AMD Bulldozer (ENG Sample) benchmark leaked.

interesting, probably going to end up being fake again, or early engineering samples......would be really bad if BD scores that bad in Cinebench compared to last gen i7's
 
W.Feather said:
interesting, probably going to end up being fake again, or early engineering samples......would be really bad if BD scores that bad in Cinebench compared to last gen i7's
Click to expand...

It's certainly possible. Cinebench is FP intensive... so this BD is basically like a tri-core there due to the shared floating point unit across each module, right?
 
If it's real, there seems to be something really wrong with it. The reliable leakers will post pics of the hardware for proof. I'm not believing any leaks unless they also show the hardware used.
 
well all these leaks show BD as really weak compared to Core.. and i really want AMD to do something amazing.. now it looks as though i'll be crying for AMD in June..
 
based on the fact that its the 3 module/6 core bulldozer at 3Ghz the performance isn't all that bad. but the production model's should be clocked higher.
 
Intel trolls are having their fun while they can. Only a few more weeks until Bulldozer plows right through them!:D
 
Intel trolls are having their fun while they can.
Click to expand...

I am no so sure about that. I mean about 1/2 of these leaks (fake or real) posted on this forum were from AMD supporters. Do we call the AMD supporters posting fake leaks AMD trolls?
 
I wish it was June already, these stupid "leaks" every other day are getting really fucking old.
 
Seems similar to some other leaks that showed low cinebench scores with "bad" BIOS revisions so it could be real, but not indicative of final performance. I'm beginning to agree with the idea that AMD has gone guerrilla about spreading misinformation for every product launch. We might not see any realistic benches until just before E3. Also 10GB of RAM? How do you...I don't even...why?
 
Silent.Sin said:
Seems similar to some other leaks that showed low cinebench scores with "bad" BIOS revisions so it could be real, but not indicative of final performance. I'm beginning to agree with the idea that AMD has gone guerrilla about spreading misinformation for every product launch. We might not see any realistic benches until just before E3. Also 10GB of RAM? How do you...I don't even...why?
Click to expand...

2x4GB 2x1GB
 
Man you cant even zoom in or even legibly read those screen shots for all we know that could be an ATOM vs a 486dx4 100 lol.... God im sick of these. Just stop wasting our time with these fakes people. Not you OP. I mean fakers.
 
tangoseal said:
Man you cant even zoom in or even legibly read those screen shots for all we know that could be an ATOM vs a 486dx4 100 lol.... God im sick of these. Just stop wasting our time with these fakes people. Not you OP. I mean fakers.
Click to expand...

Fritz Chess:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/709/09335835.jpg/

Cinebench multi-thread (didn't bother to get the single thread because it took forever to download just these 2)
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/834/09343535.jpg/

As an aside people should probably stop complaining about the validity of these things. Who knows the context of these images? They might not be fake, maybe they are just images of testing that are meant for internal communication to tell people hay this werks! or show that it doesn't, show that this BIOS totally borked my uber cool trippy CGI rendering times etc. The actual source of these leaks is unknown. Beggars can't be choosers.
 
tangoseal said:
Man you cant even zoom in or even legibly read those screen shots for all we know that could be an ATOM vs a 486dx4 100 lol.... God im sick of these. Just stop wasting our time with these fakes people. Not you OP. I mean fakers.
Click to expand...

control + scroll wheel....lets you zoom in
 
tangoseal said:
Man you cant even zoom in or even legibly read those screen shots for all we know that could be an ATOM vs a 486dx4 100 lol.... God im sick of these. Just stop wasting our time with these fakes people. Not you OP. I mean fakers.
Click to expand...

In Chrome: right click the image and select open image in new tab.
 
foxhound2001 said:
Not sure if this is real or fake but posting it since it's thread related.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUWckPBv6Fs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQWhnGbteIY
Click to expand...

Well dude's video's show nothing of any real performance. I would guess however that he has the real deal even if it is just an x4 BD..

Though I am not sure if you can fake the wei shit, but My P2 x4 955 BE at 3.9 only scores a 7.4 where this guys hits 7.9. I kind of suspect that his WEI scores are faked. Basing that off of my own scores getting a 7.5 in ram when I have 8gb @ 1600 Mhz & he is getting a 7.98 with 4gb. He is scoring a straight 7.9 across the board which also means better then a 6850 for graphics as I am scoring a 7.7 in the graphics catagories & a 7.6 on the primary HDD with a c300.

So basically what I am saying is that Either BD rocks WEI or this guy has something going to throw inaccurate results.
 
bastage said:
Well dude's video's show nothing of any real performance. I would guess however that he has the real deal even if it is just an x4 BD..

Though I am not sure if you can fake the wei shit, but My P2 x4 955 BE at 3.9 only scores a 7.4 where this guys hits 7.9. I kind of suspect that his WEI scores are faked. Basing that off of my own scores getting a 7.5 in ram when I have 8gb @ 1600 Mhz & he is getting a 7.98 with 4gb. He is scoring a straight 7.9 across the board which also means better then a 6850 for graphics as I am scoring a 7.7 in the graphics catagories & a 7.6 on the primary HDD with a c300.

So basically what I am saying is that Either BD rocks WEI or this guy has something going to throw inaccurate results.
Click to expand...
With my quad unlocked 555 @ 3.7GHz, I get only a 6.7. I think the fact that my board locks HT @ 1GHz when unlocking may have something to do with it.

It is entirely possible for someone to get straight 7.9's. If I'm not mistaken, a SSD should net in the high 7's, on the 5850 I used to have, I would constantly score about 7.2-7.4

You only get a 7.5 for Memory with 8GB DDR3-1600? With 4GB DDR3-1333, I get a 7.5. What are the timings on your memory?
 
" I think the fact that my board locks HT @ 1GHz when unlocking may have something to do with it."

What board do you have? I have never seen anything like that before.
My MSI 785GTM-E45 has the same HT multipliers available locked or unlocked.
 
JMccovery said:
With my quad unlocked 555 @ 3.7GHz, I get only a 6.7. I think the fact that my board locks HT @ 1GHz when unlocking may have something to do with it.

It is entirely possible for someone to get straight 7.9's. If I'm not mistaken, a SSD should net in the high 7's, on the 5850 I used to have, I would constantly score about 7.2-7.4

You only get a 7.5 for Memory with 8GB DDR3-1600? With 4GB DDR3-1333, I get a 7.5. What are the timings on your memory?
Click to expand...

Oh I have no doubt that its possible to get straight 7.9's.. It just doesnt seem that he should be with only 4gb of ram. I suppose its possible though.

The memory is also tied to the CPU score. If the CPU cant feed the memory fast enough it lowers the score.. I Found this out with my x2 555 my memory score went up like .8 when I unlocked it to a quad.
 
Foxconn A7DA-S 3.0, I don't know if it is the BIOS or the 790GX, but no matter what I set the HT multplieri to, it comes back to 1GHz.

I'm on the newest/latest BIOS (P07)
 
bastage said:
Well dude's video's show nothing of any real performance. I would guess however that he has the real deal even if it is just an x4 BD..

Though I am not sure if you can fake the wei shit, but My P2 x4 955 BE at 3.9 only scores a 7.4 where this guys hits 7.9. I kind of suspect that his WEI scores are faked. Basing that off of my own scores getting a 7.5 in ram when I have 8gb @ 1600 Mhz & he is getting a 7.98 with 4gb. He is scoring a straight 7.9 across the board which also means better then a 6850 for graphics as I am scoring a 7.7 in the graphics catagories & a 7.6 on the primary HDD with a c300.

So basically what I am saying is that Either BD rocks WEI or this guy has something going to throw inaccurate results.
Click to expand...

i have 2x2GB and i get 7.9

7.9 in everything but the HDD
 
I have owned intel products for a long time since the p4 days, but i am really hoping amd can pull ahead of intel. because i like amd, i honestly do. and it's time for amd to shine again. i am not a fanboy of any brand. i just like the best price/performace. and right now amd is kinda lacking, i just wanna see amd pull throw and be king again, like they did with the FX series back in the socket 939's, plus it helps us customer's because it keeps the price's down, so we get better price/performace.

I dont look at any leaked benchmark's until [H] does there review, then i will go from there. until then, its hear say.
 
WEI sucks most of the time. I have 4gb DDR2 1066 and I get 7.1 or 7.2. My ram lowered from the 7's down to 5.9 when I overclocked it!
 
Untitledone said:
WEI sucks most of the time. I have 4gb DDR2 1066 and I get 7.1 or 7.2. My ram lowered from the 7's down to 5.9 when I overclocked it!
Click to expand...

In that case, your system is barely stable with the RAM overclocked. Either that or you loosened up the timings so much that it killed performance.
 
Same timings and no instability it has been like this for at least a year. It plays games fine, synthetic benchmarks show increased bandwidth. Been running F@H for 3 weeks straight on it with no crashes. I just think it is a crappy benchmark.
 
I agree. Although most WEI tests are supposed measure performance objectively, the scores often make no sense. There are weightings added to different tests and the results are sometimes ridiculous. The scores seem to have been tweaked a couple of times since Vista introduced WEI. How it was originally supposed to work: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/...indows-experience-index-an-in-depth-look.aspx

For example, a run of the mill 7200RPM HDD using high density platter(s) will score a 5.9. A properly configured RAID0 of 3 10K RPM Raptor drives will score exactly the same because mechanical HDDs were capped at a 5.9 score. Now it tops out in the low 6.x range after a newer tweak to the scores.

However, in the case of measuring bandwidth that MS uses to compute the memory score, different timings can have a huge effect on the particular algorithm MS uses. Other programs may use different algorithms to measure bandwidth. Plus some people do often use timings that make no sense from the perspective of making the memory chips operate efficiently. It may not show in Stream-type benchmarks (used in many programs to measure bandwidth), but other code may be more sensitive to the timing changes.

tl;dr
Ignore WEI if applications and other benchmarks are showing expected performance. It is the least reliable measure of system performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top