Bulldozer Benchmark leaked

DedEmbryonicCe11 said:
They must have patched the BIOS for the 760 board themselves right? I can't believe one with stock BIOS would function beyond failsafe clocks with BD.
Click to expand...


Patched? Asus officially supports 32nm CPUs with this Board and the latest stock public Bios. But B2 Stepping was not fully supported with the older Bios obviously, therefore it can't show the real performance. M5A97 with the very new Bios from Asus made the difference.
 
I really hope these benches are fake, I want to support AMD. I may sound like a fanboy but intel needs a competition so pricing can be stable
 
$189 for a 2500K is pretty stable for me. Yeah could always be cheaper, but I'm not complaining!! :cool:
 
iconiK said:
I want Bulldozer benchmarked while it's compiling Qt (all of it), or some other big C++ project. As long as it uses an SSD, the CPU should be fully loaded. C++ scales nearly perfectly.
Click to expand...

Have you seen benefit in running ssd for c++ build times? Where I am at we did quite a few benchmarks using vertex 2s, raptors, and some standard 7200rpm drives and were shocked to find that the drives were not the bottleneck on win7 (I'm talking savings of 1-2 minutes off of 1+ hour builds which is negligible). I'm not sure if win7 is fantastic at caching data or if something else is the bottleneck. I wasn't the one to do the benchmarks but I believe we were doing this on i7 960 with 12gigs of ram. When doing builds, I noticed that cpu percentage can be rather high with 4 core/8threads. Glancing at my output tree I'm seeing 15 gigs after compile. We use a lot of precompiled headers and parrallel compiles which is why the high cpu %.
 
if something else is the bottleneck.
Click to expand...

In my experience Visual Studio (2005, 2008, 2010) does not seem to be very good at parallel builds (especially for 4+ core systems) if there are dependencies between projects or you are using precompiled headers. I try to get around some of this by building each configuration (Release, Debug. RelWithDebInfo) separately.
 
I'm going to laugh if BD is released and it kicks the shit out of Sandy Bridge...not saying it's going to, but it will be funny. :p
 
erf said:
I'm going to laugh if BD is released and it kicks the shit out of Sandy Bridge...not saying it's going to, but it will be funny. :p
Click to expand...

I'll be said since I just bought a 2600k, but I did get it for $250 from newegg.
 
iYoYo said:
I really hope these benches are fake, I want to support AMD. I may sound like a fanboy but intel needs a competition so pricing can be stable
Click to expand...

I agree. AMD is a much better choice than Intel but if these benchs are to be believed. I will not be a happy camper. Ive been waiting for BD to upgrade.
 
Nice BD ad

3LtHF.jpg
 
AMD_Gamer said:
Nice BD ad

3LtHF.jpg
Click to expand...

Yeah, AMD's best is a tractor and Intel's is like a fucking spaceship with gizmos and rockets all over it. I'd love to have seen AMD shine here but for consumer desktop it looks like they are late to the party this time around. Hopefully it works out for them in servers and moving forward though.
 
krakerman said:
Yeah, AMD's best is a tractor and Intel's is like a fucking spaceship with gizmos and rockets all over it. I'd love to have seen AMD shine here but for consumer desktop it looks like they are late to the party this time around. Hopefully it works out for them in servers and moving forward though.
Click to expand...

What party ? Where ?

Maybe times are changing AMD is taking over the world with APU while Intel is trying to figure out what hit them, next year when trinity is released that will be a party for sure....
 
Pieter3dnow said:
Maybe times are changing AMD is taking over the world with APU while Intel is trying to figure out what hit them, next year when trinity is released that will be a party for sure....
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm an idiot, but I see very few computers with APUs, and they're only able to provide decent gaming at 1280x1024 or 1366x768, so old monitors and low end notebooks. Outside of gaming the APUs are worthless, since the i3 2100 is significantly faster.
 
iconiK said:
Maybe I'm an idiot, but I see very few computers with APUs, and they're only able to provide decent gaming at 1280x1024 or 1366x768, so old monitors and low end notebooks. Outside of gaming the APUs are worthless, since the i3 2100 is significantly faster.
Click to expand...

You aren't - at the moment APU offert is very uncompetitive and apart from low end notebooks doesn't make sense.
 
As long as they can game at 720p, they are golden. 1080p is just icing on the cake and I have no doubt that trinity can handle it. Might not be max settings, but most people that are using APU's don't care about max settings otherwise they'd have bought a true gaming notebook/comp.
 
iconiK said:
so old monitors and low end notebooks.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily old monitors, since I doubt folks running APU' are that concerned with games.

Outside of gaming the APUs are worthless, since the i3 2100 is significantly faster.
Click to expand...

And APU, which is both the graphics and processing, is cheaper. An A8 is more than enough for the average consumer, who does nothing but mostly browse the web.
 
Michaelius said:
You aren't - at the moment APU offert is very uncompetitive and apart from low end notebooks doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

The problem is that you look at it from what you learned, you approach it in a manner which doesn't effect the market the chip is meant for.

As long as the production costs are low the mainboards are cheaper the computer can still go for mainstream prices thus more profit.

Single minded marketing approach that companies like Sony and MS were preaching to consumers they needed HD graphics they needed to shell out a lot of money , because that was the hardcore gaming segment they needed so badly while Nintendo ran away and opened up the non gaming crowd and has a larger userbase now then when the approach is limited towards 1 segment.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
The problem is that you look at it from what you learned, you approach it in a manner which doesn't effect the market the chip is meant for.

As long as the production costs are low the mainboards are cheaper the computer can still go for mainstream prices thus more profit.
Click to expand...

Well yeah I aproach it from perspective of consumer and so far I see that I can buy 1155 mobo slightly cheaper and AM3 mobo massively cheaper than APU mobos.

If I need power efficient chip for everyday office usage I can get one of cheap SB pentiums+ H61 mobo.
If I need cheap gaming rig I can go for am3 with Phenom II and discret gpu (GT240 is 55$ on newegg with $20 mail-in rebate to make it 35$).
 
Michaelius said:
Well yeah I aproach it from perspective of consumer and so far I see that I can buy 1155 mobo slightly cheaper and AM3 mobo massively cheaper than APU mobos.

If I need power efficient chip for everyday office usage I can get one of cheap SB pentiums+ H61 mobo.
If I need cheap gaming rig I can go for am3 with Phenom II and discret gpu (GT240 is 55$ on newegg with $20 mail-in rebate to make it 35$).
Click to expand...

you forget laptops .

For under $800 I can build a 1.8ghz quad core llano a8-3510mx + 6520G with a dedicated 67750 series gpu which in some games will work with the gpu in the apu.

This compares much better than intel verison which comes with a i3-2310m base that starts at $600 .

I'd most likely have to get a core i5 2410m upgrade to ompete with the multi threaded performance of the llano thats $50 and then I have a $100 option for the radeon 6490M which is outclassed y the 6750 or i could get the hd6770M which will set me back $200.

The main problem is the intel verison would last less than 6 hours with the base cpu and even less with the upgrade the amd verison would last much longer. Esp when you want to play games. The intergrated cpu in the intel series is worthless while you can actual game with llano
 
Michaelius said:
Well yeah I aproach it from perspective of consumer and so far I see that I can buy 1155 mobo slightly cheaper and AM3 mobo massively cheaper than APU mobos.

If I need power efficient chip for everyday office usage I can get one of cheap SB pentiums+ H61 mobo.
If I need cheap gaming rig I can go for am3 with Phenom II and discret gpu (GT240 is 55$ on newegg with $20 mail-in rebate to make it 35$).
Click to expand...

Looking at Newegg's list of FM1 motherboards, they don't seem much more expensive than AM3+ boards...

I wouldn't mind using an A8/A6 and a FM1 MicroATX/MiniITX board for an arcade build.

I'm really waiting to see what Trinity (I think it will be called A#-4xxx series) brings to the table.
 
Michaelius said:
Which is why I said AM3 mobo:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...43&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=20
Click to expand...
On average, with the number of AM3 boards vs FM1 boards, the FM1 boards aren't that much more expensive. Weren't most AM3 boards more expensive than AM2+ boards, when they were released?
Same for 1156 vs 1155, AM2+ vs AM2, S775 vs S478, etc... Newer boards usually cost more than older boards.

In about a month, you'll have FM1 boards that will run $35 - $60, and A6/A4 APUs that will be less than $100.
 
JMccovery said:
On average, with the number of AM3 boards vs FM1 boards, the FM1 boards aren't that much more expensive. Weren't most AM3 boards more expensive than AM2+ boards, when they were released?
Same for 1156 vs 1155, AM2+ vs AM2, S775 vs S478, etc... Newer boards usually cost more than older boards.

In about a month, you'll have FM1 boards that will run $35 - $60, and A6/A4 APUs that will be less than $100.
Click to expand...

And then I'll consider them as acceptable worthwile offer. For now they are sad joke.
 
Michaelius said:
All of them cheap enough to buy gpu that outclasses llano gpu performance.
Click to expand...

Well, IMHO, the A-3850 is better than a Pentium 850 in overall processing.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/399?vs=404

The G850 costs $97. The FM1 motherboards range from $70 on newegg, the 1155 range from $50. The GPU coupled th highere Llano processors (6550 I believe) would probably be about $60.

So, by my estimates, they'd be about the same price. A cheap Athlon x4 with heatsink is $100 on newegg. Coupled with a $60 GPu and $60 motherboard, it'd cost more than an A8-3850 and FM1 board. $140 and $70 respectfully. The 3850 is also the marginally better processor.

The best deal would be a Core i3-2100, since it possesses a advantage in processing.

But meh, it's all subjective friend.
 
Michaelius said:
All of them cheap enough to buy gpu that outclasses llano gpu performance.
Click to expand...

Making comparative benches with a high end video card makes 0 sense here.
It's just stupid. Half of what you're paying for on llano is the GPU it doesnt make any sense at all to bench it with a high end video card, a build like that is completely impractical.
 
Since this thread is about imaginary Bulldozer benchmarks the only APU anyone should be discussing here is Trinity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top