AMD Bulldozer A Surprisingly Sell-Out Sales Success. Victims: Phenom II & Athlon II

[HumanSmoke]

Rumors are Apple almost went Llano for the last MacBook refresh. Strong chance they'll be considering Trinity (Bulldozer based) next year on account of Intel's lackluster graphics performance.

Strong graphics performance is a prerequisite that potential MacBook owners look for? When did this happen?

Mac gaming must have come a long way lately -both in game selection and acceptance in polite Mac society.

 

[Damn_Smooth]

Rumors are Apple almost went Llano for the last MacBook refresh. Strong chance they'll be considering Trinity (Bulldozer based) next year on account of Intel's lackluster graphics performance.

You can only shove crap in consumer's faces so long till they realize faster crap, is still crap. Apple found out the hard way after the initial x86 switch. Consumers complained for GPU performance and they brought in NV low end chips.

Just a cold hard fact, Intel cannot make GPUs right. They fail on hardware, and they fail on drivers. The difference between a Mac user and a PC user is about ~$500-$1000. For that extra cost, they have the right to be upset when their Mac can't run anything. It'll only take so long till it happens again and Apple is forced to reintroduce discrete in lowends. By then, the price ratio with AMD APUs will look mighty tempting.

And that makes Apple relevant to the sales of the FX series? And now Intel has something to do with it too?

 

[cdawall]

It could just mean supplies are limited, not that people are buying them at record levels, as their performance is crap.

Performance isn't crap, performance just isn't better than Intel's offerings. This isn't like when netburst came out and performance was physically worse than P3's

fanboys are retards, they buy a bad product just because they don't like other company. The bulldozer will make more AMD fanboys then ever be for cause that's how fanboys starts, they buy a bad product, defend it and hate the other company for releasing something better.

So thats why Intel is so popular so many people bought P4's! I understand now

To reiterate what do you classify as a bad product? Does bulldozer not accomplish the task that a computer is designed for? Does it fail in droves? Is it overly expensive? In all reality you could consider it a stepping stone. Phenom II's were still outperformed by Intel yet they were considered a "good" product, what makes Bulldozer different? It clocks well, power consumption is high, but I feel that is a first gen bug and will get worked out with new steppings, just like Phenom I and II. When someone points out a legitimate reason that Bulldozer is a "bad" product I will retract what I said, but until that point whats actually wrong with BD?


Just to throw it out there Intel has had plenty of other "bad" products other than P4. They had there own TLB bug with i7, the 6 series chipsets, socket 423, the list goes on. Every company has fuck ups and in all honesty less the spectacular performance doesn't make a bad product in my book.

 

[Vancha]

I think the problem is more that BD wasn't what AMD said it'd be, so people consider it a failure because it didn't accomplish what it was "supposed to" (or at least, what people were lead to believe it was supposed to).

 

[Enmity]

I think the problem is more that BD wasn't what AMD said it'd be, so people consider it a failure because it didn't accomplish what it was "supposed to" (or at least, what people were lead to believe it was supposed to).

AMD might be just 800 million transistors short of their original performance expectations perhaps? could have made a decent difference if they really did have the full count quoted originally - but then again, power consumption is already through the roof at 1.2 Billion.

 

[PaNiC]

hey, you sound like one too you know?

just say it. I GOT RIPPED OFF, you'll fell better and you wont be stuck buying under preforming trash. I'm currently running an AMD. So how am I a fanboy?

 

[cdawall]

just say it. I GOT RIPPED OFF, you'll fell better and you wont be stuck buying under preforming trash. I'm currently running an AMD. So how am I a fanboy?

How so? I have owned chips from everything except 1155 and for the lift of me could not tell you the difference in everyday life from a Phenom 910@3.8ghz to a Xeon X3440@4.2ghz. I have run most different K10h based chips and never had an underperformance issue nor did I have an issues with my post C2D Intel parts. Maybe you should leave benchmarks to the big kids and enjoy what you have.

 

[lukcic]

With this article I got a suspicion that somebody wants to make this site to get more visits (with pissing off AMD or Intel fanboys and neutral people)....that's all

 

[pantherx12]

just say it. I GOT RIPPED OFF, you'll fell better and you wont be stuck buying under preforming trash. I'm currently running an AMD. So how am I a fanboy?

I don't feel ripped off ( cept a bsod I'm having but seems it's bios causing the issue)

An fx8120 is £25 more or so than a 1100t, sure the 1100t is 10% faster clock for clock but bulldozer overclocks 10% further even if you don't try hard, if you're patient you can get 20% higher clock speed than 1100t max overclock at a lower voltage.


So if you're an over clocker you're just paying for 2 extra cores really and the pricing is reasonable in that regard.

 

[Fx]

this might be true. i dont think they will stop at AM3+. there will at least be an AM4.

they might go over completely to FM sockets and make more kick ass APUs there.

I really love what they are doing with APUs. I almost just bought a mini-ITX mobo to build an XBMC box but the software support isnt quite there yet but it is getting close since openELEC has stepped up to the plate. they are doing a lot of good things for the HTPC audience

the FM1 socket has plenty of power in it for the average joe that uses it for school, general usage. AMD is smart for putting more focus into these markets- it is already paying off and demand is only going to grow

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

pile on the dirt why dont ya, i got qubits cards maked as a fanboy these days simples and im startin to think TPU is gettin a bias to its news, sort it out mods, you cant just constantly berate a company on here, unless its rambus that is

to me with my recent loss of my quad and mobo to disease( ok 1.55 volts on cpu might a killed it eventually) 476english pounds would buy me a crosshair v fx8150 and mem with enough slots for xfire a pcie ssd and the bonus gt240 for physx in one pc that should rock (needs 4xpciex though) if i go intel id have to spend a lot more just for enough pciex slots and marginal game bench increases

 

[Magnum°]

For some people, a bulldozer CPU might be an excellent upgrade coming from a phenom triple or quadcore?

In the beginning of the year, I was in doubt : AMD/Intel. I finally bit the bullet and bought a core i2600K system. I haven't regretted it, my system hardly lost any value: it would cost you almost the same to buy a similar PC now, 9 months later. That's exceptional I think ;-)

 

[pantherx12]

For some people, a bulldozer CPU might be an excellent upgrade coming from a phenom triple or quadcore?

In the beginning of the year, I was in doubt : AMD/Intel. I finally bit the bullet and bought a core i2600K system. I haven't regretted it, my system hardly lost any value: it would cost you almost the same to buy a similar PC now, 9 months later. That's exceptional I think ;-)

Came from a 1055t and it's an upgrade for me, only bad thing is power consumption IMO.

Yeah it could be better but it's not shite.

 

[Frick]

With this article I got a suspicion that somebody wants to make this site to get more visits (with pissing off AMD or Intel fanboys and neutral people)....that's all

Yes well it's qubit. Most of his "news" posts does that.

 

[mik95xp]

"AMD's new Bulldozer "FX" series of processors may be very lacklustre performers in reviewer's benchmarks "

its not a lacklustre performer, as other people have noticed, it was able to beat intel's 2600k in some benchies, am i not right? you can only justify that it as a bad CPU if in every benchmark it performs under intel's 2600k, but to tell you, no they dont.... and those benchmarks are only in the reviewers point of view..

and another thing, why you seem so sad dear author?? why you not like it bro?? do you like amd to sink and be bankrupt?? to tell you if that will happen, all hell will break lose.... be happy with it, it should result positively for amd.. more R&D budget=more competetion, dont you like it???

peace out!

 

[mik95xp]

To reiterate what do you classify as a bad product? Does bulldozer not accomplish the task that a computer is designed for? Does it fail in droves? Is it overly expensive? In all reality you could consider it a stepping stone. Phenom II's were still outperformed by Intel yet they were considered a "good" product, what makes Bulldozer different? It clocks well, power consumption is high, but I feel that is a first gen bug and will get worked out with new steppings, just like Phenom I and II. When someone points out a legitimate reason that Bulldozer is a "bad" product I will retract what I said, but until that point whats actually wrong with BD?


Just to throw it out there Intel has had plenty of other "bad" products other than P4. They had there own TLB bug with i7, the 6 series chipsets, socket 423, the list goes on. Every company has fuck ups and in all honesty less the spectacular performance doesn't make a bad product in my book.

you nailed it sir... i bet those guys that reacts with BD being sold out are hmm.. can i say fanboys?? BD buyers are also for their good, if it doesn't sell out, what will happen to amd?? less R&D budget, they can drop client products if it wont sell out right and may result in to an intel monopoly, and its a bad thing for everyone... so i dont get it why people are over reacting... T_T

 

[de.das.dude]

I really love what they are doing with APUs. I almost just bought a mini-ITX mobo to build an XBMC box but the software support isnt quite there yet but it is getting close since openELEC has stepped up to the plate. they are doing a lot of good things for the HTPC audience

the FM1 socket has plenty of power in it for the average joe that uses it for school, general usage. AMD is smart for putting more focus into these markets- it is already paying off and demand is only going to grow

what i thin AMD wants is, to take part in these growing markets, reap profits, and invest that in R&D for the mainstream. atleast that is what i would have done if i were the CEO.

APUs have literally no competition in the market.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

imho BD is only weak on single threaded apps and i just went from 4 to 2 cores for my main rig and my god single threaded performance matters not i got 2 threads of slow hell runnin its poo ,i want more cores simples. and now , I hope the intel bummers out there donnt succeed in gettin PD scrapped as BD is flyin off shelves and PD can only be better

 

[arthurs]

I am thinking about upgrading to Fx 8120-8150 too.

I have fx 6100@4,6 (H2O) in Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD7 with crossfireX4@HIS HD5750.

AMD rules my rig

 

[qubit]

I think the fact that for the short time that AMD was in the lead, they resorted to all the "shady" business practices that Intel did is kind of proof of that.

They were just as quick to charge $1000 for their processors, and make shady under the table deals with OEMs.

Indeed. Give or take a bit, most companies are all as bad as each other.

ORLY?...

Oh yeah, I really hate Rambus. You betcha!

I am thinking about upgrading to Fx 8120-8150 too.

I have fx 6100@4,6 (H2O) in Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD7 with crossfireX4@HIS HD5750.

AMD rules my rig

Dude, fill out your system specs! It's cool to share on TPU... and welcome to TPU!

 

[bpgt64]

I think AMD realizes that the average user, and gamer isn't going to notice any difference. Some games are more CPU limited, but even then, the difference is marginal. It's a sizable margin by the standards of this board. But we tend to forget that AMD probably cares more about making there chips more profitable, than any performance crown.

I mean really, there's about 1% of the CPU buying population that gives two shits that Intel has a super high end 1k dollar chip that's faster than everything else out there. Which makes a difference...never in the average users life.

 

[newtekie1]

they have never been found guilty of that in court so I will deduce that to a theory

no I didnt wonder. it was because OEMs were impressed with AMD's performance. vendors want to offer their customers the best performance and value

Ah, I see. So when Intel was in the lead and all the OEMs were using them, it was all down to shady business practices, but when AMD is in the lead the OEMs were just using them because AMD was in the lead? Makes sense...

 

[Completely Bonkers]

This is just a PR stunt. AMD fanboys are like Apple fanboys... tell them "less is more" (ie 600 million fewer transistors) and tell them it is selling out (ie buy now before queues get really long)... and sheeple will buy it like a Barista buys his iPad.

 

[Fx]

Ah, I see. So when Intel was in the lead and all the OEMs were using them, it was all down to shady business practices, but when AMD is in the lead the OEMs were just using them because AMD was in the lead? Makes sense...

holy shit man! are you so quick to forget what Intel has been charged with and some cases found guilty of? selective memory maybe? here is some links that I pulled up on the first google pages since you are too lazy to investigate- take your pick:

European Union
http://www.economist.com/node/13649063
http://seethirty.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/intel-found-guilty-of-criminal-sales-tactics-against-amd/
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1280059/microsoft-and-intel-fight-eu-lawsuits-just-as-antitrust-policies-in-the-us-get-tougher
http://www.osnews.com/story/21468

New York Attorney General
http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/04/technology/cuomo_sues_intel_antitrust/index.htm
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/new-york-ag-files-antitrust-charges-against-intel-alleges-bribery-coercion/26903

South Korea
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/2007-09-11-270351916_x.htm
http://www.telecomseurope.net/content/regulators-charge-intel-antitrust-violation-south-korea

that is probably about half of it but it is a good start... you need to learn to look up some facts before going all out with assumptions...

 

[pantherx12]

This is just a PR stunt. AMD fanboys are like Apple fanboys... tell them "less is more" (ie 600 million fewer transistors)

You realise that it is actually a good thing right?

2 billion transistor bulldozer = epic fail.

1.2 billion transistor bulldozer = only slightly under performing.

Pretty much puts it precisely in line with phenom architecture ( I.E phenomx6 + two more cores is 1.26 billion)


The main problem is the IPC loss and crazy power draw. Hopefully both if which get fixed further down the line.