AMD FX 8150 Looks Core i7-980X and Core i7 2600K in the Eye: AMD Benchmarks

[Wile E]

i can easily do them all with my x4 945.

He can do them all, plus more, and do it faster.

 

[newtekie1]

Then whats the point of hyper threading then???

Far as i know a virtual core is about 25% of a normal cores performance, it mimics the core.

Not even close to 25%, when you have a multi-threaded app that really pushes the CPU the benefit is usually under 10%.

In a 4 Core processor, there are only 4 cores to do the executing. It can only do the work of 4 cores, period. However, the registers for each core are duplicated, so that different information can be stored and sent to be executed on the core. This allows the processor scheduler to make it appear to the system like 2 cores, but it still only has the execution power of one, but with the duplicated registers the processor can very efficinetly switch between workloads. HT isn't anything close to mimick the actual work of 2 cores, it is an efficiency improvement for a single core more than anything else.

so to get what some people are saying straight: is bulldozer using AMD's version of hyper threading, or are they all 'real' cores?

i think thats what i've seen people argue about a few times now

They are real cores. They are just dividing them into units that share L2/L3, Intel has been doing that for ages, and AMD even launched a marketting campaign against it. Each unit has 2 cores to do execution tasks, that is a Core. They might share resources, but they are cores that do all the execution duties.

 

[de.das.dude]

He can do them all, plus more, and do it faster.

i did compare it to an i3 and i5. the i5 crashed once LOL.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Exactly, therefore BD will never compete on the top end. I want some competition up here too, dammit.

All they would have to do is release some 12 cores to compete with SB-e. Will they? I doubt it because that's the smallest percentage of enthusiasts, which is the smallest percentage of the market. But it is possible.

 

[Super XP]

• FX 8150 vs. i7-990X, FX 8150 performs well: Boohoo, 980X is slower than SB
• FX 8150 vs. i7-2600K (SB), FX 8150 performs well: Boohoo, that's an unfair 8 core vs. 4 core comparison

No problem, how about the super fast Quad-Core FX-4170 with it's stock speed of 4.20 GHz. I am sure this will easily outperform the i7-2600K....

 

[Wile E]

Not even close to 25%, when you have a multi-threaded app that really pushes the CPU the benefit is usually under 10%.

In a 4 Core processor, there are only 4 cores to do the executing. It can only do the work of 4 cores, period. However, the registers for each core are duplicated, so that different information can be stored and sent to be executed on the core. This allows the processor scheduler to make it appear to the system like 2 cores, but it still only has the execution power of one, but with the duplicated registers the processor can very efficinetly switch between workloads. HT isn't anything close to mimick the actual work of 2 cores, it is an efficiency improvement for a single core more than anything else.



They are real cores. They are just dividing them into units that share L2/L3, Intel has been doing that for ages, and AMD even launched a marketting campaign against it. Each unit has 2 cores to do execution tasks, that is a Core. They might share resources, but they are cores that do all the execution duties.

H.264 encoding can see up to 20% from HT enabled, with all threads blasting along at 100% load.

i did compare it to an i3 and i5. the i5 crashed once LOL.

Yeah, because your test was done so scientifically.

All they would have to do is release some 12 cores to compete with SB-e. Will they? I doubt it because that's the smallest percentage of enthusiasts, which is the smallest percentage of the market. But it is possible.

They don't do it because they can't on the current platform, not because they don't want to. Competing up top doesn't mean having to sell a lot of top end cpus, it means a marketing advantage, that will sell more lower cpus thru recognition. And even if they did release the 12core, intel only has to release an 8 core SB-E to be back on top.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

They don't do it because they can't on the current platform, not because they don't want to. Competing up top doesn't mean having to sell a lot of top end cpus, it means a marketing advantage, that will sell more lower cpus thru recognition. And even if they did release the 12core, intel only has to release an 8 core SB-E to be back on top.

What makes you think that they can't? There is no proof of this assumption.

As far as I know, eBD is still supposed to be coming out at some point, and we know next to nothing about that.

 

[Rookienoob]

No problem, how about the super fast Quad-Core FX-4170 with it's stock speed of 4.20 GHz. I am sure this will easily outperform the i7-2600K....

That's not likely.

This is a quad core CPU with 2 modules - it only has a total of 4 floating point units to share between the 4 cores, while an equivalent i7 has 8 (or am I wrong here?)

With an 8 core bulldozer running 4 active cores, those 4 cores have access to the full 8 FPU's - that's as far as I see it the only competition for the i7 2600K.

 

[Ferrum Master]

If it goes 5Ghz on air I don't care if it is Intel or AMD... the cheaper is base sample that can gain it - that's the winner for me.
I just can't understand these haters or lovers, this is a machine ffs... everything depends on its application.

The main point is that is concerning myself, if it can feed a current best SLI/CFX setup with data without bottlenecking everything, that's the real benchmark!! Leave those synthetics for pr0n(number) geeks... (same philosophy). That's it...

 

[TheLaughingMan]

i can easily do them all with my x4 945.

in the end it was laggin because of FRAPS! its a son of a bitch. and my HDD is a 3yr old 80gb crap. the OS and the fraps are installed on the same. so when fraps was maxing out the write at 23MBps, os had very little to do

Your system was laggin due to IO performance of your HDD.

You want to see how your system handles my daily use. Turn on uTorrent, download a 800 MB movie (they have free ones in their browser now), run your virus scanner and spybot S&D, while you watch a movie on a non-GPU accelerated player like KMPlayer with Post Processing on. You are welcome to scan one HDD while you play the movie from another. Stuttering is not an option.

Is that a lot? Not to me. As you stated, the power is for the games which many of us including myself will be playing while on TeamSpeak/Skype/Steam Voice Chat/whatever. Does that need 8 cores? No, 4 is probably enough. (assuming say 3.0 GHz)

Now what happens when a tank explodes in my face 4 feet from my location, covering the entire screen with Frostbite 2.0 or Havok calculated particles and smoke effects? Adding something like that on top of maintaining the other tasks would be a slide show on a dual core, barely passable on 3 cores, a small dip in performance for 4 cores. Many of us here aren't willing to accept that when we can spend an extra $XX to throw 8 cores at it. One of two things will happen. Either the extra threads will prevent or lessen the drop in performance to make it unnoticeable, or require less power to achieve the same performance. Its win/win to me.

Hell. Maybe I will be able to play BF3, chat on TS, while I convert videos with handbrake from MPEG to AVI.

 

[Wile E]

What makes you think that they can't? There is no proof of this assumption.

As far as I know, eBD is still supposed to be coming out at some point, and we know next to nothing about that.

The proof is that they aren't doing it. Again, they would compete up top if they could. They don't have to sell a lot of those chips to make it worthwhile. The marketing potential alone makes it worth it.

Maybe on the next socket, but not this one.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

The proof is that they aren't doing it. Again, they would compete up top if they could. They don't have to sell a lot of those chips to make it worthwhile. The marketing potential alone makes it worth it.

Maybe on the next socket, but not this one.

And how do you know what market segment eBD will be competing with? That will be on AM3+.

SB launched what, 6 months ago? And SB-e still isn't here.

Just because they're not competing with the first wave doesn't mean it can't be done.

 

[laszlo]

if price and perf will be decent the final consumer will be the winner;amd fans will buy it;intel fans will buy cheaper also so is a win situation for all

don't forget that both intel&amd are linked to each other with many patents and i wouldn't be surprised if they exchange "secrets&technology" behind closed doors;neither of them can't make progresses without these exchange; many innovation&features are similar or tend to be and i wouldn't be surprised if they both we'll have similar price/perf. products in near future

all we should care is to have cheaper good products without thinking of manufacturer label

 

[TheLaughingMan]

That's not likely.

This is a quad core CPU with 2 modules - it only has a total of 4 floating point units to share between the 4 cores, while an equivalent i7 has 8 (or am I wrong here?)

With an 8 core bulldozer running 4 active cores, those 4 cores have access to the full 8 FPU's - that's as far as I see it the only competition for the i7 2600K.

Most of the tasks your CPU does are Integer based. And each module will have 2 128-bit floating point calculation units that can be used as a single 256-bit floating point unit.

Long story short for Bulldozer:

Multi-threaded application wants Integer processing = 8 cores
dido wants 128-bit or less floating point processing = 8 cores
dido wants 256-bit floating point processing = 4 cores (note as far as I know this is limited to encryption programs as of right now.)

As for what I know of each design from Intel and AMD, I think this will be interesting to see. I consider an i7 2600K vs. an FX-8150 to be completely fair.

 

[Wile E]

And how do you know what market segment eBD will be competing with? That will be on AM3+.

SB launched what, 6 months ago? And SB-e still isn't here.

Just because they're not competing with the first wave doesn't mean it can't be done.

SB-E hasn't released because there has been no need for it.

And I would bet money that AMD won't be able to ever compete at the top end on the AM3+ socket at all. Maybe the next arch.

 

[jpierce55]

Amazing that every BD thread comes to speculating on speculations. Or speculating on rumors that are speculating on speculated rumors that are purely speculating.

People need to take a deep breath and calm down. Why fight when nobody knows for 100% certain yet.

The thread needs locked.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

SB-E hasn't released because there has been no need for it.

And I would bet money that AMD won't be able to ever compete at the top end on the AM3+ socket at all. Maybe the next arch.

So Intel is fine with their mainstream CPU's outperforming their high end line?

My crystal ball is broken, so I won't be taking any bets. Thanks for the offer though.

 

[Wile E]

So Intel is fine with their mainstream CPU's outperforming their high end line?

My crystal ball is broken, so I won't be taking any bets. Thanks for the offer though.

SB only outperforms the high end in gaming. Most of the high end market wants the threading capabilities, and aren't as concerned with gaming. My cpu is still faster than SB in the things I want it for, thus the reason I still have it over an SB setup.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

SB only outperforms the high end in gaming. Most of the high end market wants the threading capabilities, and aren't as concerned with gaming. My cpu is still faster than SB in the things I want it for, thus the reason I still have it over an SB setup.

It's only faster due to core count and even then, it's not a vast difference. Throw 2 more of the exact same cores on a 2600k and it will stomp your 980x, which is what they are doing with SB-e. But I digress, gaming is what is most important to me, and apparantly BD will hold up well, so it's fine for me.

 

[martthefart]

so i got a 1090t cpu shopuld i waied for bd?????????

 

[Damn_Smooth]

so i got a 1090t cpu shopuld i waied for bd?????????

 

[Wile E]

It's only faster due to core count and even then, it's not a vast difference. Throw 2 more of the exact same cores on a 2600k and it will stomp your 980x, which is what they are doing with SB-e. But I digress, gaming is what is most important to me, and apparantly BD will hold up well, so it's fine for me.

Right, but why release it when they still have Gultowns left to sell? They would be cutting their own throats.

 

[martthefart]

will bnd b better than a 1090 6 core on a gig 990xa board?

 

[martthefart]

???????????????????

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Right, but why release it when they still have Gultowns left to sell? They would be cutting their own throats.

Because they have people like you dying to get there hands on it. Guaranteed profit.