Bulldozers first screens

[saaya]

Yea. It's hard to believe considering someone at Intel more than likely checked out the chip they were going to send to a prominent reviewer before it went out the door.

I wonder if they over volted it or did something to hurt the chip. Or perhaps it could have been damaged by static discharge before installing?

Btw... has anyone here EVER damaged a component due to ESD? i've been building computers for 20 years and have never once had it happen. (famous last words.... like when i posted up that my Dell XPS M1530 was perfect and had no GPU problems. ZAP.... the following week it died )

I did... I was charged somehow and touched my 3850 at the xfire port, I felt a zap and the card never booted again...

[NEOAethyr]

I've never killed anything with static, except for floppies.

But I've heard of people killing whole pc's by touching the case, static discharge, because they had bad wiring in there house.

Oh and I was told along time ago that the old slot baised pentium's would die on the shelf if left that way.


I've hurt chips in the past by running them at higher voltages.
But the damage wasn't much.
It's easier to hurt a cpu then it is to break one in :|.

That's why instead of just jumping to a certain voltage and playing with it, I take baby steps.

All it takes is a few steps higher then what it really needs, running it like that for a long time and getting it hot, and the overclocking potential starts to get lower and lower ever so slightly.


And btw, what's this omg 1ghz turbo core stuff about?
You can increase by 1ghz with turbo on the x6's if you wanted to...

Omg turbo core in effect on all cores at once, lol, turbo does that now anyways .
It's just another pwr state...


A 1055t for $99 would be cool...

[Particle]

I don't get all the rabble about "High frequencies? It must suck." That doesn't make any sense since we've already been told that BD is more efficient than K10. It's not like BD is going to be a P4 strategy version of K10. It's just going to be the result of better timing design in this new architecture.

[Manicdan]

wrong

im being bottlenecked by my Yorkfield running at 4ghz while using a radeon 6950 2gig ram in some games like :BadCompany and TF2...gpu usage falls to between 40%-60% on some maps and FPS falls accordingly.

and this is only talking about online shooters...

gpu usage is hard to measure with AMD cards
because of how simple sharders may not be utilized fully, its very possible it could be gpu limited still and not just pinged at 100% usage

even with my 4850 ive seen 60% usage is MANY cases, while my cpu is 6 cores and turbo up to 4.3ghz and definitely not cpu limited for what i was doing. only a few games ever pushed my gpu past 90%

if you really want to test it properly, tell you computer to not let it reach max clocks, and if your cpu limited it should decrease fps at a near linear rate.

[Particle]

Yes. You definitely have to take GPU utilization numbers with a grain of salt. It's not as accurate as task manager showing you CPU utilization (which is itself also a close estimate, not an absolute; food for thought).

However, BC2 does chew on a CPU. You'll get good performance increases going from 3.6 to 4.0 and 4.0 to 4.4 GHz even if you're using something from the previous generation such as a 5850.

[w0mbat]

wrong

im being bottlenecked by my Yorkfield running at 4ghz while using a radeon 6950 2gig ram in some games like :BadCompany and TF2...gpu usage falls to between 40%-60% on some maps and FPS falls accordingly.

and this is only talking about online shooters...

just cause there are a few exceptions it doesnt mean that hes wrong. even a 3ghz x4 can fully utilize a gtx 580 in 90% of the current games.

[saaya]

It also depends on what the game does on the gpu. Doesn't bc2 do occlusion detection on the CPU?

[demonkevy666]

Change thread title to "Intel fanboys comment on first Bulldozer screenshots" please.

LOL
with all the comment about it only being as fast as I7 it's going to be said sooner or later.

[tajoh111]

Change thread title to "Intel fanboys comment on first Bulldozer screenshots" please.

I don't think anyone is expecting for something as disastrous as the original Phenom, I think people are expecting something more akin to something like Phenom II which was decent for a company with the resources AMD has. I think with all the framework with current CPU's, it is hard to gain single core performance because the biggest improvements have already been implemented. Sandy bridge for example isn't as impressive an improvement clock for clock as nehalem and nehalem was as impressive as core 2 duo vs P4 architecture.

I think expecting something that's going to beat for example ivy bridge for example or even match it clock for clock core for core is super unlikely. It would be the biggest improvement of all time, bigger than core 2 duo vs p4. Ivy bridge is supposed to be 20 percent faster and with sandy bridges lead over phenom II it would have to be a monster gain that is pretty much impossible.

I used to love AMD for their processors but they have continued to disappoint over and over again. Their overclocking ability is less consistent than Intels which make them less fun. Unless your working with LN2 i guess or liquid helium with the most recent processors. They are so much slower clock for clock too. So that why I wouldn't set my expectation too high for bulldozer as well as a lack of anything to show. Intel shows things months ahead of time because they are confidence about their processors, AMD just seems less confident.

[informal]

I think expecting something that's going to beat for example ivy bridge for example or even match it clock for clock core for core is super unlikely. It would be the biggest improvement of all time, bigger than core 2 duo vs p4. Ivy bridge is supposed to be 20 percent faster and with sandy bridges lead over phenom II it would have to be a monster gain that is pretty much impossible.

20% faster is within the same power envelope(SB vs IB). I would be surprised if we saw 5%(overall) higher IPC with IB. I expect IB will bring clock improvements and power draw decrease which is in line with a shrink.

Bulldozer is not only going to be made on 32nm (vs 45 in Deneb's case),it is going to be clock optimized and power optimized design. On top of this it should bring certain IPC improvements ,mostly in fp code. It will be a step up from deneb,that's for sure. I personally expect it will outperform SB in well threaded code . In poorly threaded code BD has other features which will help so that it doesn't trail SB that much as Phenom does today.

[XRL8]

I don't think anyone is expecting for something as disastrous as the original Phenom, I think people are expecting something more akin to something like Phenom II which was decent for a company with the resources AMD has. I think with all the framework with current CPU's, it is hard to gain single core performance because the biggest improvements have already been implemented. Sandy bridge for example isn't as impressive an improvement clock for clock as nehalem and nehalem was as impressive as core 2 duo vs P4 architecture.

I think expecting something that's going to beat for example ivy bridge for example or even match it clock for clock core for core is super unlikely. It would be the biggest improvement of all time, bigger than core 2 duo vs p4. Ivy bridge is supposed to be 20 percent faster and with sandy bridges lead over phenom II it would have to be a monster gain that is pretty much impossible.

I used to love AMD for their processors but they have continued to disappoint over and over again. Their overclocking ability is less consistent than Intels which make them less fun. Unless your working with LN2 i guess or liquid helium with the most recent processors. They are so much slower clock for clock too. So that why I wouldn't set my expectation too high for bulldozer as well as a lack of anything to show. Intel shows things months ahead of time because they are confidence about their processors, AMD just seems less confident.

Well, so YOU seem to be expecting something disastrous, just not AS disastrous as phenom I (i guess the first TLB bug version, B3 was not that much worse than Q6xxx)
And by "people" i think you mean intel fanboys, because normal people have pretty high expectations of bulldozer, its such a radical departure, first brand new architecture from AMD for years, and all that on brand new (for AMD) process.
Going further in your post.Such a small company like AMD with the resources thay have, had surpassed intel before, so its not like ypu present it ,like its impossible ;-).
NOBODY expects it to beat/match ivybridge clock for clock or core for core.
Ivybridge is a year away, and on a new process, which wont be available for AMD at the same time.And more importantly, definition and inner workings of amd`s "core" and intels core are such radically different for bulldozer that you cant make comparisons like that.Whats going to be important is performance per $,and/or absolute performance.
At this time, it seems first BD is going to be competing with 4 core sandybridge.With 8 cores and big turbo, it seems like it has a chance.
As for intels confidence, they were confident of a netburst architecture with rambus memory.And where it got them ?

EDIT:
And by the way, isnt ivybridge just a shrink? Shrink doesnt bring big or huge IPC gains, mainly minor ones.

[Ket]

Be realistic people. Something like 5 weeks from release and theres still no performance numbers for Bulldozer, don't ignore whats staring you in the face and thats BD won't be the miracle chip people are praying for like A64 was. I'll go on record right now and say whatever AMD intend as direct competion for the 2500k to be about 10% slower than the 2500k. If the gap is larger, that won't surprise me either. Nomatter which way you slice things, theres absolutely nothing to even suggest BD is equally as efficient as SB, nevermind better. Anybody remember me saying BD could be released for AM3 if AMD really wanted to albiet with a few exclusions but AMD kept saying "oh no BD must have a new socket and chipset".... yet now BD will essentially be released on the AM3 platform just with the AM3 socket itself so marginally modified you wouldn't even notice if you didn't know about it.

[Vardant]

Haha, I love this.

When there's a silence and somebody wants it to fail, then it's a bad sign, they got nothing to show for etc.

When there's a silence and somebody wants it to succeed, then it's a good sign, it's going to be even better than everybody expected and they don't want to scare the competition, because they could lower prices or w/e.

[Manicdan]

^^absolutely right, BD will still be horrible at superpi and thus will be a horrible chip

[geo]

will BD have Intel Quick Sync equivalent?

[Ket]

I didn't say BD will be a horrible chip, just stop expecting so much from it because theres nothing to prove its weight.

[XRL8]

I didn't say BD will be a horrible chip, just stop expecting so much from it because theres nothing to prove its weight.

Theres nothing to prove otherwise also

[tajoh111]

Well, so YOU seem to be expecting something disastrous, just not AS disastrous as phenom I (i guess the first TLB bug version, B3 was not that much worse than Q6xxx)
And by "people" i think you mean intel fanboys, because normal people have pretty high expectations of bulldozer, its such a radical departure, first brand new architecture from AMD for years, and all that on brand new (for AMD) process.
Going further in your post.Such a small company like AMD with the resources thay have, had surpassed intel before, so its not like ypu present it ,like its impossible ;-).
NOBODY expects it to beat/match ivybridge clock for clock or core for core.
Ivybridge is a year away, and on a new process, which wont be available for AMD at the same time.And more importantly, definition and inner workings of amd`s "core" and intels core are such radically different for bulldozer that you cant make comparisons like that.Whats going to be important is performance per $,and/or absolute performance.
At this time, it seems first BD is going to be competing with 4 core sandybridge.With 8 cores and big turbo, it seems like it has a chance.
As for intels confidence, they were confident of a netburst architecture with rambus memory.And where it got them ?

EDIT:
And by the way, isnt ivybridge just a shrink? Shrink doesnt bring big or huge IPC gains, mainly minor ones.

I am not expecting something disastrous. Phenom II was definitely not a disaster, It help AMD catch up alot.

I think it is easier to expect something like phenom II type improvement than expect a crazy improvement. How is expecting Phenom II performance increase vs phenom Intel fanboyish. It is pretty realistic.

I think expecting the second coming of athlon is fanboying and too optimistic. They have so much ground to make up at this point. As for some people not thinking thinking it will match or beat ivy bridge. Look at some people signatures or avatar. E.g Intel is about to get athloned. Phenom II clock for clock,clock for clock is a bit worse than core 2 quad(very slight). So they need to make up for two or three generations. If they can match sandy bridge that would be great but this is a huge endeavor. New Architech dont always pay off. Look at phenom and to a lesser extent the 6970 and Fermi. AMD's track record for CPU's isn't the best lately so its hard to expect a blockbuster.

A Intel fanboy will say BD will disappoint like Phenom I because they are not saying anything and keeping everything under wraps.

[badboy18187]

I didn't say BD will be a horrible chip, just stop expecting so much from it because theres nothing to prove its weight.

I dare to contradict your statement: there is no book on how to release a product, and the fact of the matter is that AMD really needs to prove that they can still release high-end chips. The CPU world has been onesided for far too long.

[qurious63ss]

Intel is worried, they are selling unlocked cpu's at $220. They have never done that.

The K series have been around for about a year and where a reaction to the Amd Black series so don't think that this as a worry about BD but a hedge for the PII unlocked.

[demonkevy666]

it will be Threads vs Cores again.
what I mean is it will be 8 threads on Intel Vs 8 cores on AMD.

[FlanK3r]

Ket: srry, but my 1100T Thuban beating your 5 GHz 2500k in rendering (R11.5, 3DsMax,POV Ray, practical Cinema 4D)...Dont forgot at it. In render is stock Thuban very good comparsion too with 2600k (without R10, it is not good optimized for x-cores)

[Manicdan]

it will be Threads vs Cores again.
what I mean is it will be 8 threads on Intel Vs 8 cores on AMD.

not so sure about that

.BD will be stronger when less than half the cores are used up (more power when a module has only one core running), so its tough to consider BD as just a plain 8-core chip.

i believe that BD will beat a 2600K by about 20% on average in multithreaded apps. but when it comes to low thread counts (1-2), i havnt the slightest clue what would happen. and in medium thread counts (3-4) i think it will be about tied.

[Mats]

AMD fans: listen to the Intel fans! Why? Because you have nothing to lose! Just listen, but don't buy an Intel yet..

If BD is a failure, you won't get disappointed, they told you so.

If BD is a success, you'll be very surprised!

[Brother Esau]

^^absolutely right, BD will still be horrible at superpi and thus will be a horrible chip

Why does everyone put so much worth in SuperPi? I mean for crying out loud, its not like it's serving you cheerios in the morning upon rising

Not Good at SuperPi makes for a terrible chip????? Funny I am typing on my 3 year old Phenom 940 BE at STOCK and this processor handles anything you throw at it just fine!