Printable View
You're saying i7 980x/ BD is close or as good as SB-E? Somebody please inform people at AT jumping up and down to quieten it a bit :PQuote:
Originally Posted by cesariuth
This will really piss off a lot of people at AT unless they find a way to gimp some scores in favour of team blue :D
I wonder if CVT16 could be used for that, as well.Quote:
2011-09-28 01:34:34 < Dark_Shikari> and the INT16_TO_FLOAT code is obnoxiously slow because avx sucks
2011-09-28 01:34:41 < Dark_Shikari> i.e. avx has no way of doing int16_t -> float fast
official slides ,what you will see at 12.01
: some previously known
http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/4737/62257191.th.jpg
http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/4281/25761731.th.jpg
http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/9817/17715953.th.jpg
http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/7010/95515664.th.jpg
http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/8467/96851393.th.jpg
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/1782/60349261.th.jpg
http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/8767/90894811.th.jpg
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/4812/43480311.th.jpg
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/7517/33274705.th.jpg
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/2374/82792244.th.jpg
http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/6494/85550663.th.jpg
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/7410/68797600.th.jpg
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/2804/37207736.th.jpg
http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/7408/26368986.th.jpg
http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/1037/23526305.th.jpg
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/9237/45186722.th.jpg
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/2937/94634679.th.jpg
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/475/54776294.th.jpg
http://img802.imageshack.us/img802/8346/fpup.th.jpg
http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/5905/sharec.th.jpg
We saw these crap of the slides before didn't we :)
It seems they removed the most stupid ones of the bunch, but there are still some comparisons between different opponents(like BD vs 2500k in one test, and bd vs thuban in another).
here we go again: double posts :(
http://img1.cache.netease.com/catchp...571F4F08A7.jpg
http://img1.cache.netease.com/catchp...DA78C1FCD4.jpg
http://img1.cache.netease.com/catchp...67D17481E2.jpg
http://img1.cache.netease.com/catchp...C377CEE937.jpg
http://img1.cache.netease.com/catchp...39617CFE75.jpg
http://img1.cache.netease.com/catchp...2BB1706E7E.jpg
http://img1.cache.netease.com/catchp...505394C5E3.JPG
http://img1.cache.netease.com/catchp...887B29BF79.jpg
http://img1.cache.netease.com/catchp...74ABB21E46.jpg
^
link for that?
this watercooling setup looks cool!
less than 4 hrs till NDA is up :yepp:
edit: i think on of those slides is wrong...the one showing prime 32m is reversed, colored wrong
all slides are ok, You`ll see soon
ok i jsut was wondering because someone posted one that they were revesred a few pages back i think around page 150 or so
zomg zomg zomg ........... what
Should these early results be final, let me ask, what could be the rationale behind this 2x2-way INT CMT thingy, that they've preferred over 1x4-way SMT, that could also be implemented (next to the already SMT FPU, that FlexFP is), probably on the same or even lesser footprint? Easier to design and leaving the rest to the clocks, hoping for the best?
RawZ at aria.uk has his preview up,pretty much the same as other preview
http://forums.aria.co.uk/showthread.php?t=82105
"We managed to unlock it, but how will people manage this much power!?"
Will that become an internet meme now?
I don't care much for AMD's marketing department
Bulldozer doesn't seem to scale much with overclock and in his conclusion says sometimes worse performance with turbo-core.:wth:Quote:
Originally Posted by cesariuth
waiting for piledriver :/Quote:
the good:
- performance according to the price.
- powerful multi-core applications.
- architecture that can improve more.
- significant improvements in memory speed.
- consumption less than the previous architecture.
- greater ability to overclock.
The bad:
- poor performance single thread.
- poor graphics performance benchmark.
- need to update bios, even am3 + plates.
- irregular and even worse performance with turbo core.
- higher consumption than the competition.
Nice review. Time to buy a 2600K :(Quote:
Originally Posted by cesariuth
No... wait. I'll wait for Anandtech review, then buy it :yepp:
do you guys think that due to BD's design, it is more like 4 cores 8 threads design rather than 8 cores 8 threads especially FPU, it is shared 256bit FPU.
In Cinebench R11.5, the score is very close to i5 2500k at stock speed.
Anyone can tell me if SMT a.k.a HT deployed by Intel and CMT used by AMD need any form of optimization
I feel so sorry for those who waited years for this (crap). :D
Even my little X6 1055 keeps up pretty well.
Basically, it's the DNF of processors. A colossal joke. All that BS about "power", "return of FX" and "bulldozing" was simply that, BS.
Doubtful we'll see JF around these parts anytime soon. I feel sorry for those who were duped into purchasing new boards in order to take advantage of this :banana::banana::banana::banana:.
I'll just get myself a 1090t or Phenom II X4 980 and be done with it.
I might just get a 1090t Like you said, but either way Im gonna wait a few months to see how things go.
I like AMD and get the best $/performance they have either way.
(I don't hate intel, I'm just cheap)
I'll be selling my UD7 board and be purchasing the Z68 UD7 board on my next pay check along with the 2600K, I'm saddened and very disappointed with AMD in this showing.
Maybe the problem is the name. "Bulldozer" - powerful, but slow machines they are :p:
Decent performance with DX11
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...ormance_review
I would do the same, but I got this AM3+ board (not because I necessarily wanted to, but because my other board burned out), and because I decided to wait for the actual product release. Now that I see that BD is actually a Tonka toy, I'll probably just get a new vid card and Phenom II and wait for Skyrim.Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms
Isbre: Thanks for the link!
I actually do quite a bit of video transcoding (hate digging for disks).
In that respect this looks like a nice chip and I'm sure it'll only get better as the software matures and I can do my own tweaking... :D
As far as ST and benchies, I'd already given up on the idea of an SB killer... :rolleyes:
I'm actually pretty happy with these results, then again, I'm an admitted AMD fan.
I'm REALLY hoping they'll show up for sale at my local MicroCenter tommorow!
AMD chips are just fun to OC and I need a new toy badly. ;)
glad i went with 890gx and not crosshairV ....... sheesh extra money went to 5870's in Xfire. wo0t made the right choice.
i dont encode or zip. but atleast that was SB's claim to fame lol good ram and a thuban was the right thing to do.
glad i went with 890gx and not crosshairV ....... sheesh extra money went to 5870's in Xfire. wo0t made the right choice.
i dont encode or zip. but atleast that was SB's claim to fame lol good ram and a thuban was the right thing to do.
Wow, we've been waiting ~ 4 years for this?
What a letdown.
I guess the 1090 will get a few years use now, no sense in me spending hard earned on this one.
Well, at least Theo Valich should be pleased with himself. He was dead on. Damn. LOL!
i think terrace posted too much :(
@chew*: can we still expect better performance via bios updates and such in the future is that really it ???
Is anybody going to review the 6100 or 4100? I'm guessing the press didn't receive those, right?
My guess is that they'll enter very quietly in the market... a U$S245 FX8150 can barely hold against a U$S190 X6 1100T, in performance per dollar, and pure performance... IMHO a FX4100 will look like crap against the X4 980BE, or even the 960T with the posibility of unlocking it to X5 or X6...Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryR
I would rather have a Phenom II X8 :yepp: with 32nm HKMG, maybe it could even clock the same as this crap. I didn't see 5Ghz stable, something Intel is doing since last year...
I for one am so...so...SO glad that I did not buy a 990FX; thank god for that! I would have been :banana::banana::banana::banana:ting bricks right about now had I done so!
Welcome to Reality check , my fellows
It's a sad day :(
6100 is in the below review.
http://www.legionhardware.com/articl...fx_4170,1.html
*sigh*
this is so weird....
OC power consumption is nuts!
bulldozer prefers multi OC vs ref clock OC
something seems to be holding it back maybe l3 cache/prefetch bug?
this so looks like phenom I aka barcelona
EDIT: heres to Bulldozer II :D hopefully it will be a freshly zambonied silicon just like Phenom II was
IPC goes up, ha !! Yep, against AMD K6 perhaps, what a bollock statement ......
Epic Fail.
Special Thanks to rintamarotta, 2good4you and JF, continue skrewing dudz ... :yepp:
Come on Llano 8-core with L3
I wonder how long it would take to whip that up into production
^
thatd be awesome
but sadly it would take 4 yrs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacklash
LOL! Guess I'll be getting an 1100t then. Just gotta wait on the impending price drop.
you're asking the wrong personQuote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
He said this is the winner
You really think so?
Even 2 A8's with L3 on a die would work and I dont see any reason it would take more than 6 months
It is.......if all you do on a computer is Zip Files all day..........Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxforces
"Get your multicorebadassfilezipperhere!"
900 series = nvidia gheyness... lmao
we dont need no foxconn lic. beat it.....................
I am one of the sad souls with a Asus CH V. Was waiting for the BD and with all the hype created by AMD and a few of the top members on numerous forums, I got carried away I guess....no more AMD for me. I also got carried away thinking that there was no way a company like AMD could introduce a new product that was probably as good as or worse than the older gen...
I guess people who were discredited before this will now sleep easy knowing that they have been proved right...
Sorry JF, but IPC didn't increase, sorry JF but its a new arch that's still trying to beat a 1100T comprehensively....forget the competition. What was AMD thinking, releasing a chip that didn't even beat the in house competition and at a higher price point and that to with way more power consumption???? Wow.....
I have been using AMD for the last 13 years now and have recommended it to a lot of people..but all the bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: and just plain fail is now driving me away.
I wasted $250USD to get Crosshair V FormulaQuote:
Originally Posted by PerryR
and this is even worse than Duke Nukem Forever !!!
That's right , He posted too much and this is the outcomeQuote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Wow.... When you look at the number of folks viewing the AMD thread compared to the Intel thread right now it doesn't really suprise me at some of the comments.
Do AMD folks actually go into Intel threads and trash things like this when Intel F's up? :shrug:
I know I don't, and yes, Intel has had it's share of screw ups (remember the SATA problems with the last chipset?).
I know folks had really high expectaions for BD, I did too!
But, if you look at things from a rational point of veiw this chip doesn't look all that bad...
Yes, it's different, and it loses badly in ST performance. Keep in mind, this is a radical change from what we've seen in previous arch's.
It may take a little time for software/firmware tweaks (or even a respin) to make this chip shine!
What really shocks me, is the fact that I see alot of known AMD fans trashing it too.... :shakes:
None of this is really new to me. I hope it doesn't happen again, but I rode Commodore Amiga out of existence, and to this very day I still think it was a serious loss
from a tech point of veiw... :(
I'm less dissapointed in the chips performance, and more dissapointed in some of the responses I've seen.
I'll buy one as soon as I can, and push the snot out of it!
Maybe I'll be riding AMD out of business just like I did the Amiga....
I'd hope that reguardless of which camp your in, you'd realize that a world without AMD wouldn't be good for anyone. :rolleyes:
Indeed. Maybe others guy lied so much and purposely disinformed the others that reality felt it needed to slap them..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
You think a magical 0.3% from tunning some hidden timings are going to make a difference ?Quote:
@chew*: can we still expect better performance via bios updates and such in the future is that really it ???
Your sig has a completely different meaning starting from today... :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Brice MJ
I'm actually still considering the 8150, since I can obtain the CPU for 1500 DKK, which is a pretty damn good prize.
I won't blame so hard if AMD haven't use the "FX" name to name Bulldozer , plus all those hype they spread !Quote:
Originally Posted by Daveburt714
For Bulldozer performance , it doesn't fit to revive "FX" ( the "FX" does mean a lot to AMD fans , if you recall the Athlon64 era )
If Bulldozer don't use "FX" , it probably won't piss so much AMD fans off.
idf2011, amd released 8.4ghz that totally jerk excitements all over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daveburt714
anticipation for the best cpu from amd, of course threads like these will get a lot of views from xs members and other forum members.
So ... lab501 was right after all... too bad for AMD.
I agree with imamage. Why use FX-branding? Black Edition processors were fine by themselves. I was about to pull the trigger on an AM3+ mobo + BD combo on 10/12, but AMD has disappointed me. Why even bother releasing BD if it can't keep up with Thubans? I just sold my 2500K because I was expecting better. I'm a big AMD fan but this really irritates me. It makes me want to take an hour drive down to Sunnyvale to show AMD what a real bulldozer is, lol.
I am absolutely crushed by the sad state of Bulldozer. How does an architecture specifically tuned for multithreaded performance fail so hard at said tasks? I was hoping for performance between quad SB and Gulftown, with significantly lower platform costs, but instead we get performance that on average, matches Thuban and at best, matches quad SB. I've exclusively used AMD for my personal systems since my first custom computer with a Thoroughbred Athlon XP. I shed a tear as I'm literally forced to upgrade to Intel.
Why exactly do you need to upgrade? I'd think you could get another 300-500mhz out of your CPU and probably some higher CPU-NB clocks. If there's something you're doing that calls for higher performance that's understandable but for gaming and general desktop useage there's really no reason to upgrade what you've got. I'd say wait until the IVB/Piledriver Era.Quote:
Originally Posted by Assimilator87
if they would've called module=core people wouldn't be so mad now
...did this one got lost along the way?
http://www.hitechlegion.com/reviews/...13752?start=23Quote:
Pros:
Incredible Multi Threaded Performance
Excellent Price/Performance Ratio
Smooth Working Turbo Core For Speed Boost
Dual Turbo Modes For Increased Boost In Lightly Threaded Apps
Maintains Excellent Temps At Stock Speeds
Black Edition With Unlocked Multiplier
Eight Physical Cores
Easily Achieves High Overclocks
Excellent OC Performance Scaling
Easily Tweaked With AOD For Maximum Performance
Cons:
Performance In Single Threaded Apps Not On Par With Multithreaded
...did this one got lost along the way?
http://www.hitechlegion.com/reviews/...13752?start=23Quote:
Pros:
Incredible Multi Threaded Performance
Excellent Price/Performance Ratio
Smooth Working Turbo Core For Speed Boost
Dual Turbo Modes For Increased Boost In Lightly Threaded Apps
Maintains Excellent Temps At Stock Speeds
Black Edition With Unlocked Multiplier
Eight Physical Cores
Easily Achieves High Overclocks
Excellent OC Performance Scaling
Easily Tweaked With AOD For Maximum Performance
Cons:
Performance In Single Threaded Apps Not On Par With Multithreaded
I still say the underlying architecture of the chip is quite sound and innovative, i just can't fathom what and where the :banana::banana::banana::banana:ups are that make it like this state right now. Really waiting for peeps with knowledge to chime in with their analysis and opinion regarding this debacle .......
Perhaps if certain peep didn't make the statement of IPC increase and those leaked slides didn't happen to overly excite many of us, the anticipation won't be that high and it won't be perceived like a total abortion of release product as of right now.
What we have been promised:
-higher or equal IPC (AMD HC22 presentation, AMD bulldozer blog,JF blog and posts)
-more cores(33% more)
-more clocks
-overall 30-50% more performance in the same TDP envelope than previous design
What we got as a final product:
-lower IPC,ranging from 10 to 25%!
-more "weak threads" that in many workloads barely beat X6 at lower clock ( weak threads are direct result of much lower IPC than K10even 4.2Ghz Turbo is not enough to offset this)
-higher clocks with much higher power draw under load (this can be GloFo's mistake for all we know)
- overall around 10-15% more performance vs 1100T
End result: we practically got 8 Bobcat cores (which are sometimes slower per clock than real Bobcat!),higher power draw than 1100T which can clock rather high (with astronomically high power draw when you do that).
With AMD's projected IPC improvements(now to be taken with much salt) ,even Steamroller will not be able to beat Llano which is around 7% faster than Thuban at around same clock while having no L3 cache at all.This is major fail I'm afraid. For desktop at least. For server I suppose they can do fairly well in SOME workloads,but overall they will be just a tiny bit better than where they were with MC. 2B transistors and this is what we get...
probably because its a good example of a bad review,Quote:
Originally Posted by duron
a lot of GPU limited tests and selected benchmarks which would obviously show the main strength of the CPU, lack of PII X6, lack of OC on the Intel CPUs and so on,
I don't think so,Quote:
Originally Posted by Evantaur
the biggest problem with BD is the low single thread performance, low IPC.
so using softwares that can only take advantage of 1-4 cores will always make BD look BAD, and unfortunately that's the case with many popular softwares.
Yeah, Bulldozer is an epic failure, I built a 990FX system all ready to go hoping that Bulldozer would deliver but apparently didn't. I have no more hope for AMD when it comes to CPU's anymore. and I doubt their next generation would be any good as well. The gaming benchmarks were the worst though, and power consumption was insane despite that its slower than the i7 2600K, not worth it. Not going to buy Bulldozer anymore.
... Bulldozer got bulldozed ... :x
The time to change to AMD still didn't come for me...
AMD had to launch this processor ... it imagine the R&D & yieldings costs ... they must, somehow, get same profit out of it ... They knew this was not as good as they anticipated ... what's sad, because the latest cpu's from AMD are labelled as " Not as good as you would like but ... get's the job done " and this is one more for the bunch .
bugger... :x
that was when amd made a good product. if amd keeps producing bad products like this, then they aren't helping us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daveburt714
it doesn't matter if amd disappears if this is all they can do. this will not keep intel prices down. if anything, the reverse is happening, and intel is putting price pressure on amd. that is how bad zambezi is for the price right now. intel is better performance per dollar right now.
that was when amd made a good product. if amd keeps producing bad products like this, then they aren't helping us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daveburt714
it doesn't matter if amd disappears if this is all they can do. this will not keep intel prices down. if anything, the reverse is happening, and intel is putting price pressure on amd. that is how bad zambezi is for the price right now. intel is better performance per dollar right now.
Attachment 121184
I think, power consumption is mistake of editors (some used bad BIOS version). OBR has more experinece, than most of editors from all world, look at his results. Still could be some problems in BIOS of some motherboards.
Attachment 121184
I think, power consumption is mistake of editors (some used bad BIOS version). OBR has more experinece, than most of editors from all world, look at his results. Still could be some problems in BIOS of some motherboards.
Let me ask, again, what could be the rationale behind all this 2x2-way INT CMT thingy, that they've preferred it over 1x4-way SMT? Easier to design and leaving the rest to the clocks, hoping for the best?
SMT could also be implemented on the scalar INT domain (FlexFP is so, already), probably on the same or even lesser footprint... That way they wouldn't have limited peak IPC, unlike now. Who cares if the 2nd thread per module brought lesser %, if the "100%", so the ST performance was much better!?
Well, perhaps the cost of R&D for that would have been just too must for them.
Anyway, it's perhaps even bigger of a marketing fail to call it a 8-core. People are not that stupid, no matter what some marketing duds think. For a modest 4C/8T CPU it would've looked much better...
Tell me about it...same boat, different place....this sucks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrono Detector
Tell me about it...same boat, different place....this sucks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrono Detector
Atleast the IMC is completely 'twisted' on BD ;)
No trouble doing DDR-2400 24/7 (unofficial divider on Crosshair V) and much much higher with better cooling (due the fact that the minimum NB to DRAM ratio is 1:1 and high MEMCLK stresses the NB much more).
Shamino did DDR-2904 on a not_so_good A0-stepping BD (back in April).
I did not find any trouble doing DDR-2700 (Memtest stable) on Crosshair V once the bios was fixed.
"Underclocked" CPU, northbridge at minimum speed, DDR-2700:
Attachment 121187
CPU with a bit better clocks (NB too):
Attachment 121186
The bandwidth is ok I guess :)
Oh my...Loooking at benchmarks this morning, I was remembering all the discussions with you over the past 18 months about BD....Well, we can't be both right at the same time. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Attachment 121188
Hardware Canucks did some pretty good comparisons :
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-20.html
PS : You should change your signature, someone was right and you and others were terribly in the wrong.
Stillt: nice man, I need better RAMs for 2900 MHz :-D, But I found some drops with higher RAM clocks at 8-10-8 or 8-11-8 against 8-9-8 in overall bandwith (the best was about 2220 8-9-8 at clock about 5 GHz)
Yay! Nice! DDR3 2900Mhz... oh, wait! No.
Attachment 121190
because 7-7-7, 9-11-9 . Poor timings in second situation. Easy 7-9-6 1866 MHz for me at FX. An then u will see diferences. Of course, its more for overclockers and enthusiast than for daily users. But, we are at XS :)
Has anyone got a clue on the overclock potential of the FX-8120? Is it binned, or as good as the FX-8150? In the latter case I'd consider buying a Zambezi to OC it to 5GHz 24/7.
There were some performance improvements to be had if the testing was done with better memory (3DMark11 and Mafia 2):Quote:
Originally Posted by Andi64
http://www.madshrimps.be/articles/ar...#axzz1aY74DCwx
Yeah, the fact that they would even bother to market this towards gamers is amusingly insulting. In their sad attempt at trying to be different from Intel, AMD shoots themselves in the foot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrono Detector
Speaker of the TRUTH ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectrobozo
It loses in MT performance as well, the X6 even beat it in some MT tests.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daveburt714
The current line of BD will never shine, there is just not enough tweaking that can be done to save it, unless you want the BD-zip'o'matic, then your golden!
Just because people here are more or less PO'ed at how all this was handled, doesn't mean we want AMD to go under. Competition is good.Quote:
What really shocks me, is the fact that I see alot of known AMD fans trashing it too.... :shakes:
None of this is really new to me. I hope it doesn't happen again, but I rode Commodore Amiga out of existence, and to this very day I still think it was a serious loss
from a tech point of veiw... :(
I'm less dissapointed in the chips performance, and more dissapointed in some of the responses I've seen.
I'll buy one as soon as I can, and push the snot out of it!
Maybe I'll be riding AMD out of business just like I did the Amiga....
I'd hope that reguardless of which camp your in, you'd realize that a world without AMD wouldn't be good for anyone. :rolleyes:
Lying to the consumer is not, they brought this onto themselves. I don't blame anyone for jumping camps after this fiasco.
This would be like Apple releasing a iPad 3, that was slower than a iPad 2, yet they were telling world + dog that it will be faster, (aka IPC increases!)
The only way AMD can save face is to lower the price by $50 across the board, then, the sting wouldn't hurt so much.
flank3r (or anyone) can you pls compare thuban 24/7 settings (somewhere around 4.2ghz/2.8ghz/1600mhz) vs BD 24/7 settings whatever they might be? win7 64bit if you can :)
where about hypers on this crap?
Sick man :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stilt
yep.. people have been saying 2400+ is very doable if imc is under cold.. even 3k from what i've heard
@leeghoofd in your review at madshrimps in the stock clock test section you said this
i think you made a typo about the 4 cores and 4 hyperthreaded,should be just 4 cores.Quote:
And yes we are finally in 2500K territory people. Reminder though : thats 4 cores and 4 hyperthreaded ones for the 2500K versus the "8" cores of the FX-8150.
Anyone remember this post? This was April.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Add 33% cores theoretical score... = 3.8 Pts 8 core at 2.6 Ghz 3.6/2.6 = 1.384 x 3.8 = 5.26 pts, or 5.7 at 3.9 Ghz (all core turbo)
You know how hard we laughed at that leak?
We made fun of it, talked about how terrace must have been the source, how the source must have "ran all the tests at once"
...and look where we are today with much more optimized bioses...
Scoring a 6.0 instead of a 5.7. :shakes:
Doesn't 'need' to be cold :)Quote:
Originally Posted by badatgames18
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/853/1217cl7.png
Super easy.
Need to have a play with he higher strap.
Can you work over 2800 NB Gappo ( no cold) I only could succeed with cold...
Man the spin just doesn't stop for this hunk of :banana::banana::banana::banana::
#1 Its super effective against 2600k
-No
#2 Well it overclocks a lot! 5ghz on air is common!
-No
#3 Well its memory speeds are insane!
-Gimme a freaking break
im gutted and totally unimpressed with bd :( but with there r&d budget who would of thought they would stand a chance against the big blue?
has amd commented on WHY bd isnt what it was supposed to be yet?
Based on the binning I did the average on the FX-8150īs was around 2700MHz with ~1.33V.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
These were equivalent to the retail cpus, however I believe the retails will be atleast a bit better.
Naturally some of them liked the VDDNB higher some lower, depending if the chip was a "keeper" or a leaker ;)
NCLK seems to be the only limiter for MEMCLK on aircooling.
On K15h the NCKL domain cannot work at lower speeds than the MEMCLK (so the minimum is 1:1).
High MEMCLK frequency stresses NB much more than lower frequencies. Therefore it appears that the NB is doing worse than it actually is.
Surely cold helps reaching higher MEMCLK frequencies, how much that is impossible to say until there are chips that do 2700MHz+ NCLK at the same MEMCLK frequency (on air).
It seems that less compute units / cores activated will make the NCLK go further.
Atleast the average FX-4100 does better in the terms of NB overclockability.
There will be a special bios build for Crosshair V quite soon.
It will feature all of the gimmicks found in previous "ES" builds + some new improvements.
Some of the timing parameters and NB related stuff will be improved to make it fly even higher in proper conditions ;)