Jump to content
SceptreCore

AMD conFusion? Forget the hype!

Recommended Posts

LOL philo-sofa, you're profile pic pretty much sums up the way I feel about it

 

My upgrade plans have halted, I'm not buying an AMD FX CPU for the foreseeable future. As far as I see it, they should do well in the server space, but for desktops...

 

I was hoping for an Athlon 64, and I got a Pentium 4 :-/

 

EDIT: Actually, I was hoping for a Core 2 Quad. 2x Core 2 Duo chips basically, with 2x2 COMPLETE cores!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

And I will lol if the FX-4xxx can't beat my Phenom II X4 :P

 

AMD, you've done the FX icon no justice. Good work

Yeah Nobody - it's a bit of a mess eh, have sympathy for your nailed plans given how slow, watt-hungry and generally unimpressive Bulldozer can be - like you I'd held out in hope. This market needs competition too - how long now before we're paying a $300 premium to get a'K'' series unlockable CPUs from Intel?

 

To add insult to injury Anandtech, via AMD are saying that "the AM3+ platform will live to see one more processor generation before it's retired". If this is true, AM3+ owners would get to see Piledriver in 2012, but thereafter have to shift boards, presumably to FM2.

Edited by philo-sofa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is really disappointing to be honest. People have laughed and said fail because some sites just compared it to what is the base spec of today. *sigh*

 

To be honest, we shouldn't really be expecting so much after the Phenom I launch. Everyone was so caught up on it really that they didn't notice something weird about it. Idiots built the hype and we all fell for it. This architecture was in the pipeline for FOUR years. Four years is a long time in terms of architecture. We know how easily Intel did their Core to Core 2 and now Core i series given they had more talent and money. AMD didn't have anything to build on and this was the result. Failures aside, remember that this architecture was designed to compete against the Nehalem.

 

When was Nehalem released? 2008. So that puts it about right really. AMD has caught up to Nehalem with this architecture and keeps the Sandy Bridge honest despite needing more power and less computing power.

 

I'd think Bulldozer as a sort of a building step for the next CPU. I'll get it as I've been waiting too long really. Perhaps the next generation will be the one to finally hit the mark.

Edited by sora3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMD conFusion? Forget the hype!, Bulldozer, Bobcat, Fusion... explained at last.

 

I fell for the hype, and too expected much. I'll agree with you there sora, good point

Edited by nobody813

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to reinforce my point, I will be buying this CPU. Idiots that prance their idiotic views via avatar without much thought to what is involved here will not change my opinion on the matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's exactly how I expected, apart from the power usage and efficiency, I dunno what's going on there as it's touted as a power efficient server CPU.

 

I hope a revision or something helps this, or maybe an update to win7 for thread scheduling?

 

AMD needs this, without good competition, we all lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'll admit freely that I never expected an 8 core processor to be competitive on a power front. But i really did think the one big FPU design was going to thoroughly trounce one of intels FPU's. but instead it bearly beats a phenom II x6. Think about it like this, AMD was throwing essentially what should compete against an i3 in a single module but instead of there being two fpu's they were going to have one that could be entirely allocated to either 'core'. To me this smelled like a monster gaming/single threaded cpu.

 

But it all went the other way. It has what amounts to half an FPU.

 

It's a Pentium 4! Not that northwood was not a good chip, but it came from an obviously flawed concept. That was easily seen when benchmarks of a 1.86ghz cut down conroe (allen-something damn!) showed up giving a p4 3.74ghz a run for its money.

 

I really hope bulldozer architecture is not this flawed.

 

Now I'm stuck as to where I upgrade to. I'm running an e7400, and even though its a beast of an e7400 (its over clocked to 4ghz while still running stock volts and has speedstep still on) it's time for an upgrade. This late in the game I think I'll just keep waiting and see what happens with the 2700K and prices on the 2600k after its release. Sandy-E is also a possiblity since its coming soon aswell, but intel is probably revising its prises on Sandy-E in the north direction as we speak considering they know how far away bulldozer is on performance.

 

The positives are that its real and its a base for AMD to build off. It just makes me wonder where the gutsy bastards that made the Athlon are now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

needs a new bios revisions and windows updates, disappointing for sure but at least its here now and they can build from there.

Edited by tunksy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ilures aside, remember that this architecture was designed to compete against the Nehalem.

 

When was Nehalem released? 2008. So that puts it about right really. AMD has caught up to Nehalem with this architecture and keeps the Sandy Bridge honest despite needing more power and less computing power

And when was Bulldozer released my friend? 2011 - so it has taken them another three years to 'match' Nehalem, albeit with a die 50% larger and absolute impotency in un-threaded tasks.

 

And you feel it 'unfair' for reviews to compare what's being released today with what is on market today? lol - consumers live in 2011, and in 2011 Bulldozer is an utter disappointment that's at odds with everything that was promised by AMD earlier this year. You're right about the level of hype generated by AMD, but in denial about just how bad things are and blaming the wrong person for it.

 

And to reinforce my point, I will be buying this CPU. Idiots that prance their idiotic views via avatar without much thought to what is involved here will not change my opinion on the matter.

Very, very clever sora3. To return the compliment, I do I do find it so hard to remember - is the one with idiotic views one with the well above genuis IQ who correctly acknowledged that Bulldozer had blatant signs of utter failure (not that it required much), the one who connected the dots and confirmed AM3+ will get one revision, the one who 'prances' an entirely accurate and worldwide affirmed opinion of a processor via avatar perhaps? I'll give you this, I am arrogant, but that's well earnt, except perhaps for my ever hopeful optimism about Bulldozer. To decisively find out who is being idiotic out I do suggest that you buy this white elephant of a CPU, grind through it's sub E-6750 single threaded performance, deal with its ridiculous TDP and occasionally revel in the fact that handbrake performs the same for you as it would a 2600K with ~55% the CPU transistors. Do consider which of us was the 'idiot' as you slowly come to realise you've bought an architecture whose cores are bested per cycle Bobcat in some circumstances lol. Best of luck there, have fun my friend (and if all else fails go back to your generally faster 940).

 

I'm sure you'll decide to report this post for daring to respond to your insults with much better founded ones, but for the record I'm utterly sick of and done with dealing with fanbois and their sycophantic, fantastical and fanatical reinterpretations of reality, not to mention their sophistry and abuse of those that call them out. If you're actually silly enough to buy one of these awful processors that have even hardened AMD supporters tearfully planning their Intel upgrades, that's your business, not mine beyond being slighty amused. I just can't abide people talking s**t, and you sir, from your comparisons with a three year old architecture we should all for no reason use as a benchmark on a processor that was in development for five years and touted as revolutionary, to your lack of acknowledgement that for a consumer Bulldozer is beaten by Thuban are doing just that. Hate away, but nothing could leave me with more contempt than you and your compatriots wilful delusions, or the sad and negative effects they might have upon other peoples buying decisions.

 

My first enthusiast system was an AMD, and I hope to build one again someday, but it'll require a lot of revisions to this base architecture. Bulldozer is a dog at the level of the P4, wake up and smell the coffee you could roast on one with a mild overclock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what happens if AMD go under, we'll lose what was ati too...

 

imagine if they didnt buy ati out.

 

fingers corssed some optimisations come out asap for windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ilures aside, remember that this architecture was designed to compete against the Nehalem.

 

When was Nehalem released? 2008. So that puts it about right really. AMD has caught up to Nehalem with this architecture and keeps the Sandy Bridge honest despite needing more power and less computing power

And when was Bulldozer released my friend? 2011 - so it has taken them another three years to 'match' Nehalem, albeit with a die 50% larger and absolute impotency in un-threaded tasks.

 

And you feel it 'unfair' for reviews to compare what's being released today with what is on market today? lol - consumers live in 2011, and in 2011 Bulldozer is an utter disappointment that's at odds with everything that was promised by AMD earlier this year. You're right about the level of hype generated by AMD, but in denial about just how bad things are and blaming the wrong person for it.

 

 

I'm with Philo on this one. You have to remember people are spending their money based on todays market. People aren't going to buy a product because it's on par with a product from 3 yers ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5Ghz with a single module active, but PCPer is pretty conservative with overclocking.

Edited by smakme7757

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as sora3 may have "started it" and really, that wasn't necessary sora3, with his throw away line about your avatar philo, there is generally a better way of responding. It does take a little bit of calm, a pinch of "breathing" and some self esteem to allow you to come at it from a place of balance. For someone else's opinion/ belief/ CPU preference to enrage you so is really spending unnecessary energy.

 

Here is possibly another way of responding without the need to rage it all out.

 

And when was Bulldozer released my friend? 2011 - so it has taken them another three years to 'match' Nehalem, albeit with a die 50% larger and absolute impotency in un-threaded tasks.

 

And you feel it 'unfair' for reviews to compare what's being released today with what is on market today? lol - consumers live in 2011, and in 2011 Bulldozer is an utter disappointment that's at odds with everything that was promised by AMD earlier this year. You're right about the level of hype generated by AMD, but in denial about just how bad things are and blaming the wrong person for it.

I don't quite follow how you could purchase a CPU that compares with yesterday's technology. Each to his own I guess.

 

 

And to reinforce my point, I will be buying this CPU. Idiots that prance their idiotic views via avatar without much thought to what is involved here will not change my opinion on the matter.

Very, very clever sora3. To return the compliment, I do I do find it so hard to remember - is the one with idiotic views one with the well above genuis IQ who correctly acknowledged that Bulldozer had blatant signs of utter failure (not that it required much), the one who connected the dots and confirmed AM3+ will get one revision, the one who 'prances' an entirely accurate and worldwide affirmed opinion of a processor via avatar perhaps? I'll give you this, I am arrogant, but that's well earnt, except perhaps for my ever hopeful optimism about Bulldozer. To decisively find out who is being idiotic out I do suggest that you buy this white elephant of a CPU, grind through it's sub E-6750 single threaded performance, deal with its ridiculous TDP and occasionally revel in the fact that handbrake performs the same for you as it would a 2600K with ~55% the CPU transistors. Do consider which of us was the 'idiot' as you slowly come to realise you've bought an architecture whose cores are bested per cycle Bobcat in some circumstances lol. Best of luck there, have fun my friend (and if all else fails go back to your generally faster 940).

 

I'm sure you'll decide to report this post for daring to respond to your insults with much better founded ones, but for the record I'm utterly sick of and done with dealing with fanbois and their sycophantic, fantastical and fanatical reinterpretations of reality, not to mention their sophistry and abuse of those that call them out. If you're actually silly enough to buy one of these awful processors that have even hardened AMD supporters tearfully planning their Intel upgrades, that's your business, not mine beyond being slighty amused. I just can't abide people talking s**t, and you sir, from your comparisons with a three year old architecture we should all for no reason use as a benchmark on a processor that was in development for five years and touted as revolutionary, to your lack of acknowledgement that for a consumer Bulldozer is beaten by Thuban are doing just that. Hate away, but nothing could leave me with more contempt than you and your compatriots wilful delusions, or the sad and negative effects they might have upon other peoples buying decisions.

 

My first enthusiast system was an AMD, and I hope to build one again someday, but it'll require a lot of revisions to this base architecture. Bulldozer is a dog at the level of the P4, wake up and smell the coffee you could roast on one with a mild overclock.

 

Well that was unnecessary sora3. To be honest my opinion is backed up by some pretty reasonable data found here, here and here.

 

If you really want to get on board with it though I guess that's your prerogative.

 

------

 

Seriously peeps - calm the fuck down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at stock clocks these chips dont perform to badly for there price\power in some multithreaded tasks so while amds server share may not increase i cant see it plummeting

ati among other things should also be making them some cash at the moment so i dont think they will be going anywhere in a hurry

 

as a gamers cpu and for 24\7 oveclockers its not looking so good although i would be interested to see how far it gets at near stock v with qnq still enabled assuming this is possible

however like phenom II its playable most games dont need all that much cpu power to maintain 30-60fps there is just a few that can drop below 30fps and a few more with view distance tweaks\mods most of them are badly threaded

 

id say bulldozer has dug its own grave lets hope piledriver can ram it in early next year

Edited by Dasa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ The Tick, I suppose. Anyway, what's done is done. I apologise for everyone else that have been subjected to the 'opinions' of myself and the other. But I do not apologise for the gaff as I was expressing my opinion. Sure, it may be a bit far but I suppose people interpret as they will.

 

@ Dasa, true. However, with this, I doubt anyone will buy Piledriver as the damage has already been done. Everyone will look at Piledriver and go 'What's the point since the original architecture is useless' as the other pointed out.

Edited by sora3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Dasa, true. However, with this, I doubt anyone will buy Piledriver as the damage has already been done. Everyone will look at Piledriver and go 'What's the point since the original architecture is useless' as the other pointed out.

All it has to do is prove its worth. People who buy individual system components usually find out performance info (or info related to their use) and then make a decision. Of course you still have the people who will buy without thinking, but i think if Piledriver brings some nice performance to the table it will sell. If it doesn't then it will suffer the same fate as BD, but keep in mind that if it does do well, then it has the bonus of being a saviour which would bring even more people to buy it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Dasa, true. However, with this, I doubt anyone will buy Piledriver as the damage has already been done. Everyone will look at Piledriver and go 'What's the point since the original architecture is useless' as the other pointed out.

All it has to do is prove its worth. People who buy individual system components usually find out performance info (or info related to their use) and then make a decision. Of course you still have the people who will buy without thinking, but i think if Piledriver brings some nice performance to the table it will sell. If it doesn't then it will suffer the same fate as BD, but keep in mind that if it does do well, then it has the bonus of being a saviour which would bring even more people to buy it!

 

Well, we'll see. I think Phenom -> Phenom II was probably showing that AMD can bounce back and I really hope for competition sakes really. The problem is just the front end as it just can't process fast enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was really wanting to push these out in our next DC project but it dosnt look like I will be this time sigh*

 

One thing though Anand's turbo core comparison was interesting. Basically Thurbans have terrible turbos, but will gain the most from overclocking because they don't use turbo much. 8150 won't gain that much because turboing it gets to 4.2 or whatever already.

 

You can pick up a 1055t for $150 and a 1090t for $20 more. Both will give 2500k a run and will fit into existing am2+, am3 and am3+.

 

 

I think what AMD should do now is release a

 

* Phenom II x6 1130t-3.6Ghz (10% on 1100t)

* Opteron 4190 FX based off the thurban core but with unlocked multis (again 3.5ghz)

 

1130t will basically tie with 2500k and be faster than a 8150.

A decent clocked opteron will gain AMD the workstation market remember in the enterprise market its about bang for buck and power usage as thats the main killer cost. There its only got to complete with 1366 xeons which it can definitely do. Sell a lot of platforms and then sell them piledriver..

 

Work like buggery on piledriver, it needs to be 25% faster than bulldozer while using 25% less power.

 

Edit: with the FX series CPU's it seems the stock coolers are all astek OEM models like the antec 620 and the corsair H50 considering what these sell for separate the pricing isnt that bad as well.

Edited by mudg3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very, very clever sora3. To return the compliment, I do I do find it so hard to remember - is the one with idiotic views one with the well above genuis IQ who correctly acknowledged that Bulldozer had blatant signs of utter failure (not that it required much)...

 

...but nothing could leave me with more contempt than you and your compatriots wilful delusions, or the sad and negative effects they might have upon other peoples buying decisions.

 

Are you kidding me dude? Perhaps you should be putting that IQ of yours to better use.

 

Apparently high IQ doesn't stop you from losing perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMD conFusion? Forget the hype!, Bulldozer, Bobcat, Fusion... explained at last.

 

I fell for the hype, and too expected much. I'll agree with you there sora, good point

If Intel's reaction or lack thereof was anything to go by we knew this CPU would fail ages ago guys no need to get worked up cause the mesiah of your epenis turned out to be shit, just suck it up and go buy 2500k's like every other person with half a brain.

 

Intel should change its marketing line to "Intel, our 4 cores to their 8"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Work like buggery on piledriver, it needs to be 25% faster than bulldozer while using 25% less power.

its rumoured to only be ~10-15% faster which should be enough to put it clearly in front of phenom but not enough to catch intel in a core vs core scenario

hopefully a power usage drop and/or higher clock speeds will come with it

 

windows 8 will apparently give these cpus a boost but its over a year away and will probably give intel a bit of a boost to from the little i have seen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very, very clever sora3. To return the compliment, I do I do find it so hard to remember - is the one with idiotic views one with the well above genuis IQ who correctly acknowledged that Bulldozer had blatant signs of utter failure (not that it required much)...

 

...but nothing could leave me with more contempt than you and your compatriots wilful delusions, or the sad and negative effects they might have upon other peoples buying decisions.

 

Are you kidding me dude? Perhaps you should be putting that IQ of yours to better use.

 

Apparently high IQ doesn't stop you from losing perspective.

 

 

Enough vestige. That won't get anywhere. Seriously, I nearly caused a riot here and you're riling up people isn't the smartest thing to do.

 

@nesquick, perhaps but I think they knew nothing can beat it really. Worst case scenario would be it just barely matches it. But yeah, shit happens and this is the result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×