amps = 203.58 Watts

It's easier to calculate consumption

Both Intel and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) have defined TDP as the maximum power consumption for thermally significant periods running worst-case non-synthetic workloads. Thus, TDP is not the actual maximum power of the processor.

In some cases the TDP has been under-estimated such that in real applications (typically strenuous, such as video encoding or games) the CPU has exceeded the TDP.

1. For a given device, operating at a higher clock rate always requires more power. Reducing the clock rate of the microprocessor through power management when possible reduces energy consumption.
2. New features generally require more transistors, each of which uses power. Turning unused areas off saves energy, such as through clock gating.
3. As a processor model's design matures, smaller transistors, lower-voltage structures, and design experience may reduce energy consumption.

TDP is usually 20% - 30% lower than the CPU maximum power dissipation

TDP is not the maximum power the CPU may generate - there may be periods of time when the CPU dissipates more power than designed, in which case either the CPU temperature will rise closer to the maximum, or special CPU circuitry will activate and add idle cycles or reduce CPU frequency with the intent of reducing the amount of generated power.

The TDP also doesn't necessarily mean that a specific CPU model will consume that much current in real usage scenarios.

But the idea is that

Intel over estimates since i7

AMD under estimates since Barcelona

...

And you contribute NOTHING!

 

[btarunr]

Lol TDP ≠ chip's power consumption.

 

[seronx]

Lol TDP ≠ chip's power consumption.

Truth

But it doesn't help that

Cads Phenom II under heavy load pushes in 150 Watts when rated 125 Watts

and his Sandy Bridge with the iGPU turned off pushes in 65 watts when rated for 80~? Watts

It is under heavy load right?

Under Estimation and Over Estimation

In this case AMD is closer to the definition of TDP but it isn't the max TDP

 

[brandonwh64]

Topic is pretty much

Zambezi ES FX-8130P beats i7 2600K

Engineer Sample beats Retail Sample of competition



I think the effects haven't harvested much other than

ZOMG! AMD Zambezi has weaker scores in Super Pi/AIDA64 than my Sandy Bridge trolololol
(Not everyone is like this but majority is which is saddening)
Which might or might not be fixed by Retail

Ive went through 12 pages of penis softening non sense and still don't see what you posted were this magical chip beats a SB? was it oced and the SB stock? Also please stop the AMD hard on rage until the REAL chips come out and someone can properly bench them that is not a complete moron.

Numbers and pictures CAN be faked.

 

[pantherx12]

and his Sandy Bridge with the iGPU turned off pushes in 65 watts when rated for 80~? Watts

It is under heavy load right?

Under Estimation and Over Estimation

In this case AMD is closer to the definition of TDP but it isn't the max TDP

Protip: The IGP is included in the tdp rating, so it's not underestimated at all it's probably right on.

 

[Thatguy]

IGP to IGP? Buhahahahahahaha. Who gives a shit about the IGP's? People who can't afford to buy a 100 dollar GTX 460?

Compare the number of discrete cards versus the number or OEM prebuilts sold everyday and tell me again that IGP doesn't matter.