New Windows 7 Bulldozer Patches Available.

[c_heater]

i would say when bd gets cheap, beware of used chips.
but there will be a batch that "should" ROCK, when new and not abused.
my board may not be much good past the next revisions of fx, but if i pay attension to tpu and other class sites, some smart azz is going to nail down the right lot numbers.
damn wife.
batteries are low.
gotta go


4/1

 

[Tweety]

my i7 930 has the same score and it's almost 2 years old

I upgraded from an X3 720BE. Which got 7.1 @3.5GHz. BD is pretty good with memory, those scores went right up, 7.9 now.

I'm very pleased with my purchase.

 

[btarunr]

Both these files are now available on our downloads section. Find them on Today's Downloads (frontpage).

 

[Bluefox1115]

AMD's new FX 8-core series are not bad. In fact, they are power houses. The reason why they still fall behind in some places, is due to Microsoft's lacking ability to write multithreading code to fully utilize all 8 cores. So in essence, all of you flaming the FX chips, it is a software issue, not a poor hardware design, but a set of coding that has been overlooked by Microsoft.

 

[largon]

Bluefox1115,
Strange, benchmarks disagree with that.
Must be something wrong with them. So all the reviews shorely are null and void.

 

[n0tiert]

My Futuremark 3DMark11 test on FX-8150 / 6990

before:

and after using the patches:

as you can see , it slightly raised the PhysX score a bit and the Total score is arround 50 points higher

 

[INSTG8R]

Those 50 points are well within the "median" for 3D Mark I could get that kind of deviation just running the test twice in a row(if not more). There is nothing really to show in that test other than perhaps the slightly higher PhysX score...

 

[n0tiert]

Those 50 points are well within the "median" for 3D Mark I could get that kind of deviation just running the test twice in a row(if not more). There is nothing really to show in that test other than perhaps the slightly higher PhysX score...

yeeeah come back and show me your score

 

[INSTG8R]

yeeeah come back and show me your score

50 points is NOTHING in 3Dmark. I'm not getting into a pissing contest with you over scores I am just telling you 50 points could be gained or lost just in how long it's been since the last time you rebooted...Like I said run it twice in a row and you can gain or lose that much.

My point is that doesn't show anything significant to do with the Hotfix.

 

[screamer980]

Here are some more Results.

Sometimes a bit better after the patch. But also often slightly worse.

 

[fullinfusion]

50 points is NOTHING in 3Dmark. I'm not getting into a pissing contest with you over scores I am just telling you 50 points could be gained or lost just in how long it's been since the last time you rebooted...Like I said run it twice in a row and you can gain or lose that much.

My point is that doesn't show anything significant to do with the Hotfix.

Funny, mabey its just your system that varies so much from run to run but I can tell ya from my experience using amd or Intel the difference is a matter of only a couple of points different! not fluctuating by 50points lol

 

[INSTG8R]

Funny, mabey its just your system that varies so much from run to run but I can tell ya from my experience using amd or Intel the difference is a matter of only a couple of points different! not fluctuating by 50points lol

Well for example(and an extreme one) I actually ran 06 yesterday so I could get a comparison for a friend who just got a new GFX card. I happened to be running Steam in the background and well it cost me 737 points off my "normal" scores. Scores can fluctuate quite a bit with even the most minor of changes. Run it a couple of times in a row and tell me you get the same score? I have always considered 100 points +/- a more than normal variation.

Normal(and not even my highest just the latest)
http://3dmark.com/3dm06/16006564

With Steam running in the background
http://3dmark.com/3dm06/16385362

 

[fullinfusion]

Well for example(and an extreme one) I actually ran 06 yesterday so I could get a comparison for a friend who just got a new GFX card. I happened to be running Steam in the background and well it cost me 737 points off my "normal" scores. Scores can fluctuate quite a bit with even the most minor of changes. Run it a couple of times in a row and tell me you get the same score? I have always considered 100 points +/- a more than normal variation.

If I gotta run tests all day to prove to you Im only getting a couple point difference Ill slap ya!
When benching Im sure the user unlike you are opening up steam and other programs. Think about it?

 

[fullinfusion]

^ good morning shit disturber

 

[trickson]

^ good morning shit disturber

I am only saying what is right I agree with what this person said . and you call me names ? I deleted my post .

 

[fullinfusion]

I am only saying what is right I agree with what this person said . and you call me names ? I deleted my post .

now look who cant take a good morning joke... Man wake up and be happy its FRYDAY

 

[trickson]

Here are some more Results.

Sometimes a bit better after the patch. But also often slightly worse.

now look who cant take a good morning joke... Man wake up and be happy its FRYDAY

I just think that this is more like it . 3Dmark11 is just not at all the best indicator of a CPU patch .

 

[INSTG8R]

If I gotta run tests all day to prove to you Im only getting a couple point difference Ill slap ya!
When benching Im sure the user unlike you are opening up steam and other programs. Think about it?

Well of course, under normal circumstances I would and always run any bench from a clean reboot. I'm just making the point it takes very little to effect scores. 50 points IMHO is not really any kind of gain to be attributed to anything.

 

[fullinfusion]

Hmmmm Resident evil 5 bench maby?

 

[trickson]

Hmmmm Resident evil 5 bench maby?

LOL .

 

[x86overclock]

It all comes down to Intel having hyperthreading and AMD dont (because they cant patients,copyright blah blah).This CPU was to designed to fight that and its not fairing so well on its first go round.

Actually BD has multi threading, 2 dual 64 bit core dies with 4 threads each and multi threading is more stable under heavy work loads than hyper threading is. AMD was just simply misleading by slapping the FX name on the chips and they are basing all of their new chips on this architecture. Why?...you may ask, because this architecture is much more cost efficient for them to make and they can claim twice the amount of cores than they actually have and charge twice as much for the chips. People like you and me know better about the lack of performance of these chips have especially compared to their older chips, but your average everyday consumer has no idea,they hear or see 8 cores advertised and they think they are getting the best bang for the buck when they see the Intel quads going for the same price or slightly higher. Since AMD is continuing with this architecture it would be wise of them to purchase as much stock as they can in Intel,that way when they can't sell anymore of these horrid chips they can still make money on Intel consumers and prior AMD Fanboys that got smart and switched to Intel.

 

[eidairaman1]

This thread puts me to sleep... Really nothing more to discuss bout the patches.

 

[erek]

This thread puts me to sleep... Really nothing more to discuss bout the patches.

i beg to differ.

scope this out @ http://vr-zone.com/articles/before-...amd-opteron-interlagos-6274-server/14572.html (just released article as of today)

 

[x86overclock]

I am upset because AMD is putting this architecture on all of their processors, by fall we will AMD will have the PhenomIIx8,they have discontinued all of their 45nm former architecture processors to use this cost efficient/ poor performance architecture. They should of atleast kept their former PhenomII quad and hex cores atleast those were FASTER THAN ALL OF THE INTEL CORE2 PROCESSORS!

 

[pantherx12]

I am upset because AMD is putting this architecture on all of their processors, by fall we will AMD will have the PhenomIIx8,they have discontinued all of their 45nm former architecture processors to use this cost efficient/ poor performance architecture. They should of atleast kept their former PhenomII quad and hex cores atleast those were FASTER THAN ALL OF THE INTEL CORE2 PROCESSORS!

The Architecture will improve don't worry

Pile-driver will put it above Phenom performance clock for clock ( if it doesn't then that will be a fail )

I don't think AMD are aiming to get close to intels IPC performance though, aiming to fit a crap ton of cores in a single package for cheap.