Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 47

Thread: They're back ... "our take on amd fx"

  1. #1
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    174

    They're back ... "our take on amd fx"

    http://blogs.amd.com/play/2011/10/13...ake-on-amd-fx/

    Playing the Latest Games

    A perfect example is Battlefield 3. Take a look at how our test of AMD FX CPU compared to the Core i7 2600K and AMD Phenom™ II X6 1100T processors at full settings:
    Map Resolution AMD FX-8150 Sandy Bridge i7 2600k AMD Phenom™ II X6 1100T
    MP_011 1650x1080x32 max settings 39.3 37.5 36.3
    MP_011 1920x1200x32 max settings 33.2 31.8 30.6
    MP_011 2560x1600x32 max settings 21.4 20.4 19.9

    Benchmarking done with a single AMD Radeon™ HD 6970 graphics card

    Creating in HD

    Those users running time intensive tasks are going to want an AMD FX processor for applications like x264, HandBrake, Cinema4D where an eight-core processor will rip right along.

    Building for the Future

    This is a new architecture. Compilers have recently been updated, and programs have just started exploring the new instructions like XOP and FMA4 (two new instructions first supported by the AMD FX CPU) to speed up many applications, especially when compared to our older generation.

    If you are running lightly threaded apps most of the time, then there are plenty of other solutions out there. But if you’re like me and use your desktop for high resolution gaming and want to tackle time intensive tasks with newer multi-threaded applications, the AMD FX processor won’t let you down.

    We are a company committed to our customers and we’re constantly listening and working to improve our products. Please let us know what questions you have and we’ll do our best to respond.

  2. #2
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    137
    I really cant understand why they screwed this (edit: this implying BullDozer) up

    Every student which studies anything pc/software oriented comes across Amdahl's law at least once...
    Last edited by BoredByLife; 10-13-2011 at 02:25 PM.

  3. #3
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North Queensland Australia
    Posts
    1,441
    Rofl.

    So by they're own admissions, the FX is only 1-3 FPS on average better then the 1100T.

    That in itself is enough to be considered not good enough.

    -PB
    -Project Sakura-
    Intel i7 860 @ 4.0Ghz, Asus Maximus III Formula, 8GB G-Skill Ripjaws X F3 (@ 1600Mhz), 2x GTX 295 Quad SLI
    2x 120GB OCZ Vertex 2 RAID 0, OCZ ZX 1000W, NZXT Phantom (Pink), Dell SX2210T Touch Screen, Windows 8.1 Pro

    Koolance RP-401X2 1.1 (w/ Swiftech MCP35X), XSPC EX420, XSPC X-Flow 240, DT Sniper, EK-FC 295s (w/ RAM Blocks), Enzotech M3F Mosfet+NB/SB

  4. #4
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Spain, EU
    Posts
    2,947
    Adam Kozak is a product marketing manager at AMD...
    /thread
    Friends shouldn't let friends use Windows 7 until Microsoft fixes Windows Explorer (link)


    Quote Originally Posted by PerryR, on John Fruehe (JF-AMD) View Post
    Pretty much. Plus, he's here voluntarily.

  5. #5
    Banned Movieman...
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    illinois
    Posts
    1,810
    Quote Originally Posted by paulbagz View Post
    Rofl.

    So by they're own admissions, the FX is only 1-3 FPS on average better then the 1100T.

    That in itself is enough to be considered not good enough.

    -PB
    wow dude in a game at only 20-30 fps, 3 fps is 10-15 %

  6. #6
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    392
    this is only useful to show how inappropriate a HD6970 is for this game at "max settings",
    you could throw a i3 2100, i5 2300, PII X4 945, and performance would be about the same anyway.

  7. #7
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    5,485
    lol the comments are hilarious...

  8. #8
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,714
    No matter what AMD tries to explain about Bulldozer things are very simple. Bulldozer is too slow in TODAY's PC workload compared old AMD CPU's and Intels. It is a completely wrong architecture to launch at the end of 2011 since Windows 7 does not even know how to utilise it properly.

    AMD should have launched Bulldozer after Windows 8 was released. Today they needed a CPU design that has each core performing better then Intel's. Bulldozer is a wrong CPU for today's market, its that simple. Worse thing is no matter how good the Bulldozer CPU's are they will forever be seen as the AMD's version of P4's. And that is just proper you know what.
    TAMGc5: PhII X4 945, Gigabyte GA-MA790X-UD3P, 2x Kingston PC2-6400 HyperX CL4 2GB, 2x ASUS HD 5770 CUcore Xfire, Razer Barracuda AC1, Win8 Pro x64 (Current)

    TAMGc6: AMD FX, Gigabyte GA-xxxx-UDx, 8GB/16GB DDR3, Nvidia 680 GTX, ASUS Xonar, 2x 120/160GB SSD, 1x WD Caviar Black 1TB SATA 6Gb/s, Win8 Pro x64 (Planned)

  9. #9
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    8,832
    Quote Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR View Post
    /thread
    This.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  10. #10
    Visitor
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    676
    Some shops in the EU are taking advantage of the disappointing BD desktop performance. After the launch they jacked up Intel i5 and i7 prices by 10-15%.

  11. #11
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,432
    ...looks like amd really should have chosen a different review kit combination, these are great results if they hold true.


    http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/31...lldozer-inside
























    [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

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    73
    You could always handpick tests where P4 beat Athlon64, too bad they were 1 in 20.
    JF-AMD / Hans de Vries / informal posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (12th October 2011)

  13. #13
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by god_43 View Post
    ...looks like amd really should have chosen a different review kit combination, these are great results if they hold true.
    they did exactly that,
    all their gaming performance claims are based on GPU limited tests, like the ones you posted.

  14. #14
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    373
    Quote Originally Posted by god_43 View Post
    ...looks like amd really should have chosen a different review kit combination, these are great results if they hold true.
    Also, the thing to note is that Hardware Secrets and HardwareHaven both used 1866MHz RAM (where as every other review I read used 1333MHz or 1600MHz). And if you go have a mosey over at madshrimps (leeghoofd's) review, he shows you a bit about RAM speed scaling with BD

  15. #15
    Banned Movieman...
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    illinois
    Posts
    1,810
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectrobozo View Post
    they did exactly that,
    all their gaming performance claims are based on GPU limited tests, like the ones you posted.
    so you would rather it be tested on crysis which runs like on anything other than a 85 GHz SB and yes i mean 85

  16. #16
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    8,832
    Quote Originally Posted by stangracin3 View Post
    so you would rather it be tested on crysis which runs like on anything other than a 85 GHz SB and yes i mean 85
    Ironically, 2GHz i7 is enough to max Crysis out.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  17. #17
    Banned Movieman...
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    illinois
    Posts
    1,810
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    Ironically, 2GHz i7 is enough to max Crysis out.
    oh you know what i meant though, i may have used the wrong game but you got the general idea.

  18. #18
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by stangracin3 View Post
    so you would rather it be tested on crysis which runs like on anything other than a 85 GHz SB and yes i mean 85
    there are far more cpu demanding games out there,

    but the only thing you prove by comparing the 2600k and the 8150 at a GPU limited test, and achieving around the same performance, is how irrelevant the CPU is in this case, and whoever is testing should feel the need to point out this, and show how a phenom II x4, or i3 2100 does at the same test, and tell you reader how useless in this case, is paying an extra 100 usd+, if that's what you are going to do...
    or you are going to end up looking like one of the AMD marketing guys.

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    70
    Doesn't this test just show that most games are GPU bottlenecked? I think they should of advertised, buy cheap AMD cpus and our high end HD 6990 Radeon. You all know that while BD is slower than Intel's 2600k, BD ain't terrible. A little worse but they at least its justified in their pricing.

  20. #20
    Banned Movieman...
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    illinois
    Posts
    1,810
    if you would like then sell your computer and buy a 2100 that you can't overclock have fun while i get a cpu that will kick its ass

  21. #21
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    373
    I think AMD's marketing depertment should just STFU and let their engineers do their job...

  22. #22
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North Queensland Australia
    Posts
    1,441
    Quote Originally Posted by stangracin3 View Post
    wow dude in a game at only 20-30 fps, 3 fps is 10-15 %
    But that's not what my gripe was.

    My gripe was that they talked this up to be 10% etc better then its principle competitor the 2500k/2600k.

    I just wanted AMD to really take BD to a good place that's all.

    A bitter pill to swallow.

    -PB
    -Project Sakura-
    Intel i7 860 @ 4.0Ghz, Asus Maximus III Formula, 8GB G-Skill Ripjaws X F3 (@ 1600Mhz), 2x GTX 295 Quad SLI
    2x 120GB OCZ Vertex 2 RAID 0, OCZ ZX 1000W, NZXT Phantom (Pink), Dell SX2210T Touch Screen, Windows 8.1 Pro

    Koolance RP-401X2 1.1 (w/ Swiftech MCP35X), XSPC EX420, XSPC X-Flow 240, DT Sniper, EK-FC 295s (w/ RAM Blocks), Enzotech M3F Mosfet+NB/SB

  23. #23
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    588
    Jesus!! WTF
    WOOOOOF

  24. #24
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    511
    Last edited by cold2010; 10-13-2011 at 04:55 PM.

  25. #25
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near Venice as they say
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectrobozo View Post
    this is only useful to show how inappropriate a HD6970 is for this game at "max settings",
    you could throw a i3 2100, i5 2300, PII X4 945, and performance would be about the same anyway.
    This
    TRUE Lapped - Intel Core i7 2600k 4,5Ghz - ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 - EVGA GTX 670 FTW - 8Gb Ripjaws - Crucial M4 256Gb - Corsair AX850 - Fractal Define R3


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •