And the reviewers still compare 5xxxK to CPUs that are clearly way above its price segment...
And the reviewers still compare 5xxxK to CPUs that are clearly way above its price segment...
FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.7ghz 1.452v, Swiftech H220x
Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-46-2T @ 1.66v
MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1100/1500* Cat.14.9
OCZ ZX 850w psu
Lian-Li Lancool K62
Samsung 830 128g
2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
Win7 Home 64bit
My Rig
tbone8ty review isn't his
Last edited by tbone8ty; 10-01-2012 at 05:52 PM.
FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.7ghz 1.452v, Swiftech H220x
Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-46-2T @ 1.66v
MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1100/1500* Cat.14.9
OCZ ZX 850w psu
Lian-Li Lancool K62
Samsung 830 128g
2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
Win7 Home 64bit
My Rig
yep chart is wrong![]()
FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.7ghz 1.452v, Swiftech H220x
Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-46-2T @ 1.66v
MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1100/1500* Cat.14.9
OCZ ZX 850w psu
Lian-Li Lancool K62
Samsung 830 128g
2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
Win7 Home 64bit
My Rig
[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
Bottom line: Trinity has serious issues with resource allocation when Turbo CORE is enabled.
link to example possible? just curious what you mean by that...
like this?
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/2047/19/
resource sharing?
Last edited by tbone8ty; 10-01-2012 at 08:33 PM.
FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.7ghz 1.452v, Swiftech H220x
Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-46-2T @ 1.66v
MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1100/1500* Cat.14.9
OCZ ZX 850w psu
Lian-Li Lancool K62
Samsung 830 128g
2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
Win7 Home 64bit
My Rig
http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-trin...ht-/17271.html
nice and quick overview
hopefully jim keller of amd is looking at this and taking a red pen to their arch
FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.7ghz 1.452v, Swiftech H220x
Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-46-2T @ 1.66v
MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1100/1500* Cat.14.9
OCZ ZX 850w psu
Lian-Li Lancool K62
Samsung 830 128g
2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
Win7 Home 64bit
My Rig
if review sites would use windows 8 i dont think it would have those issues. are they using cinebench r14 (has support for new cpus)? also why is everyone comparing this to i7's and high end i5's. this is an entry level cpu, its targeted between i3 and i5. i hope we start seeing comparisons between windows 8 and windows 7 for apu benches. fact is, by the end of the month, the only thing you can buy will be windows 8.
[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
Sure. Basically, under some load situations when all cores are loaded, the architecture struggles against the Llano APUs:
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/2047/14/
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Process...D-Mark-Vantage
I have spent hours diagnosing it. At first I thought it was the mobo, memory, etc. Turns out that certain situations cause Trinity's architecture to really struggle, even against the Llano APUs. Usually it entail tests that put a high amount of stress upon the memory controller. I'm still going back and forth with AMD about it but they have confirmed that some applications and synthetic benchmarks will see Trinity boasting less x86 performance than the A8 3870K and A8 3850.
Last edited by SKYMTL; 10-01-2012 at 08:44 PM.
chinese vr-zone.
http://translate.google.com/translat...ew-10022012%2F
[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
your comment was about resource utilization, windows 8 properly manages bulldozer resources. huh well there were a bunch of ppl in the amd forums using it, i just assumed it was out. ok how did it turn out? i have not seen bulldozer benched on windows 8? link to benches please? i know my bd runs much better with windows 8, this is what the review sites should figure out, is there a difference? if so by how much? if not then the issue can be put to rest.
[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
@ SKYMTL: Llano had "proper" cores not modules,can't it be just that (yet to see in what types of workloads it struggles but you should be able to figure it out).
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6347/a...desktop-part-2
good review by anand.
[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
As repeated time and time again - Bulldozer's two-thread module has the 160% performance of single thread in said module. The cinebench single/multithread result is almost perfectly in line with the info we have had for years now.
Only optimization that windows can do is use one thread per module until it runs out of modules..
Last edited by R101; 10-01-2012 at 11:04 PM.
What I don't understand with bulldozer modules is the size of them. Why did they think it would be ok when a bulldozer module is roughly 2x the size of a single core. If a module is 200% as big but only offers 160-180% the performance of 2 seperate cores how could it ever work out well?
First of all it's obviously not 2x the size of single core( since you have one FP unit shared' this alone means that in other case,replicating FP unit's hw and accompanying logic would make "true" bulldozer dual/quad core considerably larger). In most of the tests ,MT performance suffers from the shared floating point unit and slowish L1D cache design. AMD said they are working on these issues with SR core and we have to wait and see what comes out of that. When they designed BD's FP unit they were relying on recompiled code(FMA) in order to utilize the max potential of it. For desktop,unfortunately, this won't happen so the legacy performance is subpar in some occasions.
CPU's and boards in stock at Newegg![]()
Rig 1:
ASUS P8Z77-V
Intel i5 3570K @ 4.75GHz
16GB of Team Xtreme DDR-2666 RAM (11-13-13-35-2T)
Nvidia GTX 670 4GB SLI
Rig 2:
Asus Sabertooth 990FX
AMD FX-8350 @ 5.6GHz
16GB of Mushkin DDR-1866 RAM (8-9-8-26-1T)
AMD 6950 with 6970 bios flash
Yamakasi Catleap 2B overclocked to 120Hz refresh rate
Audio-GD FUN DAC unit w/ AD797BRZ opamps
Sennheiser PC350 headset w/ hero mod
No ITX boards in stock anywhere yet that I see. Someone post if you see one.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages...ew_apu,19.html
Sata performance looks good!
FX-8350(1249PGT) @ 4.7ghz 1.452v, Swiftech H220x
Asus Crosshair Formula 5 Am3+ bios v1703
G.skill Trident X (2x4gb) ~1200mhz @ 10-12-12-31-46-2T @ 1.66v
MSI 7950 TwinFrozr *1100/1500* Cat.14.9
OCZ ZX 850w psu
Lian-Li Lancool K62
Samsung 830 128g
2 x 1TB Samsung SpinpointF3, 2T Samsung
Win7 Home 64bit
My Rig
some of it is memory because any cache miss in the Bulldozer architecture is told to go to main memory for a miss.
if you want to see why it struggles then I suggest you use Intelburntest While running cinebench 11.5r singles thread.
Set affinity to one core in taskmanger, and set IntelBurnTest to 1 thread and one in affinity taskmanger too. Make sure they're set to run in [b]one module[.b]
see The Modules can Work as "Dual cores" or as single cores When running as "dual cores" they effectively drop from 4 way decoders to 2 way decoders. 33% less single thread for both cores. that's what I usually see with my FX.
So, there are all reviews, what I read. I think, tomorow will be here next 10-20...
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/p...e-im-cpu-test/
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6347/a...desktop-part-2
http://translate.google.com/translat...ew-10022012%2F
http://www.overclockers.ru/lab/49852...K_Trinity.html
http://www.hartware.de/review_1534.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages...iew_apu,1.html
http://pctuning.tyden.cz/hardware/pr...-mereni-vykonu
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/46...k-trinity-apu/
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/2047/1/
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Process...0K-Break-Cover 4.4 GHz
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...roduction.html
http://www.hitechlegion.com/reviews/...-amd-a10-5800k
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/AMD-A...U-Performance/
http://www.svethardware.cz/art_doc-E...600561F71.html
http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/3202...y-for-desktops
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...a10-5800k.html
http://www.pureoverclock.com/Review-...-5800k-review/
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ency,3315.html
http://pclab.pl/art51168.html
http://www.planet3dnow.de/cgi-bin/ne...?id=1349152485
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/878-...-deuxieme.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/...es-apu-launch/
http://www.bjorn3d.com/2012/10/amd-v.../#.UGrlzlH6nAE
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/FM2_APU_Review/
http://extrahardware.cnews.cz/testy/...-vs-ivy-bridge
http://www.vortez.net/articles_pages..._review,1.html
http://www.pcworld.fr/processeur/tes...2,532041,1.htm
ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread
Bookmarks