Bulldozer Shines in 3D Gaming and Rendering: AMD

[spynoodle]

spynoodle: It will probably depend on what you are using it. At another forum we are already discussing this and it looks like BD will be fastest CPU in multi thread based on CineBench at least untill 6 core Sandy is released.

Agreed. It'll probably only just barely edge out the 2600k, though, and LGA2011 will probably come out only a short while after BD, considering the delays that AMD's going through.

Also, we still don't know how biased AMD's benches are. They don't seem very detailed as of yet.

 

[meirb111]

this is the second time the 50% subject headline raise a discussion about
Bulldozer looks like what amd is saying to people :"dont buy intel yet please we have something better wait for us pretty please"

 

[THANATOS]

FordGT90Concept:

LGA 2011 will be in 4 quarter and even a delay may happen.
Maybe I am wrong but triple channel didn't have much of a effect when you compared socket 1366 CPU versus socket 1156. On average it will be no more that 2-3 % at best my guess.

 

[THANATOS]

spynoodle: still 4-5 months or possibly more difference is enough and LGA 2011 will be just 6 cores at first then you can forget about competitive prices more like extreme edition will be released. It seems there won't be a delay for BD.

 

[TheMailMan78]

My guess is Bulldozer will only be about 20% faster in over all performance then the current generation of AMD processors. (waits for cadaveca to correct me)

 

[newtekie1]

I'm going to guess there is a very specific reason that AMD didn't put a 6-core processor in the slight, and that reason is probably because Intel's current 6-core processors match AMD's upcoming 8-core. And Intel 8-Core processors will probably destroy Bulldozer.

I like how AMD is going back to its own marketting ways. "First true 8-Core Processor"... Remember when they had the first "True Quad-Core Processor"? Everyone pretty much added "that still gets it ass kicked by Intels fake Quad-Core Processors" to the end and laughed at the line...

 

[trt740]

are any of these going to be backwards compatible with current am3 boards?

 

[TheMailMan78]

are any of these going to be backwards compatible with current am3 boards?

No.

I'm going to guess there is a very specific reason that AMD didn't put a 6-core processor in the slight, and that reason is probably because Intel's current 6-core processors match AMD's upcoming 8-core. And Intel 8-Core processors will probably destroy Bulldozer.

I like how AMD is going back to its own marketting ways. "First true 8-Core Processor"... Remember when they had the first "True Quad-Core Processor"? Everyone pretty much added "that still gets it ass kicked by Intels fake Quad-Core Processors" to the end and laughed at the line...

Well having real cores do have its advantages.

 

[ROad86]

I'm going to guess there is a very specific reason that AMD didn't put a 6-core processor in the slight, and that reason is probably because Intel's current 6-core processors match AMD's upcoming 8-core. And Intel 8-Core processors will probably destroy Bulldozer.

And then Amd will make 16 core cpu's...etc,etc. Are the current model's of amd and intel so far between them in terms of perfomance? I think no! Only the 980x which cost $1000 and the brand new 2600K are clearly ahead( and not at all the programms). The point is in a certain price range which will preform better?
As for 2011 plattform if P67 costs $150 at least and i72600K $330 how much the mobo and the 6 core, 8 core from intel will cost?

 

[btarunr]

are any of these going to be backwards compatible with current am3 boards?

No, but AM3 processors are forwards-compatible with AM3+ socket.

 

[TheMailMan78]

And then Amd will make 16 core cpu's...etc,etc. Are the current model's of amd and intel so far between them in terms of perfomance? I think no! Only the 980x which cost $1000 and the brand new 2600K are clearly ahead( and not at all the programms). The point is in a certain price range which will preform better?
As for 2011 plattform if P67 costs $150 at least and i72600K $330 how much the mobo and the 6 core, 8 core from intel will cost?

The argument of price/performance will be won by AMD. However raw performance is what enthusiasts want and thats what Intel provides. PLEASE guys don't turn this into a AMD vs Intel thread.

 

[spynoodle]

spynoodle: still 4-5 months or possibly more difference is enough and LGA 2011 will be just 6 cores at first then you can forget about competitive prices more like extreme edition will be released. It seems there won't be a delay for BD.

Guess my info on the delay is outdated:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/...6_AMD_Bulldozer_Not_Delayed_Says_Company.html
I remember hearing about this a few months ago, and I guess the source was wrong.
I'm guessing that 6 core LGA2011 will be superior to Zamezi 8 core, due to the whole module vs. core thing. When Zambezi 16 core comes out, we'll probably see some more high-end competition.

 

[ROad86]

PLEASE guys don't turn this into a AMD vs Intel thread.

Ok I went a bit off topic so I stop.

 

[blibba]

And then Amd will make 16 core cpu's...etc,etc. Are the current model's of amd and intel so far between them in terms of perfomance? I think no! Only the 980x which cost $1000 and the brand new 2600K are clearly ahead( and not at all the programms). The point is in a certain price range which will preform better?
As for 2011 plattform if P67 costs $150 at least and i72600K $330 how much the mobo and the 6 core, 8 core from intel will cost?

Already the majority of users don't really benefit from more than a dual core. I would argue that even most enthusiasts really have little need for a 16 core CPU.

 

[Fourstaff]

Already the majority of users don't really benefit from more than a dual core. I would argue that even most enthusiasts really have little need for a 16 core CPU.

Yeah, but by the same argument we really don't need more than 1 core back in early 2000s. Most of the tasks we do normally can be done efficiently with 2 cores, hence Intel still have 2 core 4 thread as their low end. But that said, games are starting to utilise 4 cores (Frostbite engine etc), and you get a massive improvement by using 4 cores instead of 2. Also, development goes the other way round: if you have 16 cores, people will develop apps to use all 16 of them, instead of developing 16 thread apps and wait for 16 core processors. I still believe 4 thread is still the way to go for the next couple of years though. If you study and work in engineering (and the likes), you will quickly notice how slow i7 980x is.

 

[1Kurgan1]

The argument of price/performance will be won by AMD. However raw performance is what enthusiasts want and thats what Intel provides. PLEASE guys don't turn this into a AMD vs Intel thread.

I do agree. But it also matters your price range, I personally will probably never spend over $300 on a processor, under that line is pretty blurry between both companys, so in my market, it isn't the same.

 

[newtekie1]

And then Amd will make 16 core cpu's...etc,etc. Are the current model's of amd and intel so far between them in terms of perfomance? I think no! Only the 980x which cost $1000 and the brand new 2600K are clearly ahead( and not at all the programms). The point is in a certain price range which will preform better?
As for 2011 plattform if P67 costs $150 at least and i72600K $330 how much the mobo and the 6 core, 8 core from intel will cost?

Yeah, and it will perform worse than Intels 12 core.

Intel's prices are high because they have no competition in those high price segments. So to answer your question in certain price ranges Intel will perform better because Intel is the only one in those price and performance ranges.

If you go lower, AMD competes nicesly, but enthusiasts want high end, and will pay Intel's prices for it until AMD can offer something competitive. And 50% faster with 100% more cores than a 2 year old product doesn't point to AMD being competitive at the current high end to me.

You can say, oh AMD wins price/performance at the lower end, but I don't see that all that often either. You can look at the $125 segment and see an i3-540 beating the x2 565BE or the i3-540 beating an x4 920 if you prefer the idea that "real men use real cores"-and still get their asses handed to them by a dual core...

 

[TheMailMan78]

Yeah, and it will perform worse than Intels 12 core.

Intel's prices are high because they have no competition in those high price segments. So to answer your question in certain price ranges Intel will perform better because Intel is the only one in those price and performance ranges.

If you go lower, AMD competes nicesly, but enthusiasts want high end, and will pay Intel's prices for it until AMD can offer something competitive. And 50% faster with 100% more cores than a 2 year old product doesn't point to AMD being competitive at the current high end to me.

The question is now will AMD market Bulldozer as being an "Intel destroyer" or a better deal then Intel. That is what will make or break the Bulldozer.

 

[ROad86]

You can look at the $125 segment and see an i3-540 beating the x2 565BE or the i3-540 beating an x4 920 if you prefer the idea that "real men use real cores"-and still get their asses handed to them by a dual core

Anandtech very objective site...

 

[jsfitz54]

Do my eyes deceive me?

Intel processor Core i7 950 but the package 1156? Mistake or fake?

Is AMD trying to pull a fast one on its customers?

 

[MicroUnC]

Can't wait anymore! I found a great deal on i7 980 X for $500 couldn't let it go. Anyway i'am intrested in how the bulldozers will perform.

Waiting for benches

 

[DigitalUK]

this slide proves nothing not enough information there for anyone to guess anything, could even be completely faked. funny thing is if the title was intel to release new i7 50% more powerful this thread would have a different vibe.

 

[lashton]

TheMailMan78
I want to see two things....

1. Benches.
2. Price.

lol i want to se 1 thing Benches first

 

[JF-AMD]

I can't say whether this data is real or not. It might be, but it is not my department, I am in server.

However, someone should kill the [AMD] from the title of the thread because we are not making these claims, some third party is.

 

[TheMailMan78]

I can't say whether this data is real or not. It might be, but it is not my department, I am in server.

However, someone should kill the [AMD] from the title of the thread because we are not making these claims, some third party is.

Knowlage......is dropped.