AMD FX 8120 Listed on Ukrainian Store

[heky]

Dont be silly of course its not legit. Even an Athlon II X4 620 @ stock performs 1MB SuperiPi in under 30 seconds.

So if anyone thinks a 8 core high-end Bulldozer is 3x SLOWER than an Athlon II X4 is smoking something or is mentally challenged.

I wonder how you will justify your comments when reality hits in a couple of days.

 

[Super XP]

The Bulldozer will be out in 3 days. Once it gets released and officially reviewed, then only then people can salivate over it, that is when we will get the truth about it's true performance and AMD's 50% performance claim over original PII's.

Can't wait to see this thing in real action..

 

[techtard]

The Bulldozer will be out in 3 days. Once it gets released and officially reviewed, then only then people can salivate over it, that is when we will get the truth about it's true performance and AMD's 50% performance claim over original PII's.

Can't wait to see this thing in real action..

Well, 50% more cores, 50% more performance in select multi-threaded apps.
You can't just believe everything the marketing department tells you.
But, as you've stated: 3 more days.

 

[Super XP]

I agree, but we are talking about a completely new CPU Architecture.
Even the AMD FX 4170 Quad-Core at 4.2 GHz "SHOULD" be 50% faster than a Phenom II x4 at 4.2 GHz....according to AMD and it's slides, then again the Marketing Department has a history of pumping stuff into the clouds

 

[IvTK]

AMD FX-8120 unboxed

 

[seronx]

 

[AndreiD]

Dont be silly of course its not legit. Even an Athlon II X4 620 @ stock performs 1MB SuperiPi in under 30 seconds.

So if anyone thinks a 8 core high-end Bulldozer is 3x SLOWER than an Athlon II X4 is smoking something or is mentally challenged.

The Lab501 guys have won a lot of Overclocking contests ( http://vr-zone.com/articles/romania-wins-msi-master-overclocking-arena-2011/13703-2.html# ) and over the years I have not seen but very good articles from them.
Maybe they got some gimped ES sample, but still, it's a rather disappointing performer, I would have expected more.
I guess we'll see the full picture after the release.

 

[faramir]

I agree, but we are talking about a completely new CPU Architecture.
Even the AMD FX 4170 Quad-Core at 4.2 GHz "SHOULD" be 50% faster than a Phenom II x4 at 4.2 GHz....according to AMD and it's slides, then again the Marketing Department has a history of pumping stuff into the clouds

According to AMD IPC should be roughly on par with Phenom II. Raise the clock, get better performance. Increase the number of cores, get better (multithreaded) performance.

 

[Super XP]

According to AMD IPC should be roughly on par with Phenom II. Raise the clock, get better performance. Increase the number of cores, get better (multithreaded) performance.

Absolutely no way IMHO. We are talking about alot more L2 and L3 cache not to mention a brand new design's structure built from the ground up. There is no way Phenom II w/ Equal Cores & Equal Clocks can be equal to AMD's FX line.
The only cores that can compaired in a fair manner is the AMD FX 4100 & FX 6100 vs. PII's do to the core count.

Now you got me curious about all of this, now I am really looking forward to Bulldozer's Launch and Real World Benchmarks.

 

[Super XP]

Performance Comparison - Bulldozer vs. Phenom II Clock for Clock + Same Core Count

AMD Phenom II x6 1100T @ 3.30 GHz
- L2 = 3MB - L3 = 6MB - AM3 - TDP = 125W - 45nm SOI - 1066 MHz Memory
Versus:
AMD FX 6100 @ 3.30 GHz
- L2 = 6MB - L3 = 8MB - AM3+ - TDP = 95W - 32nm SOI + HKMG - 1866/2133 MHz Memory

AMD Phenom II x4 980T @ 3.70 GHz
- L2 = 2MB - L3 = 6MB -AM3 - TDP = 125W - 45nm SOI - 1066MHz Memory
Versus:
AMD FX 4100 @ 3.6 GHz
- L2 = 4MB - L3 = 8MB -AM3+ - TDP = 95W - 32nm SOI + HKMG - 1866/2133 MHz Memory

Can AMD's new upcoming FX line's superior Design take out CLOCK 4 CLOCK Phenom II's aged design? I think it can Big Time if not, then AMD is in trouble....

 

[faramir]

Absolutely no way IMHO. ...

Now you got me curious about all of this, now I am really looking forward to Bulldozer's Launch and Real World Benchmarks.

Check out [back then acting] AMD CEO's statement regarding performance of Interlagos (16 core Bulldozer) versus Magny-Cours (12 core Phenom II): the former is supposedly up to 35% faster than the latter. Not much of a surprise, considering that it has 33% more cores.

The initial prediction was that performance would be up to 50% higher which would imply IPC improvements, but they reduced that few months ago, right around the time when first rumors regarding Bulldozer underperforming started to fly around ...

 

[alexsubri]

well, i'll still stick to with what they [AMD] are claiming...Again , this is all unofficial 3rd party poppy cocked nonsense. If Bulldozer turns out to be an epic fail, I will switch back to Intel. What ashame

 

[Super XP]

If this is the case then Bulldozer should make for a great gaming CPU, just like the Phenom II. Everything shall unfold once it gets released, obviously AMD is keeping something away from the media and the reviewers. I already have my ASUS Crosshair V Formula (ROG) mobo and it's waiting for a Bulldozer.

That said, how about Bulldozers 3rd gen called Steemroller. Love the names.

Hammer - The birth of FX...
Bulldozer
Piledriver
SteemRoller

 

[cadaveca]

That said, how about Bulldozers 3rd gen called Steemroller. Love the names.

Hammer - The birth of FX...
Bulldozer
Piledriver
SteemRoller

Um, you mean Clawhammer? Different generation of core design...

I beleive it goes:

Bulldozer to clear the land
Piledriver to set the foundation
Steamroller to pave the road to complete success.

 

[Dent1]

I wonder how you will justify your comments when reality hits in a couple of days.

Its not a matter of justification its common sense that the Athlon II X4 is NOT 3x faster than the Bulldozer.

You'd have to be retarded and 100% mentally challenged to think a 3 year old mainstream Athlon II X4 is 3x faster than AMD's flagship highend 8 core Bulldozer.

 

[qubit]

Its not a matter of justification its common sense that the Athlon II X4 is NOT 3x faster than the Bulldozer.

You'd have to be retarded and 100% mentally challenged to think a 3 year old mainstream Athlon II X4 is 3x faster than AMD's flagship highend 8 core Bulldozer.

Duh! Of course +1.

 

[heky]

Actually the FX-8150 chip is a little slower in SuperPI 1M than the Phenom II x6 1100T. It takes around 20s. But hey, what do i know, right?

 

[Dent1]

Actually the FX-8150 chip is a little slower in SuperPI 1M than the Phenom II x6 1100T. It takes around 20s. But hey, what do i know, right?

Which proves my point.

The Phenom II X6 is AMDs current flagship product and takes about 20seconds to compute Super PI, 1MB.

The "leaked" benchmarks are saying the Bulldozer takes 1min 42 seconds. Why would AMD's new flagship processor perform 5x slower than their current flagship processor.

No reputable company will release a product 5x slower than the previous generation at high end, which leads anyone to determine the "leaked" benchmark is fake.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Which proves my point.

The Phenom II X6 is AMDs current flagship product and takes about 20seconds to compute Super PI, 1MB.

The "leaked" benchmarks are saying the Bulldozer takes 1min 42 seconds. Why would AMD's new flagship processor perform 5x slower than their current flagship processor.

No reputable company will release a product 5x slower than the previous generation at high end, which leads anyone to determine the "leaked" benchmark is fake.

Or much like when Intel debuted hyper-threading Windows didn't know what to do and didn't take advantage of it. Could be the same thing with BD. It handles instructions differently.

 

[Dent1]

Or much like when Intel debuted hyper-threading Windows didn't know what to do and didn't take advantage of it. Could be the same thing with BD. It handles instructions differently.

If this was the case, in very worse case senerio where the 8 core Bulldozer would perform similarly to 4 core Bulldozer due to non applicaiton support, it still begs the question, why would a $70 Athlon II X4 perform 3.4x faster than a $240 4 core bulldozer?

Are we honestly saying a $70 Athlon II X4 is core for core faster than a 4 core Bulldozer (4cores being unutilised). Of course not. Which puts into perspective that the benchmark isnt genuine or isnt telling a complete story.

 

[TheMailMan78]

If this was the case, in very worse case senerio where the 8 core Bulldozer would perform similarly to 4 core Bulldozer due to non applicaiton support, it still begs the question, why would a $70 Athlon II X4 perform 3.4x faster than a $240 4 core bulldozer?

Are we honestly saying a $70 Athlon II X4 is core for core faster than a 4 core Bulldozer (4cores being unutilised). Of course not. Which puts into perspective that the benchmark isnt genuine or isnt telling a complete story.

Thats not true. If BD is getting the same set of instructions over and over again it wouldn't really matter how much faster it is. It would be slow as a snail. Its a whole new architecture. There are gonna be some issues with the software.

 

[Dent1]

It won't happen. AMD know that enthusiasts want SuperPi benchmarks, and are aware that enthusiasts will ridicule them based on SuperPi alone. For that reason they wont let a flagship Bulldozer FX leave their warehouse performing slower than a Athlon 64 3500+ @2.2GHz from 7 years ago.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1758&page=3

 

[Damn_Smooth]

It won't happen. AMD know that enthusiasts want SuperPi benchmarks, and are aware that enthusiasts will ridicule them based on SuperPi alone. For that reason they wont let a flagship Bulldozer FX leave their warehouse performing slower than a Athlon 64 3500+ @2.2GHz from 7 years ago.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1758&page=3

I personally don't give a rats ass about SuperPi. I wan't gaming benchmarks. That's the only thing relevant to me.

 

[TheMailMan78]

It won't happen. AMD know that enthusiasts want SuperPi benchmarks, and are aware that enthusiasts will ridicule them based on SuperPi alone. For that reason they wont let a flagship Bulldozer FX leave their warehouse performing slower than a Athlon 64 3500+ @2.2GHz from 7 years ago.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1758&page=3

The only benchmarks most people care about are gaming and encoding. SuperPi is so 09' Like I said, this could be a major software issue with Windows and not BD performance.

I personally don't give a rats ass about SuperPi. I wan't gaming benchmarks. That's the only thing relevant to me.

Agreed.

 

[Dent1]

The only benchmarks most people care about are gaming and encoding. SuperPi is so 09'

SuperPI still holds a lot of weight in the community. Look at this thread, people talking about Bulldozers disappointing performance based on fake SuperPI results, yet they claim they don't care about PI.

I personally don't give a rats ass about SuperPi. I wan't gaming benchmarks. That's the only thing relevant to me.

Agreed.

BTW isn't Bulldozer out tomorrow. Overclockers.co.uk are preparing to list them
...looks like they've taken it down again!