The reactions of some people really get me laughing.
People wanted to see results posted so Lab501 did that. Unfortunately, some of us are bound by NDA so we can't comment on the accuracy of said numbers but....
Since they weren't anywhere near what some people expected, small details are picked and prodded until we get the "impossible", "BS!" and "biased" words thrown around for heaven knows what reason.
So if these numbers are accurate, will those same people post again saying "we were wrong!"? Methinks not. They'll go sulk in a corner for 5 minutes, find another thread to pick apart and then ultimately go buy an Intel processor. On the flip side of that coin, if the numbers are inaccurate or wrong, Lab501 has pretty much burned every possible bridge with a major manufacturer and will be the butt end of communal jokes until Theo or Charlie screw up again.
So which one will it be? Man, the next few days will be interesting to say the least.....
The Cardboard Master Crunch with us, the XS WCG team
Intel Core i7 2600k @ 4.5GHz, 16GB DDR3-1600, Radeon 7950 @ 1000/1250, Win 10 Pro x64
This line makes me think you know it's bad, since the same could be asked of people who know that'll it suck based on this one review
Regardless, I still find it strange that AMD is willing to charge around $280 for a failed processor. The price came from this microcenter employee.
http://www.overclock.net/amd-general...ate-specs.html
AMD stated nothing over $250 during the live event, so I imagine that pricing will change (eventually).
I will repeat what others said: never, ever base your purchasing decisions or opinion about a certain product off of:
A) Rumors
B) A single review / preview
At this time everyone wants to know how this thing does so let's all wait until we see a large cross section of results before flinging crap around.
IIRC the PII 1090 and 1100 where both around 290 when first released but dropped down to 190 pretty fast so you will probably see this for these proc price drop as well. Supply and demand will dictate the price. Now if current results hold true I guess I should be glad Amd screwed up but I feel a bit a little bad for them since I know how much hard work it takes to get these things out successfully. Well if it helps I can talk to the big shots and see if we can fab those bulldozers on a proper 32nm process
I have been lurking, waiting, and I have to say.
It's the strangest build up to a CPU launch I have experienced so far.
Although I am full of a fever at the moment so everything is a little odd.
Can anyone remember AMD being so tight lipped on figures prior to launch?
Just about anything bulldozer related.
I have spent the day testing various BIOS on AMD chips > compatible code > optimised > non-optimised.
The results that have leaked so far give indication that the real performance is yet to be unleashed, the previews I'm seeing here sort of confirm this data pattern.
I think first of all BIOS is the key here, followed by OS updates and then software optimisation.
if this is raw performance on a compatible but non optimised BIOS I am quite happy then.
If all these benchmarks are legit (and, at this point there is very little reason to doubt them since multiple people got pretty much the same results), the the only thing we are going to see the next few days is lots of spin control.
JF-AMD will have his work cut out for him, going into full damage control mode.
Nobody wants to only have one player in the mid to high end field, and at this time, it looks like that intel doesn't have anything to worry about, and they will continue to charge a premium for what they offer.
I still think AMD will do OK with the BD, they just need to adjust the price down, and hurry up and tape out pile driver.
Competition ranking;
2005; Netbyte, Karise/Denmark #1 @ PiFast
2008; AOCM II, Minfeld/Germany #2 @ 01SE/AM3/8M (w. Oliver)
2009; AMD-OC, Viborg/Denmark #2 @ max freq Gigabyte TweaKING, Paris/France #4 @ 32M/01SE (w. Vanovich)
2010: Gigabyte P55, Hamburg/Germany #6 @ wprime 1024/SPI 1M (w. THC) AOCM III, Minfeld/Germany #6 @ 01SE/AM3/1M/8M (w. NeoForce)
Spectating;
2010; GOOC 2010 Many thanks to Gigabyte!
Competition ranking;
2005; Netbyte, Karise/Denmark #1 @ PiFast
2008; AOCM II, Minfeld/Germany #2 @ 01SE/AM3/8M (w. Oliver)
2009; AMD-OC, Viborg/Denmark #2 @ max freq Gigabyte TweaKING, Paris/France #4 @ 32M/01SE (w. Vanovich)
2010: Gigabyte P55, Hamburg/Germany #6 @ wprime 1024/SPI 1M (w. THC) AOCM III, Minfeld/Germany #6 @ 01SE/AM3/1M/8M (w. NeoForce)
Spectating;
2010; GOOC 2010 Many thanks to Gigabyte!
Monstru, I hope you not playing with us and the benchmark are true or not paid by Intel to do this. If its fake you desserve a big punch in your face from everyone who uses a AMD in this forum. Im not the happiest man in the world right now
Computer 1: AMD Vishera FX-8350 - Asus Crosshair V Formula-Z (AM3+) - Zotac GF 560Ti 448 Core - 8GB (2x4GB) G.Skill TridentX 2400MHz - Samsung 500GB - Samsung 1TB - Western Digital 1TB - Motherboard Sound - Bitfenix Ghost - BenQ XL2410T
Computer 2: AMD Phenom II x6 1100T BE - Asus M4A79T Deluxe (AM3) - Sapphire 5870 - 8GB 1600MHz Corsair Vengeance - Western Digital 500GB - X-FI XtremeGamer - Antec 300 - Samsung SyncMaster 204B
...lol wtf how did your comment end up quoted before you made it? who here is versed in temporal mechanics?
Last edited by god_43; 10-09-2011 at 09:44 PM.
[MOBO] Asus CrossHair Formula 5 AM3+
[GPU] ATI 6970 x2 Crossfire 2Gb
[RAM] G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 1600
[CPU] AMD FX-8120 @ 4.8 ghz
[COOLER] XSPC Rasa 750 RS360 WaterCooling
[OS] Windows 8 x64 Enterprise
[HDD] OCZ Vertex 3 120GB SSD
[AUDIO] Logitech S-220 17 Watts 2.1
all the conspiracy theories are messing up spacetime
I don't know how how my post ended up above his, the quote was done before the edit too .
Seasonic Prime TX-850 Platinum | MSI X570 MEG Unify | Ryzen 5 5800X 2048SUS, TechN AM4 1/2" ID
32GB Viper Steel 4400, EK Monarch @3733/1866, 1.64v - 13-14-14-14-28-42-224-16-1T-56-0-0
WD SN850 1TB | Zotac Twin Edge 3070 @2055/1905, Alphacool Eisblock
2 x Aquacomputer D5 | Eisbecher Helix 250
EK-CoolStream XE 360 | Thermochill PA120.3 | 6 x Arctic P12
Actually, we already have such an issue known for Bulldozer, and NO bench-marked system has the patch installed!
The shared L1 cache is causing cross invalidations across threads so that the prefetch data is incorrect in too many cases and data must be fetched again. The fix is a "simple" memory alignment and (possible)tagging system in the kernel of Windows/Linux.
I reviewed the code for the Linux patch and was astonished by just how little I know of the Linux kernel... lol! In any event, it could easily cost 10% in terms of single threaded performance, possibly more than double that in multi-threaded loads on the same module due to the increased contention and randomness of accesses.
Not sure if ordained reviewers have been given access to the MS patch, but I'd imagine (and hope) so! Last I saw, the Linux kernel patch was still being worked on by AMD (publicly) and Linus was showing some distaste for the method used to address the issue. One comment questioned the performance cost but had received no replies... but you don't go re-working kernel memory mapping for anything less than 5-10%... just not worth it!
Bookmarks