AMD cuts to the core with 'Bulldozer' Opterons

[-Boris-]

Also he keeps quoting those AT game benchmarks while back in real world gaming the results are pretty much even across the number of chips.LC already showed the artifact in benchmarking(the "highest fps") which other websites don't bother addressing. What matters is minimum and average(minimum more than average) since these define the "gameplay fluidity".

Letting the GPU bottleneck the processor is a very bad way of measuring how long the processor will be capable of the latest games. You have to let the processor bottleneck if you shall know the true capacity of the processor which is essential in estimating longevity.

In low resolutions in 2007, a A64 X2 3800+ and a C2D Q6600+ could performe the same. Which one would be able to run the latest games today?

And no you have it backwards,if it(BD) scales "bad" with many cores then the single thread perf. will be higher... The problem with the 'bad scaling" is 1) it won't scale bad 2) you can't extrapolate any figure from 50% AMD gave us.

That's exactly what I said! If Bulldozer scales terrific, then it can achieve 50% over Bulldozer in multithreaded scenarios and still be slower per core.

Let me make up some numbers to show:

BD performance per core = 1 bogomark.
With optimal scaling a full 16 core Bulldozer will achieve 16 bogomarks.

MC perforamnce per core = 1.1 bogomarks. But it scales less.
With only 80% effiency and 12 cores it will achieve 10.56 bogomarks.

In this example with numbers I just pulled out of my arse. I clearly show why bulldozers rumored scaling advantage, really is a singlethread disadvantage if 50% is all it can achieve.

That's why I am hoping it scales lousy, that would mean much higher single thread performance.