This Can't be right!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dr. Righteous

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 1, 2007
Messages
3,163
Ok, I finally got a new build going after gather parts for a while.
This is a fat, fresh AMD FX-8120 with a minimal OC to 3.4Ghz.
I score a 7.2 windows experience; low because my old HD5750 video card.
specs:
AMD FX-8120 (Hyper 212 cooler)
Biostar TA990FKE MB
8 GB Vengeance RAM
128GB Crucial SSD
Blu-Ray reader optical drive
Radeon HD5750 video card
550w Cooler Master PS
New install windows 7-64bit.
Install Make MKV and then Handbrake.

Normally I do this on my old system (in my sig)
and on a typical blu-ray to MKV (via handbrake) transcode I score 15-20 FPS.

I expected this new system to SMOKE the old one.
To my shock, it scores the same!!!

SOMETHING is holding the CPU performance back on this system and it has to be windows 7.
I noticed CPU usage was anywhere from 85% to 95%. I usually see them held at 100% on my linux system. Something is drastically out of wack here. How can a 8 core fall on it's face so bad??
A Phenom 9500x4 running at 2.3mhz should NEVER be outdone by a FX8120 8 core running at 3.4mhz. :confused:
 
Had you read the performance reviews of bulldozer, you would have seen that this is normal.
bulldozer is outperformed by phenom 2's in a large number of use cases.
 
Zoson said:
Had you read the performance reviews of bulldozer, you would have seen that this is normal.
bulldozer is outperformed by phenom 2's in a large number of use cases.
Click to expand...

I don't think it beats it in encoding, but anyway, he had a phenom 1, not 2. and running 1200mhz slower at that.

something is not right.
 
Are you transcoding directly from the bd? How fast is your destination drive? What version of handbrake are you using?

You may want to try running a smaller test file directly from the hdd on the pc.
 
Zoson said:
Had you read the performance reviews of bulldozer, you would have seen that this is normal.
bulldozer is outperformed by phenom 2's in a large number of use cases.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, not a Phenom II, old Phenom 9500 locked clock at 2.2 Ghz.
NO way in the world it can compare to a unlocked bulldozer.

System drive is a Crucial 128 GB SSD.
Ripping with MakeMKV to the drive and then transcoding it to MKV with HandBrake.

The specs of the 2 systems are ancient to modern. It blows me away that I get the same FPS performance. I expected it to be at least double.

The H.264 Codec scales smoothly across multiple cores. Something doesn't make sense here.
I have a feeling if I did the same test with Linux, the system would be smok'in fast. (I have always used Linux for this task)
Something is going on with Windows but I don't know what.
 
I find it funny that you have no clue what the problem is, but are already making assumptions that it HAS to be Windows. News flash: Bulldozer blows. They claim 8 cores, but it's not (8 modules). They claimed high performance, it's not. Thuban and Sandy Bridge processors easily beat it in a majority of benchmarks, and that's why I never upgraded from my 1090T.

If you want higher performance, either OC that CPU more, tighten your RAM timings, or replace it with something else. Don't feel bad though, everybody was expecting Bulldozer to be amazing thanks to AMD marketing.
 
If possible I would try to compare again using Linux if that's what you normally use. Also, you should go for a more aggressive overclock with that chip, 4Ghz should be fairly easy.
 
mhenley said:
I find it funny that you have no clue what the problem is, but are already making assumptions that it HAS to be Windows. News flash: Bulldozer blows. They claim 8 cores, but it's not (8 modules). They claimed high performance, it's not. Thuban and Sandy Bridge processors easily beat it in a majority of benchmarks, and that's why I never upgraded from my 1090T.

If you want higher performance, either OC that CPU more, tighten your RAM timings, or replace it with something else. Don't feel bad though, everybody was expecting Bulldozer to be amazing thanks to AMD marketing.
Click to expand...

Forget the Bulldozer BS.
The first gen Phenom was proclaimed a dog also.

I'm not sitting here comparing BD to Sandy Bridge.
What I am saying is there is SOMETHING wrong if a FX 8120 at 3.4 Ghz does the same FPS performance as a OLD system with slow memory, slow HD, slow CPU.
All HandBrake settings are stock. Non tweaked.
What I do know is this task under hits 100% on all 4 cores and give 15-20 fps.
It hits 85-95% on all 8 cores on the BD and a much higher clock speed and give 15-20 fps.
Bulldozer performance SHOULD NOT be this bad. Something is wrong somewhere.

Maybe there is some kind of load balancing or some kind of super energy saver buddy in Windows that linux does not have causing this. Don't know.
The ONLY reason I put windows7 on this was because fewer and fewer games are supporting XP anymore. Had to migrate some time. All other computer work I do is on LINUX so naturally that is my preference for this kind of thing.
 
This makes me giggle a little bit. Seriously, you need to read up on the flaws of the architecture.
 
K1tty said:
If possible I would try to compare again using Linux if that's what you normally use. Also, you should go for a more aggressive overclock with that chip, 4Ghz should be fairly easy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, 4Ghz is the eventual goal.
I'm gonna have to cut a hold in the case for the cooler to stick out. :p
I just finished putting the thing together last night and not had a lot of time to play with hit.
 
Everyone "laughing" at the OP because Bulldozer "blows" doesn't find it at all strange that a Phenom, NOT Phenom II is running with his BD build?

Instead of recommending he essentially "get with it" why not understand what he's saying? Bulldozer may have been a fail in the eyes of many, but no way should a Phenom 9500 @ 2.2 GHz be running with it...
 
Dr. Righteous, check out these benchmark scores, comparing the FX 8150 (just like your new processor, but clocked higher), versus the Phenom x4 9650 (also, like yours, though clocked a bit higher.): http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=23

From what you write, I would assume that something IS wrong... you should be getting better encoding frame rates than that (especially on the second pass) with the Bulldozer.

Are you using Cool n' Quiet? That can hamper performance.
 
Jherek said:
Dr. Righteous, check out these benchmark scores, comparing the FX 8150 (just like your new processor, but clocked higher), versus the Phenom x4 9650 (also, like yours, though clocked a bit higher.): http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=23

From what you write, I would assume that something IS wrong... you should be getting better encoding frame rates than that (especially on the second pass) with the Bulldozer.

Are you using Cool n' Quiet? That can hamper performance.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling those bench numbers are based on a low quality, quick pass. If it were me, I'd set everything back to default (Get rid of the OC), put in your HB settings that you use on the other machine, and test it again. I'm pretty sure that MS released a modified scheduler for Windows 7 for the BD as well. Again, research, research, research.
 
Everybody laughing at the OP also doesn't seem to realize that his gripe pertains to the one area where BD truly excels. Something is wrong.
 
OP

if you watch your cpu clock speed in cpuid does it clock up to 4ghz (the boost speed)? i am wondering if your "oc" is limiting you cpu speed to 3.4. is there even a point to oc your cpu to 3.4 if it will boost to 4.0 on its own?
 
Jherek said:
Dr. Righteous, check out these benchmark scores, comparing the FX 8150 (just like your new processor, but clocked higher), versus the Phenom x4 9650 (also, like yours, though clocked a bit higher.): http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=23

From what you write, I would assume that something IS wrong... you should be getting better encoding frame rates than that (especially on the second pass) with the Bulldozer.

Are you using Cool n' Quiet? That can hamper performance.
Click to expand...

Those benches show exactly what I should expect. Double the performance, and I ain't getting it!
This is the whole purpose of this thread.
Now if we are finished with the "Bulldozer sux.........." posts. :rolleyes:

I didn't see "cool and quiet" in the bios setting but it might be called something else and enable. Need to review. I have not loaded any AMD CPU drivers in Windows either other than the software that came with the MB (AMD chipset drivers).
 
Dr. Righteous said:
Those benches show exactly what I should expect. Double the performance, and I ain't getting it!
This is the whole purpose of this thread.
Now if we are finished with the "Bulldozer sux.........." posts. :rolleyes:

I didn't see "cool and quiet" in the bios setting but it might be called something else and enable. Need to review. I have not loaded any AMD CPU drivers in Windows either other than the software that came with the MB (AMD chipset drivers).
Click to expand...

Have you tried setting the CPU minimum state to 100% in the power settings in Windows?

What are your CPU temps. If it is getting too hot for some reason, it could be clocking down.

Have you checked task manager to make sure something isn't always using a bunch of CPU time?
 
Kinda hard to compare hardware changes when also changing OS software (especially if the transcode software had different compilers and compiler switches ... was it even the same transcode software?)
 
xorbe said:
Kinda hard to compare hardware changes when also changing OS software (especially if the transcode software had different compilers and compiler switches ... was it even the same transcode software?)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm trying not to compare apples to oranges too much here.

Old Phenom system on Linux 64bit
Ripping Blu-Ray with Make MKV (bit per bit copy to the HD)
Resulting file is usually 15-23GB or so; depending on what it is.
Transcoding that with Handbrake set to MKV. This in itself is a "high profile" setting.
All handbrake setting identical between the 2 system.

New FX-8120 system Win7 64bit
plus using a 128GB SSD drive.
Ripping Blu-Ray with MakeMKV
transcoding with Handbrake same MKV settings.
 
cyclone3d said:
Have you tried setting the CPU minimum state to 100% in the power settings in Windows?

What are your CPU temps. If it is getting too hot for some reason, it could be clocking down.

Have you checked task manager to make sure something isn't always using a bunch of CPU time?
Click to expand...

I think I found the culprit. There was a CPU "power control" option turn on in the bios that was the issue. Bios for this MB doesn't use any of the usual nomenclature for the functions. Turned it off and it was off to the races.
Also I was using the AMD VISION overdrive version and it gave up at 3.4Ghz and wouldn't go no further. :confused:

I downloaded the stand alone version of AMD overdrive and used it.
Well, on auto tune it got to 4.1 Ghz and wasn't slowing down. Hottest it got was 50C according to CPU temps in AMD Overdrive. I stopped it there. Will see where max overclock later and test stability. But I set the multiplier to 20.5 and fired up Handbrake and duplicated the transcode from earlier.

Right now average 53 FPS. That is transcoding a full lengh 1080P movie.
And that is near double the performance. :D

Load is floating from 60-75% per core and temp is 41C. So it still is not using them to 100%. But that is enough for tonight. ;)
 
Glad you got that figured out. Big har har to the troll posts. I really hate it when people jump to comment without first reading the issue at hand.
 
Geez the meathead responses in this thread! Glad you got it sorted, I was about to suggest temporarily disabling all the power saving settings, c states, APM, cool and quiet etc, but looks like you got it.
 
Zoson said:
Had you read the performance reviews of bulldozer, you would have seen that this is normal.
bulldozer is outperformed by phenom 2's in a large number of use cases.
Click to expand...

This is not at all normal. BD is WAY faster than the original phenoms which is what the OP had.
 
Glad you figured it out. BD is no slouch whatsoever when it comes to encoding.
 
Btw there settings in Catalyst itself which allow you to set the power usage to be set. Mine are always set for full power "high performance" the default is medium or some powersave mode (been a while)
 
Last edited:
Glad you were able to figure it out!

Load is floating from 60-75% per core and temp is 41C. So it still is not using them to 100%. But that is enough for tonight.
Click to expand...

I wonder if this is due to it not being optimized for BD?
 
Dr. Righteous said:
I think I found the culprit. There was a CPU "power control" option turn on in the bios that was the issue. Bios for this MB doesn't use any of the usual nomenclature for the functions. Turned it off and it was off to the races.
Also I was using the AMD VISION overdrive version and it gave up at 3.4Ghz and wouldn't go no further. :confused:

I downloaded the stand alone version of AMD overdrive and used it.
Well, on auto tune it got to 4.1 Ghz and wasn't slowing down. Hottest it got was 50C according to CPU temps in AMD Overdrive. I stopped it there. Will see where max overclock later and test stability. But I set the multiplier to 20.5 and fired up Handbrake and duplicated the transcode from earlier.

Right now average 53 FPS. That is transcoding a full lengh 1080P movie.
And that is near double the performance. :D

Load is floating from 60-75% per core and temp is 41C. So it still is not using them to 100%. But that is enough for tonight. ;)
Click to expand...

There ya go! i was going to say bulldozer is awesome at encoding -- anyone saying phenom would match it is full of crap. I just encoded real steel from bluray on my 3.2ghz llano quad and averaged 30fps FYI
 
Dr. Righteous said:
Yeah, I wondered the same. I know the Linux kernel was optimized for BD and showed better performance.
Click to expand...

I primarily run Linux but I have tested Handbrake in Windows and Linux. BD in Linux perfroms about 15% better across the board and that is also reflected in Handbrake. I'll lose about 10fps in encoding by just being in Windows.
 
I see you got it figured out now but I would like to add my stock clocked 8120 is on par to slightly better than my i7 860 when it comes to encoding. Its not the greatest cpu in the world but I like it.
 
Track Drew said:
Yeah, I would recommend taking advice from these folks with a grain of salt in the future:
:(
Click to expand...

Isn't that cute. My posts were both relevant and correct. I told the OP to revert to stock settings and RESEARCH both the processor and settings.
 
Dr. Righteous said:
Forget the Bulldozer BS.
The first gen Phenom was proclaimed a dog also.
Click to expand...

The first Phenom was a dog. Phenom II was less of a dog but still a dog. Bulldozer is worse than Phenom II clock for clock in a lot of areas. What does that say? (No I do not mean that Bulldizer is slower than Phenom II at encoding.)

buttons said:
There ya go! i was going to say bulldozer is awesome at encoding -- anyone saying phenom would match it is full of crap. I just encoded real steel from bluray on my 3.2ghz llano quad and averaged 30fps FYI
Click to expand...

It does do well in that area. It matches higher end offerings from Intel in a lot of cases. I wouldn't say that it's awesome for encoding because there are better CPUs for that job from Intel. Though they are significantly more expensive. (IE 3930K, 3960X etc.)
 
Dan_D said:
The first Phenom was a dog. Phenom II was less of a dog but still a dog. Bulldozer is worse than Phenom II clock for clock in a lot of areas. What does that say? (No I do not mean that Bulldizer is slower than Phenom II at encoding.)



It does do well in that area. It matches higher end offerings from Intel in a lot of cases. I wouldn't say that it's awesome for encoding because there are better CPUs for that job from Intel. Though they are significantly more expensive. (IE 3930K, 3960X etc.)
Click to expand...

You say Phenom II was still a dog? Whatever man, the Phenom II was a great CPU and virtually unsurpassed in the performance per dollar category. If you think the Phenom II is a dog of a CPU then you are extremely spoiled on your $350 dollar i7 processors. Realistically a VERY small percentage of people can afford to spend that much on their computer hardware.
 
ZodaEX said:
You say Phenom II was still a dog? Whatever man, the Phenom II was a great CPU and virtually unsurpassed in the performance per dollar category. If you think the Phenom II is a dog of a CPU then you are extremely spoiled on your $350 dollar i7 processors. Realistically a VERY small percentage of people can afford to spend that much on their computer hardware.
Click to expand...

I love how people who can't afford this or that usually act like those who can are just spoiled bitches. They couldn't possibly have earned their way towards having enough income to enjoy a hobby now could they. :rolleyes:

Was Phenom II a dog In terms of what else was available? Absolutely. Yes Phenom II was a dog. It barely matched the Core 2 Quad 45nm CPUs and was obliterated by the Core i7 and Core i5 CPUs. As for the bang for your buck argument, let's not forget that since the introduction of the Core 2 Duo E6300 there have always been Intel CPUs which were pretty close to the price of what AMD was offering on theie high end of the spectrum and generally speaking, Intel's CPUs were far more powerful. Core 2 Quad's hit the sub-$300 price point quite often after the Core 2 Quad Q6600's had been out for awhile and more frequently when 45nm CPUs hit. Core i7 920's were under $300.00 before too long, Core i7 2500k and 2600k processors that came out later were also under $300.00. In fact the Core i5 3570K I purchased for my mini-ITX build was $169.99 a few weeks ago. Core i5 3570K's, and Core i7 3770K's etc. still surpass the performance of anything AMD has in most applications.

You can argue for cheaper motherboard prices and you'd be right to some degree but it isn't as if all Intel processor compatible motherboards are $300+ either. There are many options which reach near parity with AMD processor compatible offerings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top