Can new BIOS AGESA give more performance (or little more) to Bulldozer chips???
Printable View
Can new BIOS AGESA give more performance (or little more) to Bulldozer chips???
I thinking, it can, or the least mean full right support with RAM modules, righ Turbos function etc
Is there a thing you are sure about Bulldozer ?Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
Stop bla-bla John and give us some numberz more ;)
You're the one that should stop this kind of stupid blah blah dude.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
You know what he means... He is stating that anything you see online prior to actual launch may not be entirely true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
Wow, from 3.1GHz to 3.6GHz, that seems like alot. Cant say Ive seen that kind of wide gap in clocks before. Somthin's up.
RussC
Speaking with some guys from amd in my country,they had hopes that bulldozer would catch i5.But they were not sure about that :) ...
all these transistors and die space, and yet not being sure if they can match i5 with integrated(albeit :banana::banana::banana::banana:) GPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex-Ro
Catch i5?? Phenom II X6 is faster than i5 in almost all multithreaded benchmarks and even comes very close in a few poorly threaded ones. So according to your source in AMD, Zambezi X8 may have a good chance of catching up with Phenom II X6. Great lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex-Ro
As I remember Bulldozer (First Generation) don't have Integrated GPU , it's Llano (APU , Socket FM1) have Integrated GPUQuote:
Originally Posted by muziqaz
No it's not,don't know what reviews you've been reading but 2500K beats X6 in a good amount of multi-threading but in single-threaded ones...God bless us.I'm talking about stock 2500K vs stock 1090T,not stock 2500K vs 1090 at 4 ghz and cpu-nb at 3000.
Yes, I know, I meant i5 with integrated gpu ;) Thus the bananas dancing. I wouldn't put bananas next to Llano or Brazos GPUs ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by imamage
Yeah, bananas are not good as thermal compound, I know from experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by muziqaz
Let's see what real numbers show us:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex-Ro
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...rs-review.html
2600K/2500K vs 1100T
AIDA64 Extreme Edition : Mixed bag,some tests are won by 2600K,some by 1100T and sometimes 2500K is faster than 1100T. Synthetic benchmark.
SuperPi Mod v1.5 : We all know the results in this one,2600K/2500K is faster .Obsolete fp benchmark.
wPRIME 2.03 : 2600K is a hair faster than 1100T. 2500K is much slower than 1100T(40%). Synthetic benchmark.
Cinebench R10 : 2600K is solidly faster than 1100T,2500K is slightly faster than 1100T(6%). 3D rendering benchmark,uses obsolete engine now.
Cinebench R11.5 : 2600K is solidly faster than 1100T(16%),2500K is slower than 1100T by 8%. 3D rendering benchmark,uses newer engine with better MT support.
Deep Fritz 12 - Chess Benchmark : 2600K is faster than 1100T (12%),2500K is slower than 1100T (14%) . Benchmark uses chess engine,good MT support.
POV-Ray 3.73 beta 40 : 2600K is faster than 1100T (9%),2500K is slower than 1100T (14%). A ray tracing program,good MT support.
Intel High Definition Experience and Performance Ratings Test 2010: 2600K and 2500K are much faster than 1100T (40%). This is intel's own
benchmarking software so difference is not surprising(they probably use ICC and generate suboptimal code paths).
PCMark Vantage x64 : 2600K and 2500K are faster than 1100T by 14% (and they are faster than 980x Gulftown for that matter!). Semi-synthetic benchmark
suite.Limited MT support.
Lame Front End : 2600K and 2500K are faster than 1100T by 25-28% (and anything else from intel too). Single-threaded application.
Photoshop CS4 : 2600K and 2500K are faster than 1100T by 40+% (and anything else from intel too,including 980x). Not well threaded real world application.
x264 HD Benchmark : 2600K is solidly faster than 1100T (17%),2500K is slower than 1100T (11%). Well threaded real world application.
WinRAR : Both 2600K and 2500K are much faster than 1100T. Compression test uses 1-2 cores so not well MT aware.
7-Zip : Both 2600K and 2500K are faster than 1100T(14%), but 1100 is placed 3rd,well before 980x Gulftown. Test uses 256 AES NI encryption with HW support in latest intel CPUs (1100T has no such support yet performs good).
Futuremark 3DMark06 : Both 2600K and 2500K are faster than 1100T(2500K just slightly). Semi-synthetic test,has some support for multicore.
Futuremark 3DMark Vantage : 2600K is noticeably faster than 1100T,2500K is practically on par with 1100T.Semi-synthetic test,has some support for multicore.
Games: Generally in games,2600K and 2500K are somewhat faster but advantage varies a lot from very low to somewhat high(percentage wise). Most games are poorly threaded,with thread support ranging from 2 to 4 max.
As can be seen from hard numbers,whenever you have good MT support ,1100T is faster than 2500K. In single and poorly threaded workloads 2500K is faster but not always and not with big advantage. 2600K is usually noticeably faster,by more than 15% in many workloads but it costs a lot more.
EDIT:
16C Opteron listed (with wrong specs though,copy paste from Magny Cours):
http://www.smsassembly.com/AMD-Opter...KTGGGU-2.3GHz/
Quote:
Product description
AMD Opteron 6276 OS6276WKTGGGU 2.3GHz 16-Core Server CPU
Be the first to own AMD's next generation 16-Core 6200 Series processors.
In stock, can ship today.
Nice find :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
They're way cheaper than MC :
Opteron 6276 (Interlagos) : 1075$ (In stock)
Opteron 6176 (Magny Cours) : 1750$
It seems SMS got 14 chips :
http://www.tradeloop.com/broadcast/?bc=821460
AMD is going for server market share,it's obvious ;). They need to make up for a lot of lost %.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
So if it is for sale and it appears that anyone can purchase it, doesn't that mean that the NDA is lifted, or am I missing something?
There is a presentation under NDA planned on 6th september but launch is more for around mid-october according to trustworthy sources.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canis-X
Interesting (and sad), so can these sources be named?
Of course, Hardware.fr and X86-Secret teamQuote:
Originally Posted by Canis-X
Thank you sir!! :up:
http://www.tradeloop.com/users/?user=64706
He's selling more than that model.
Hope, this mean paperlaunch (reviews) at 6.9. and later real avaibility of chips.
AMD's stepping codes mark the date of assembly in the format of ?? YYWW???. If you look at the Opteron 6276 heatspreader markings, on the second line it says FA 1130CPM. Assuming the image is real, it means the CPU was manufactured during the 30th week of 2011, or between July 25th and 31st.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Attachment 119601
If that is a production part this early, I doubt this is going to be a paperlaunch. It could, however, have a low initial production volumen until it ramps and very high demand, so they COULD be scarse, even though it will reach the hands of end customers. Remember events like the A64X2 vs Pentium D launchs, A64X2 were available but scarse and demand was very high, while Pentium D was nowhere to be seen at no matter how much you wanted to pay for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Oh, besides, where the hell could someone get Bulldozer retail parts this early? Users of Engineering Samples parts jealously protects the NDA and do not Benchmark or sell it. If this guy really is selling retail parts, someone could easily make a quick preview of Bulldozer performance with one of these.