Printable View
previously, people are talking about single core performance. Now, when rumor suggests that BD is almost equivalent to SB i7-2600k in single core performance then people start to looking forward to SBE (which is having the same micro-architecture but packed with more cores only).
I dont get many people.That score (in, let me remind you PCMARK) is pretty much better than i expected.
We all knew that BD has smaller cores but more of them.So if it scores in the 2600k range in the not well multithreaded benchmark.Its awesome.
http://tof.canardpc.com/view/803f6da...ecd58c0a00.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
A6 has 4 cores, not 6.Quote:
Originally Posted by kaktus1907
But you don't need to try to calculate IPC based on PCMark Vantage, since it includes nearly every component of the system, including graphics and hard disk. So deriving IPC based on results including HDD subtest scores might be difficult and worth writing a thesis about ;)
As fast as Intel's fastest processor in a weakly threaded benchmark? OMG, this is horrible news!
what if the software were SuperPI?Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
Those are just projections and not real numbers, we have to wait a little bit more ;)
But it's not....Quote:
Originally Posted by haylui
Certainly, there is nothing reliable about this information.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aten-Ra
Look at AKM's post and the one I wrote afterward,comparing pcmark vantage scores.Clearly the result of Zambezi is not bad since Westmere 6C is below 2600K in this benchmark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
If we take the i7 2600K IGP scoring 2100 in Vantage P, then copy paste the bar over the BD bar, it's about 3.4x smaller.
That gives a score of 7140, while an i7 920 @3.2 GHz with the 6670 scores 8140. Obviously that isn't good and goes against recent rumours of BD's gaming superiority.
Right, because Vantage is a perfect reflection of gaming experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo75
Shouldn't exactly be hard to figure out that the system is performing 3d in a gaming-like manner? Or is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Frontl1ne
Who said that Zambezi will be superior in gaming? Games are all about GPUs anyway,at least if you talk about the latest ones which are mostly shader bound.
Charlie D suggest it might be and there has been more rumours of it as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I'm just saying if that bar is even close to being representative of reality it's not particularly good.
PCMark Vantage whitepaper
http://www.futuremark.com/pressroom/...aper_v1.0_(PDF)
(from http://www.futuremark.com/pressroom/companypdfs/ )
You can see how 3dmark vantage (and pcmark) scales here
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ng,2652-5.html
It's possible the i7's IGP scored up to P2400, meaning the bulldozer+6670 would score around the same 8100ish as an i7 920 @3.2ghz. Just saying that from that graph there doesn't appear to be any gaming boost that is showing up in vantage but who knows.
If the slide is true, the FX-8000 will be 55%-60% higher than 1100T.
BTW, the gap between i7-960 & 1100T in this benchmark is larger than Cinebench; 2600k is doubtfully higher than 990x.
http://www.tomshw.it/files/2011/03/i.../30082/5-1.png
AMD Prescott :shakes:
In which regard?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumak
I gave up on AMD when core 2s came out.Its been a waiting game for the plast 7 years from AMD.I hope BD performs but if it did dont you think AMD would of leaked the performance a long time ago to slow sandy bridge sales down?
Im not impressed at all,good job AMD you made your loyal fans hold out for yet another let down.
eee? There are no known benches available, the product is not out yet... the maybe (fake) benches we get seem to indicate great performance (>Sb 2600 and >gulftown 990x) and you start about letting down blablabla ??Quote:
Originally Posted by Skratch
Also AMD shouldn't leak results good or bad because that will hurt their sales more then it will intels.
Givin the gpu tests were either integrated or 6670, cpu performance wouldn't matter to get the score. The gpu score is already dominating at 13K let alone with a lot slower gpu.
It's 5 years, not 7, and it's a bit naive of you to think that you can predict a fail, just because they won't tell us anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skratch
Maybe AMD could slow down SB sales with a leak, but you're totally forgetting that this would slow down X4/X6 sales as well, and it would just give Intel more headroom to release a 2700K or whatever.
Also, people would be screaming PAPER LAUNCH if we saw a leak too early.
Don't blame AMD for your lack of patience/self control.
Forgot about that kitguru link that suggested the gaming improvements would come via crossfire. That makes a bit more sense now.
Considering PC marks seeming preference for IPC at the expense of cores, it looks pretty good on the cpu front if true.
I mean if 8c BD can match 4c SB in a single thread it's going to show up pretty seriously over 8 threads.
Zambezi fights Sandy Bridge, not Sandy Bridge E, so why even bring it up people?
Interlagos fights Sandy Bridge E.
If Zambezi beats Sandy, chances are good chance Interlagos will beat E, and of course the opposite is true.
PCMARK results hint that AMD has something special. If single threaded performance is better on bulldozer, then running a full eight threads on both should extend the lead in AMD's favor since there is more discrete logic per thread.
But for all we know, Bulldozer could have a special affinity for PCMARK. You're going to need a broad array of tests to draw any kind of meaningful performance conclusion for a new architecture.
And of course, it's also highly possible these results are fakes and all of this speculation is for naught.
Do you guys waiting on BD honeslty think it has a chance against sandy bridge e with quad channel memory? I hope Im wrong but Im sure some of you all think that BD will be a huge let down.