Editorial Bulldozer Beats Politicians As The Biggest Fail

[btarunr]

On our front page, we placed a poll in mid-September, ahead of AMD FX Processor family launch (based on the "Bulldozer" architecture). Based on the most plausible specifications and the hype surrounding the products at the time, we had a hunch that neither Bulldozer nor Sandy Bridge-E will meet our readers' expectations. AMD FX Processor family turned out to be a Duke Nukem Forever, clogged in the pipeline for too long (since 2007, as a matter of fact), when it came out, it made a mockery of itself. It's barely faster than its previous generation.

Sandy Bridge-E promised to be a pin-up processor platform that's eons faster than its predecessor, its specs-sheets warranted its hype. As it turns out, although they're the fastest processors, they aren't much faster than previous-generation Westmere six-core chips at multi-threaded applications, and aren't much faster than Sandy Bridge LGA1155 Core i7 processors at gaming and serial loads. We set out to find out which would turn out to be a bigger "fail" (failure, in internet jargon). To stuff the poll up with more options, we experimented with the idea of placing a seemingly-unbeatable poll option "Our Politicians", just to see if either of the two could fail so hard, that politicians end up better. The myth that politicians always win at a failing contest is busted, at least in this case.



At the time of counting today, "Bulldozer" edged past "Our Politicians". The graph above shows the trend of voting chronologically. At the start of polling, people were evenly optimistic about both Bulldozer and Sandy Bridge-E. Politicians were off to a flying start, and although there were a few spikes, their votes per day figure was decreasing. Then by the 7th of October, votes began to increase for Bulldozer (around the time when unofficial benchmark results were doing rounds, reviewers had samples at hand). On 12th October (AMD FX launch day), Bulldozer got a Noah's flood of fail votes. People weren't expecting Bulldozer to be a Sandy Bridge-E killer, but they were at least expecting it to outperform Intel's LGA1155 platform. That was not to be. Despite not really bringing shock and awe to the table that its specifications Sandy Bridge-E managed to be the fastest processors money can buy. This ensured that Sandy Bridge-E didn't fare badly in our poll, few thought it was a fail. Sarah Michelle Gellar? Well, apparently people tolerate her provided they mute their TVs.

In before dragons and grammar tutors.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[qubit]

Yeah, I'm not surprised that Bulldozer "won" - all the reviews have come out as either fail or "meh". In particular, Custom PC magazine's review finished with "It's a stinker" and that's a direct quote.

Unfortunately, I think we're back to the era of incremental performance improvements for each CPU generation. This is driven in part by the lack of competition from AMD and the fact that even a low end CPU runs everyday tasks and 3D games very well - even the failed Bulldozer. Just look at the Early Ivy Bridge benchies I wrote about. It's also barely faster than a stock Sandy Bridge CPU.

 

[_JP_]

Well that was entertaining. I was expecting the politicians to live up to their names, but I guess in a tech world, that couldn't happen anyway. Good job.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

bit harsh but it deffinately wasnt win soo.. and i wouldnt listen to a word custom pc has to say bout anything bit tec sites a bit shit and the custom pc mag is just some stuff off that, robbing gets.

come on politicians win hands down have they cut all your tax or sumat

 

[RejZoR]

On the other hand AMD Fusion is pure win so AMD is kinda neutral for me.

 

[Kaleid]

I disagree. The amount of work which is put into politics by so many, with incredibly much money put into it politicians are unbeatable when it comes to a let down.

 

[qubit]

I disagree. The amount of work which is put into politics by so many, with incredibly much money put into it politicians are unbeatable when it comes to a let down.

Yeah, I have to agree there.

Look at it this way: Bulldozer is simply a failed effort of one company to compete with another. It's a real shame and the marketplace is much more lacklustre because of it, but it's hardly a crime.

Politicians on the other hand... well, where the f* do I start? Incompetence, greed and corruption, which affects all our lives negatively and significantly, rules most of what they do. Therefore, they should be the clear hands down winner.

 

[Neuromancer]

C:\tru.dat

 

[Suhidu]

I agree that the politicians are the worst. They all say they're qualified and right for the job, but it seems to me that most of them are a FP Unit short of deserving their title if y'know what I mean.

 

[Fx]

this poll fails. nothing can even start to compare to the epic failures that our politicians have beset us with

...perhaps AMD and Intel know something that we dont about W8 and have made designs changes to harness the new potential

 

[HalfAHertz]

Not *MY* politicians...nothing can come even close to their epic level of fail...Thank you Bta for this amusing poll

 

[KainXS]

depends, if your talking about US politicians, then this is wrong as they almost all are greedy failers.

 

[ensabrenoir]

No matter what or who by definition politicians will deceive/ betray.Their fail is expected. Bulldozer was the underdog/peoples company battling the evil empire. Their deception/fail was greater. Amplified by fanboy claims of bd trouncing sbe and the x58's. Amd could've quelled the hype and lessened the blow but they didn't.

 

[qubit]

depends, if your talking about US politicians, then this is wrong as they are hardworking, decent people who only look after their electorate's interests.

Fixed.

j/k lol

 

[dicobalt]

Will AMD acknowledge this information? Will AMD adopt a tick tock strategy to repair Bulldozer by adding better prediction, macro ops, and proper cache? Will AMD help GlobalFoundries so they deliver a competitive process in which to manufacture these repaired Bulldozer chips?

All this and more will be revealed in the next few years.

 

[Frick]

Meh blahblahblahl. Coming from a techsite it's not a big surprise.

 

[ensabrenoir]

Will AMD acknowledge this information? Will AMD adopt a tick tock strategy to repair Bulldozer by adding better prediction, macro ops, and proper cache? Will AMD help GlobalFoundries so they deliver a competitive process in which to manufacture these repaired Bulldozer chips?

All this and more will be revealed in the next few years.

Wont bulldozer be replaced by then....

 

[Yellow&Nerdy?]

This is driven in part by the lack of competition from AMD and the fact that even a low end CPU runs everyday tasks and 3D games very well - even the failed Bulldozer. Just look at the Early Ivy Bridge benchies I wrote about. It's also barely faster than a stock Sandy Bridge CPU.

Yes, Ivy Bridge won't perform better clock for clock (since it's the same architecture), but it will most definitely cut down heat output and power usage, and probably offer higher overclocks than Sandy Bridge.

What we have in Bulldozer is a CPU with on-par/worse clock for clock performance than the previous generation CPU's, with higher power usage, even though it was 32nm. That's no improvement at all, not even incremental.

 

[qubit]

Yes, Ivy Bridge won't perform better clock for clock (since it's the same architecture), but it will most definitely cut down heat output and power usage, and probably offer higher overclocks than Sandy Bridge.

Yes, that sounds about right. That's why I'm not waiting for it.

What we have in Bulldozer is a CPU with on-par/worse clock for clock performance than the previous generation CPU's, with higher power usage, even though it was 32nm. That's no improvement at all, not even incremental.

Indeed, the buggers have gone backwards. :shadedshu The big cheeses should have had the balls to pull the plug on the design when it became clear that it was going to be such an epic fail. No wonder so many of those cheeses got pushed out recently.

 

[Frick]

What we have in Bulldozer is a CPU with on-par/worse clock for clock performance than the previous generation CPU's, with higher power usage, even though it was 32nm. That's no improvement at all, not even incremental.

Except the few cases where it's on par with SB (didn't we talk about this for like a month?). That's the problem with BD, the low points is VERY low and the high points are actually not that bad. Too spread out.

But qubit have a point actually, even my in modern computing "modest" system is for what I do with it almost overkill, and that includes gaming (at 1280x1024). For home users the power race is almost irrelevant.

 

[ensabrenoir]

The thing that woulddnt die

Smell a bd thread take over cooking....

 

[badtaylorx]

why the hell doesnt amd after this major fail......just put out a 32nm phenomII

in heinsight would it not out perform bulldozer???

 

[dicobalt]

Wont bulldozer be replaced by then....

Not if Athlon64 and Phenom are any indicators of what AMD plans to do. In recent years AMD has been terribly slow to improve their chips. If they do manage to repair Bulldozer I would not consider the repaired CPU as being Bulldozer, but what Bulldozer should have been in the first place. It is going to take a whole lot of engineering work to do that and I just don't see it happening quickly enough.

 

[qubit]

Not if Athlon64 and Phenom are any indicators of what AMD plans to do. In recent years AMD has been terribly slow to improve their chips. If they do manage to repair Bulldozer I would not consider the repaired CPU as being Bulldozer, but what Bulldozer should have been in the first place. It is going to take a whole lot of engineering work to do that and I just don't see it happening quickly enough.

Yes, indeed. You may be interested in this news article: Bulldozer Aims For 50% Improvement By 2014: Is This Really Enough To Counter Intel?

 

[cadaveca]

Neither BD nor SB-E are fail, in my opinion.


What IS fail, is the marketing surrounding them.


It's clear to me, personally, that both AMD and Intel are having issues with the current silicon node. P67 was recalled, X79 is missing drive functionality(P67 nearly killed it's own drive controller, so this issue with X79 is far worse than portrayed.), SB-E chips themselves aren't fully functional, and seemingly, BD missed it's clock target.

Ok, so there are real physical problems that led to the current situation, but at no point has AMD or INtel ever conveyed that there was any problems. They just hype'd away, not realizing that they hyped away customer satisfaction.

I have always been a proponent of OEMs being more transparent, and more honest with their customers...namely us. If anything, they are even more full of it.

At least, myself, I can remain hopeful. AMD at least has some newer management(and fired some marketing staff), so I'm willing to give them a chance to pull up thier socks, and become the real company they should be. Intel, on the other hand...