AMD FX-8130P Processor Benchmarks Surface

[Pestilence]

Toms hardware reputable? Buhahahahahahahahahaha

Thank you Ser. I needed that belly laugh.

 

[DeerSteak]

Why do Amd fans always use the "Background Workload" excuse for more cores? Seriously? How many programs do you run at the same time because i know i only run one or two

Hey, I'm an AMD fan and I don't use this argument. Background workload must be code for torrents and streaming pr0n to the TV.

 

[Pestilence]

Hey, I'm an AMD fan and I don't use this argument. Background workload must be code for torrents and streaming pr0n to the TV.

I get those two things done quite easily with 4 cores.

 

[AsRock]

There's the i7-970 6 core 32nm for 580$. It is eating this leaked BD for breakfast not that anybody would need such a chip for gaming.

It is ?. i did not think BD was released yet. And intel can shove there 580$ chips were the sun don't shine.. it's a Frigging ripp off.

 

[DeerSteak]

I get those two things done quite easily with 4 cores.

well of course, you have a faster CPU per-clock/per-core/per-watt/per-anything. If I were using Intel I'd do that with a quad, too. I value fapping, but I don't value it at $600+.

 

[seronx]

Pift sure

Toms hardware reputable? Buhahahahahahahahahaha

Thank you Ser. I needed that belly laugh.

You're welcome....

<-- Intel fanboy check my rig

It is ?. i did not think BD was released yet. And intel can shove there 580$ chips were the sun don't shine.. it's a Frigging ripp off.

Depends if you consider gimmicks rip offs

Quad-Channel, The Great and Honorable QPI returns, what else oh YEAH! PCI-Express 3.0!!

I feel like I am missing something else

 

[cadaveca]

Well, TPU is ranked in the interwebs 3x higher than [H](~TPU = 6000, [H] = 19500), and Tom's sold out long ago(~1250), so is now a business entity serving hardware vendors for marketing purposes.

Your choices for reputable sites is interesting.

 

[yogurt_21]

can the thread crappers take their arguments elsewhere?

on topic:

at work I just did a super pi out of curiosity, e7500 wolfdale @ stock = 17.93 seconds for 1M.

so this is slower per clock than 775 on that paticular bench. 3dmark scroes aren't paticularly bad, but still not great.

I was really hoping for more market competition, but it doesn't seem like AMD has changed that at all.

 

[Dent1]

Meh, I really have to say it's sad to see amd can't compete, I wanted it to be faster.

You want an engineering sample to be faster? That sounds silly dont you think?

Anyways, this article disagrees with you. appropriately titled "AMD Outpaces Sandy Bridge in early tests". 3DMarks 11 and CineBench, x64 encoding AMD beats pulls ahead impressively. SuperPI, goes to Intel as usual.

http://fudzilla.com/processors/item/23381-bulldozer-performance-figures-are-in

Dent1, he's saying things that are the opposite of what's been reported and makes no attempt to back it up. That's all. He can answer it with his opinion, but he's saying it's fact.

A lot of what he was saying was true though. Granted he didn't provide links for most of what he was saying, but who wants to be that guy that runs around the internet looking for evidence all day to appease geeks on a forum lol

 

[Crap Daddy]

It is ?. i did not think BD was released yet. And intel can shove there 580$ chips were the sun don't shine.. it's a Frigging ripp off.

No, BD wasn't released yet was talking about the leak and was responding to another post. When AMD will offer the performance of an i7-970 be sure they will ask for at least 500$.

 

[cadaveca]

at work I just did a super pi out of curiosity, e7500 wolfdale @ stock = 17.93 seconds for 1M.

so this is slower per clock than 775 on that paticular bench. 3dmark scroes aren't paticularly bad, but still not great.

I was really hoping for more market competition, but it doesn't seem like AMD has changed that at all.

I am not interested in stock performance numbers. I have to feel that the majority of TPU members overclock, like I do, so OC numbers are what matter.

With that in mind, I present my own SuperPI times, done with my 2600k @ 4.9 GHz(2133 MHz memory)

Wake me up when AMD can reach these.

 

[Crap Daddy]

Wake me up when AMD can reach these.

Or as Green Day says, "Wake me up when September comes"...

 

[v12dock]

Why do Amd fans always use the "Background Workload" excuse for more cores? Seriously? How many programs do you run at the same time because i know i only run one or two

I should show you a screenshot of how much I have running at once... But of course I don't lag on my i7

 

[Dent1]

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=42897&stc=1&d=1310406080

Wake me up when AMD can reach these.

But who cares really? SuperPi is such an old benchmark does its results really merit anyone to care about the end results? Even when AMD was ontop almost a decade back their SuperPi results were poor, but nobody cared because it was better at most other things

Poor SuperPi doesnt equate to poor overall performance or value for money.

 

[seronx]

can the thread crappers take their arguments elsewhere?

on topic:

at work I just did a super pi out of curiosity, e7500 wolfdale @ stock = 17.93 seconds for 1M.

so this is slower per clock than 775 on that paticular bench. 3dmark scroes aren't paticularly bad, but still not great.

I was really hoping for more market competition, but it doesn't seem like AMD has changed that at all.

x87 is a dead race...x87 is much slower on Zambezi Prcoessers because it is emulated on the FMACs (Same way 256b AVX is I believe)
1x AVX(256bit)
1x x87(64/80bit)

Well, TPU is ranked in the interwebs 3x higher than [H](~TPU = 6000, [H] = 19500), and Tom's sold out long ago(~1250), so is now a business entity serving hardware vendors for marketing purposes.

Your choices for reputable sites is interesting.

I need a wide variety of reviews to say "YOUR BIASED!! ha ha" then leave like no one saw me

No, BD wasn't released yet was talking about the leak and was responding to another post. When AMD will offer the performance of an i7-970 be sure they will ask for at least 500$.

It's for $320~ish the AMD Zambezi FX Processor for comparison to beating the i7 970-990X

I am not interested in stock performance numbers. I have to feel that the majority of TPU members overclock, like I do, so OC numbers are what matter.

With that in mind, I present my own SuperPI times, done with my 2600k @ 4.9 GHz(2133 MHz memory)

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=42897&stc=1&d=1310406080

Wake me up when AMD can reach these.

Never
SuperPi is using the dead x87

Tell us your wPrime 32M and 1024M time/scores

Or as Green Day says, "Wake me up when September comes"...

Actually, that is never going to come lol

I should show you a screenshot of how much I have running at once... But of course I don't lag on my i7

i7 720QM *Cringe* I have nightmares using that even the Core 2 Duo Celeron rebrands are better than that CPU

But who cares really? SuperPi is such an old benchmark does its results really merit anyone to care about the end results? Even when AMD was ontop almost a decade back their SuperPi results were poor, but nobody cared because it was better at most other things

Poor SuperPi doesnt equate to poor overall performance or value for money.

AMD Zambezi isn't for x87 it's all out brute forcing SSE2 - SSE5(XOP, CVT16, FMA4 amd exclusive)

 

[repman244]

Love it when people use SuperPI to "measure" the "speed" of a CPU

 

[yogurt_21]

I am not interested in stock performance numbers. I have to feel that the majority of TPU members overclock, like I do, so OC numbers are what matter.

With that in mind, I present my own SuperPI times, done with my 2600k @ 4.9 GHz(2133 MHz memory)

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=42897&stc=1&d=1310406080

Wake me up when AMD can reach these.

you know it's really bugging me that you calculated everything but 8M...like an uncompleted part of a quest in an rpg that you can't get back to.


and yeah my i7 @ 4.2 comes in just under 10 seconds, I was just curious if amd finally managed to catch up to 775 yet. Still no go.

 

[DeerSteak]

Anyways, this article disagrees with you. appropriately titled "AMD Outpaces Sandy Bridge in early tests". 3DMarks 11 and CineBench, x64 encoding AMD beats pulls ahead impressively. SuperPI, goes to Intel as usual.

http://fudzilla.com/processors/item/23381-bulldozer-performance-figures-are-in

A lot of what he was saying was true though. Granted he didn't provide links for most of what he was saying, but who wants to be that guy that runs around the internet looking for evidence all day to appease geeks on a forum lol

Good work - the circle is complete. You linked to an article with the same source as the TPU article for which this very thread serves as the comments. And guess what, the results haven't changed. Memory throughput is still lower, which is the point of contention with seronx.

I am not interested in stock performance numbers. I have to feel that the majority of TPU members overclock, like I do, so OC numbers are what matter.

With that in mind, I present my own SuperPI times, done with my 2600k @ 4.9 GHz(2133 MHz memory)

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=42897&stc=1&d=1310406080

Wake me up when AMD can reach these.

I do agree that I'm not interested in stock benchmarks. I disagree that SuperPi itself is important. It may be an indicator of more useful results - though often, it's not. But with regards to games, the GPU is always going to be the bottleneck - or at least, it should be. If it's not, you're not cranking up details/AA enough, or the frame rate is going to be RETARDEDLY FAST to the point of non-importance anyway.

 

[ensabrenoir]

Everybody ssssttttttooooooopppp!!!!!! I'm out of popcorn! Have 2 run to corner store. Wow this is getting good. But in the end we all win so bring it on amd and intel. Bd will be the best amd ever put out intel's tweaking 2011 2 mop the floor. With everything b 4 it so the rollercoaster ride continues everybody hold on keep your hands 2 yourself and enjoy the ride

 

[Crap Daddy]

Wait a minute! I smell treason! On all the screens leaked you cannot see the clocks for the BD! Only on Aida screen when we look carefully we see that it is clocked at 4.2 GHz. Well if all those benches were run at 4,2 then do a comparison with Sandy at 4.2. It's getting interesting.

 

[DeerSteak]

Wait a minute! I smell treason! On all the screens leaked you cannot see the clocks for the BD! Only on Aida screen when we look carefully we see that it is clocked at 4.2 GHz. Well if all those benches were run at 4,2 then do a comparison with Sandy at 4.2. It's getting interesting.

Holy cats, you're right. AIDA is very clearly 4200MHz. I didn't even notice that before.

 

[treboRR]

OMG am i stupid or in picture 8th there is test time 2.jan 2008 :O wtf is that! Was bulldozer tested back then? or am i missing anything?

 

[Dent1]

Good work - the circle is complete. You linked to an article with the same source as the TPU article for which this very thread serves as the comments. And guess what, the results haven't changed. Memory throughput is still lower, which is the point of contention with seronx.

I'm aware that the link was posted on TPU. I'm bringing it to your attention again because everyone seems fixated on AMDs poor SuperPi results yet ignoring Sandybridges poor x64 encoding, Cinebench and 3D Marks 11 results. Huge Intel bias going on.

I was just curious if amd finally managed to catch up to 775 yet. Still no go.

So if Bulldozer is slower in than Core 2 in SuperPi but faster in everything else, this equates to AMD not catching up?

Dent1, have you looked at my system specs? No pro-Intel bias in my wallet, that's for sure. I'm most interested in truth. Unsubstantiated claims to the contrary of actual benchmarks doesn't make for much truthiness.

Ive seen your system spec. Seems like somebody with an Intel Bias, maybe due to buyers remorse.

 

[DeerSteak]

Dent1, have you looked at my system specs? No pro-Intel bias in my wallet, that's for sure. I'm most interested in truth. Unsubstantiated claims to the contrary of actual benchmarks (and I'm still discussing the claim that Zambezi's memory bandwidth is higher than Sandy Bridge, here, not SuperPi) doesn't make for much truthiness.

 

[Crap Daddy]

I just did a run of cinebench r10 while downloading 10 files large files at once (background workload) on my i5-2500k clocked at 4,2 and guess what? I beat the octalcore with a score of 24999!