AM3+: 4, 6 and 8 coresQuote:
Originally Posted by Glow9
Printable View
AM3+: 4, 6 and 8 coresQuote:
Originally Posted by Glow9
Guys, don't know if some of you have already read it, but I found this article quite interesting: http://citavia.blog.de/2011/08/28/bu...mmit-11338315/
The site stated it has 24 threads when running bench.Quote:
Originally Posted by thematrixhazune
Does that mean they disabled cores?
Then OPN shows it being a 16 core
Hehe, just trying to squeeze some more info out of you, as i strongly suspect you sit on a couple :DQuote:
Originally Posted by chew*
From the site: "physically present, not always fully activated"Quote:
Originally Posted by thematrixhazune
Which is their 8 core FX then? http://sites.amd.com/us/promo/proces.../fx-rules.aspxQuote:
Originally Posted by SkullCracka
"Five (5) AMD FX series eight-core processors. Approximate Retail Value: $300 USD each."
8 cores are some desktop CPUs (example FX 8150), servers are 8, 12 and 16 cores
I see ok thanksQuote:
Originally Posted by nex_73
http://translate.googleusercontent.c...epWTZ5BO8_IHuA
wtf???
" 想在国内买到推土机？ Want to buy a bulldozer in the country? 乐观估计也得等到11月份。 Optimistic estimates have to wait until November.
"
I hope thats not happening, AMD might have yield problems.
I get my retail 8-core soon as they're released but only 1 or 2 if thats true :/
November? what next? Q1 2012? :shakes:
it says its shipping this week. does it take 2 months for a process to get to the end consumer?
ain't that :banana::banana::banana:'s bulldozer sample?Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
My stock answer on anything prior to launch is that it probably isn't true.
However to respond to "how can it beat a 5690", let's look at a couple of things:
1. This says "cryptography benchmark"
2. That work is done in 128-bit FP for the most part
3. The 5690 has 6 128-bit FP engines
4. A Bulldozer 12-core would have 12 128-bit FP engines
Generally speaking, would you rather have 6 @ 4.2 or 12 @ the 2.4 that the result shows? For highly parallel tasks like that I would much rather have more engines at a lower speed. Especially when you consider the power draw with getting a 5690 up to 4.21GHz.
I am not confirming anything here, I have no way to know if this is real or not, just saying that for those types of tasks it would be completely believable that bulldozer would do quite well.
I hope, it is only chinese boulevard...
edit:excelent, JF here now (again in right time :) )
If they are shipping this week with a release date in the middle of September then:Quote:
Originally Posted by AKM
1. We can expect general availability in some places to be fairly soon after the official release date.
2. Availability in some countries will take longer. November would not be unusual for some countries. (As the link mentions.) Of course that means some people will repost that date as being general availability for every country.
I don't know , rumor said they will launch at Sept but Retail availiability will have to wait til Oct 2011Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
Well if they really start shippingQuote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I will see if any "early" leak retail one available again :)
Honestly , I searched "ZDNet" (as Mydriver quoted their source is from ZDNet) and I don't see any "news" mention about Bulldozer start shipping this weekQuote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
Probly it will be the same like when X6 released? I remember that Golden Computer Arcade stores in HK put it out for sale first?
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/computers/...zer-chips/6587Quote:
Originally Posted by imamage
That was my understanding as well, which was depressing since before I left on vacation in July it was still November, so I was hoping that about a week or so after getting back that I'd be able to get a BD. Of course when I DO get back I see Sept 19 as launch with availability in Oct :(Quote:
Originally Posted by imamage
My speculation on the Sandra results are that it's a 12C Magny with just a Processor Name String hack. The 95GB/s memory bandwidth on the 8x 12C with 64GB is pretty sweet though haha
EDIT: There are also more bench runs with that same "Eng Sample" setup:
http://www.sisoftware.co.uk/rank2011...1b7c4f9c9&l=en
EDIT2: *shrug* Who knows, maybe it is a BD with disabled cores. The next 2 pages have the same chip only running 16 threads (8 per CPU)
if its just a MangyC chip, then wouldnt we see a whole bunch of other results near identical?
There are if you know how to search for em ;) This might shed some light on the subject:
http://www.sisoftware.co.uk/rank2011...9ff8cb181&l=en
Specifically:
Devices
AMD-ATI Processor 2x AMD Eng Sample
AMD-ATI Virtual Machine 2x AMD Opteron 6128
When I digging the result found that, 12 cores opteron 6172 only on par with 2500k & 2600k:eek:
http://www.sisoftware.co.uk/rank2011...9cfbc81b1&l=en
BTW the HyperThreading sucks in this benchmark, perhaps this benchmark is not optimized enough for multi threaded.
Non-overclock and server-only result comparision:
http://www.sisoftware.co.uk/rank2011...9cfbc81b1&l=en
Old opteron is here
http://www.sisoftware.co.uk/rank2011...cfa89b484&l=en
This Eng sample 3x faster than 6172 wtf, maybe some new instruction set take effect.