AMD Zambezi news, info, fans !

[FlanK3r]

if this will be real, than is not much good. Because PII redesign x8 at 32nm and simillary clocks could be 100% better!And die size would be the same. (Thuban 1100T working behind rendering only at 3300 MHz and hit 5.95 points, this FX worked at 4200 MHz and achieve "only" 6.87 with +900 MHz clock and +2 more cores...So, wtf?)

PS: Thuban at 3.9 GHz has 7.02 points....

[mongoled]

This was posted 2 days ago i think. It looks fake, 223 TDP doesn't sound right at all. also it's obviously an old ES since CPUz is showing 8130p not 8150p, IMO.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts

shows FX-8150P getting a 6.87 score in CB 11.5.... what does i7-2600k get stock? 5.48? is that correct?

Attachment 119324


edit: so this score = i7 2600k score

http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i...600k-review/14

Good comparissons

if this will be real, than is not much good. Because PII redesign x8 at 32nm and simillary clocks could be 100% better!And die size would be the same. (Thuban 1100T working behind rendering only at 3300 MHz and hit 5.95 points, this FX worked at 4200 MHz and achieve "only" 6.87 with +900 MHz clock and +2 more cores...So, wtf?)

PS: Thuban at 3.9 GHz has 7.02 points....

From your point of view, looks like this must be another cripple / fake result

It better be!

[FlanK3r]

I dont know, it may be not fake...Maybe still BIOS problem or microcode or maybe real performance. Who know....

[TheBreezyBB]

If it is real, Then AMD are shooting themselves in the foot, by releasing an under-performing CPU, that is not what everyone wanted to be! I for one don't think this is real.

[undone]

hey I found the die is very different compare to the earlier one, isn't it? (L2 cache become smaller or the core bigger? L3 significantly bigger than before?)

[Manicdan]

it looks like the green pictures are just taller than the pink version which looks nearly perfectly square
so how they came to the measurements may still be wrong

[informal]

If it is real, Then AMD are shooting themselves in the foot, by releasing an under-performing CPU, that is not what everyone wanted to be! I for one don't think this is real.

Do you think AMD will be releasing a chip they call high-end performance desktop CPU and which brings back the FX name again if it was slower than the predecessor? One hint about performance is the rumored retail price.Just compare this price of roughly ~300$ with Thuban 1100T price of 190$.IF you count in that usually the new stuff is priced a tad bit higher ,the difference is from 40% to 57%. Performance should be in line with this.

For reference look here:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/778-14/moyenne.html

AMD needs a chip that is 38% faster than Thuban @ 3.3Ghz,on average, to take the performance crown (until SB-E comes). I believe they will do just that(as literary have the chip that is around ~1.30x-1.5x faster than Thuban in client workloads).

[demonkevy666]

the other screen is showing a high voltage for lower clock speed. 1.414 for 2.8ghz and 1.296 for 4.2ghz. -_-

shows FX-8150P getting a 6.87 score in CB 11.5.... what does i7-2600k get stock? 5.48? is that correct?


edit: so this score = i7 2600k score

http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i...600k-review/14

seems it is possible.

what if that was only 4 cores on bulldozer ?

Do you think AMD will be releasing a chip they call high-end performance desktop CPU and which brings back the FX name again if it was slower than the predecessor? One hint about performance is the rumored retail price.Just compare this price of roughly ~300$ with Thuban 1100T price of 190$.IF you count in that usually the new stuff is priced a tad bit higher ,the difference is from 40% to 57%. Performance should be in line with this.

For reference look here:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/778-14/moyenne.html

AMD needs a chip that is 38% faster than Thuban @ 3.3Ghz,on average, to take the performance crown (until SB-E comes). I believe they will do just that(as literary have the chip that is around ~1.30x-1.5x faster than Thuban in client workloads).

it's right your sign yet n00o00o0o one cares to look.
everyone else no it's less IPC then phenom II, yet they have no real proof of it.

[tbone8ty]

That would a nice score if it was only 4 cores

[flyck]

That would a nice score if it was only 4 cores

I wouldn't be suprised if BD FX8 doesn't run far away from X6 in fpu intensive applications. Given the BD shares it fpu they will have lower core scaling then x6. If you compare it to a deneb at 3,7GHz which gets 4,35points. There is a 50-60% speedup for the same number of fpu ex-units.

not saying those numbers are correct, but i wouldn't expect magic for the part in which they made compromises with BD.

[CrazyNutz]

if this will be real, than is not much good. Because PII redesign x8 at 32nm and simillary clocks could be 100% better!And die size would be the same. (Thuban 1100T working behind rendering only at 3300 MHz and hit 5.95 points, this FX worked at 4200 MHz and achieve "only" 6.87 with +900 MHz clock and +2 more cores...So, wtf?)

PS: Thuban at 3.9 GHz has 7.02 points....

Keep in mind Cinebench is very FPU dependent as with all 3d apps. That being said we know BD only has 4 FPU's.

[freeloader]

Well if it doesn't have decent integer performance and lousy FP performance, then what does it have?

[flyck]

Well if it doesn't have decent integer performance and lousy FP performance, then what does it have?

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."

[demonkevy666]

Keep in mind Cinebench is very FPU dependent as with all 3d apps. That being said we know BD only has 4 FPU's.

that's only in 256 bit mode is there 4.
in 128 bit There are still 8 of them.
it was also said that a single core can use both 128 bit FPU if needed.

[mongoled]

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."

LMAO

[CrazyNutz]

that's only in 256 bit mode is there 4.
in 128 bit There are still 8 of them.
it was also said that a single core can use both 128 bit FPU if needed.

I see, and since cinebench does not support AVX yet I't would be running the 128bit x 8 configuration.

[cal_guy]

Each floating point unit has 4 pipes. The first two (pipe 0 and pipe 1) contain the units that mainly perform FP arithmetic such as ADD, MUL and FMA, while the other two pipes (pipe 2 and pipe 3) perform the other AVX, SSE, and MMX instructions. When compared to 10h processors bulldozers FPU is more specialized and balanced.

[JF-AMD]

Perhaps everyone should consider that AMD did not release these benchmarks and they might not even be real. Nothing I have seen, to date, has been representational of actual performance.

[Naturecannon]

Perhaps everyone should consider that AMD did not release these benchmarks and they might not even be real. Nothing I have seen, to date, has been representational of actual performance.

Was considered and discussed from what I saw...............you have to realize speculation is all we have to hold on to after numerous BD delays and poor performance rumors, not to mention the 90 day mark announced at Computex is hitting next Tuesday and not a peep from AMD. If BD is ever released or official performance data is released the speculation will stop but not until then. These delays are not looking good and no word from AMD, so the speculation will weigh on the negative side of performance until AMD proves otherwise in my opinion. Even you left doubt hanging with "might not even be real. " .

Beside, what else is a bunch of hungry sharks to do after missing several feedings. I guess we could go eat elsewhere, experience the taste (beside hype and false promises) and talk about the food there. AMD should be happy this BD discussion still exists and everyone didnt jump off the AMD ship............ although the time is nearing.

[Seth-01]

Was considered and discussed from what I saw...............you have to realize speculation is all we have to hold on to after numerous BD delays and poor performance rumors, not to mention the 90 day mark announced at Computex is hitting next Tuesday and not a peep from AMD. If BD is ever released or official performance data is released the speculation will stop but not until then. These delays are not looking good and no word from AMD, so the speculation will weigh on the negative side of performance until AMD proves otherwise in my opinion. Even you left doubt hanging with "might not even be real. " .

Beside, what else is a bunch of hungry sharks to do after missing several feedings. I guess we could go eat elsewhere, experience the taste (beside hype and false promises) and talk about the food there. AMD should be happy this BD discussion still exists and everyone didnt jump off the AMD ship............ although the time is nearing.

good answer ! AMD say nothing. The only thing we have are rumours and no words from AMD, only silence ! It's time to give us real informations instead of "might be" !

[Particle]

It's not as if you guys are entitled to information about it just because you want to know. They'll tell you when they're good and ready, and that is absolutely both their right and their prerogative.

[Seth-01]

then it is as well to say nothing

[Evantaur]

It's time to give us real informations instead of "might be" !

well his hands are pretty much tied... those flaming torches are not helping

[Mats]

Even you left doubt hanging with "might not even be real. " .

Wouldn't you? No one here can tell if they're real or not, for one reason or another. Even if it's real, it doesn't have to be representative for the actual performance of the retail product.

Give him a break, you should be thankful for having JF here. Most people here are totally clueless about BD anyway, me included.

[Seth-01]

well his hands are pretty much tied... those flaming torches are not helping

ok ..... then how many does it cost for informations ???