![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
AMD Responds
- Thread starter Ryan45
- Start date
Do it. Come on...I dare you.
I'm going to upgrade to the 8150. Running a q8400 @ 3.6 now and been wanting to upgrade. Was always an AMD fan for years. The last 5 years though have been Intel. Should be faster than my setup now at the same clocks but I plan on overclocking a tad anyway. The chip isn't slow.Just not bulldozing Intel. Its like the Radeon 7500 back in the day. Its full of new tech and ahead of its time imo.
haha if they had 8150's itd be a done deal right now, i just dont want to regret getting an 8120 Monday morning if stock pops up. Everything Im seeing is pointing to late next week for the next batch.
I think it should play "Still Alive" credits song from Portal...
He's talking about before the Athlon64 came out, when the Pentium4c was way better than the athlonXP.
desperation? i think not. Amd has always marketed we give you more cores for less. That has not changed, they were the first ones to the market with a dual core cpu. Applications have just taken much longer to adapt to the newer cpu's than anyone could have expected.
Amd planed for the future always have been, its been biting them in the rear in single threaded applications for awhile now. However every program being released these days takes advantage of multiple cores. We are finally seeing some tangible results in the applications taking advantage of more than 4 cores, even in games. The adoption rate in games is far lower because of the whole console gaming thing. Most games are ported from the console to the pc. While the few direct PC games have made pretty good strides as far as using the multiple cores.
Bulldozer is a server cpu ported over to the desktop, with a higher TDP and higher clocks. It makes sense that it kicks ass in multiple threads, and its reflection on current pricing.
may not be the most perfect desktop cpu, but it certainly is very good at what it was designed for and that's living in a muti threaded environment. Power efficiency could be better, But i expect to see better results as the process matures.
So is Amd in trouble? i don't think so The APU's are doing extremely well, their graphics division isn't failing, and they should pick up in the server market soon as the bulldozer server cpus are released. Remember the Server cpus are drop in for the current g34 socket and will offer very impressive server improvements. I cannot wait to see how the new 16 core bulldozers do in the server market, i want to believe they will best intel there.
Oh, I do think so.
More cores for less? Ok, lets go with that. Sure, you get 8 cores and it costs less than Intel's 6 core CPU's but what does that mean? Sadly, nothing. The performance is so abysmal that much more often than not, it performs worse than a 4 core Intel i5 AND costs more.
And application not "optimized" lol, yeah we heard the same thing when Barcelona launched with it's "Native Quad Core" design and you're still waiting for the optimizations even today.
Unless you're going to hop in your DeLorean, warp into the future and grab us some screenshots of future applications and come back here and post them here, history has shown us that this claim of "AMD is too far ahead of it's time" is complete BS.
AMD is not too far ahead of its time; AMD is too far ahead of its manufacturing processes.
Barcelona's three-level cache hierarchy was a good design, but on the 65 nm process there was just not enough die space for L3 cache. The design was so good that Intel adopted it for Nehalem.
Bulldozer is going to be the same way, I feel; we will end up with Hyperthreaded Intel cores that replicate more of the hardware. Its just Intel will be smart, focus on single-threaded performance, and market them as a quad core and more, instead of a castrated eight-core CPU.
im going to bite i want to mess with one too bad.
monday im going to cash this $500 check i have sitting next to me and drive an hour to the microcenter near me they have 8120's in stock for the usual 220.
im going to sell my 955BE to cover some of the cost too. i really wanted to hold out for the 8150 for 260 but i guess id really rather only spend that 220 and if i end up not liking it it i wont be out another 40 bucks lol
update...
i did it.. i reserved an 8120 at microcenter ill be picking it up tomorrow if i have time if not ill get it monday.
only downer is im still waiting for my h100 to come back from corsair RMA to fix the bad fan controller on it. so ill be running it stock for a little while just like im running my 955BE stock due tot helack of the h100 in my case lol
Last edited:
any luck tracking down a tray sku of the 8120? with that h100 you mine as well save on the heatsink.
nope, they only have boxed cpu's and only had 7 left when i reserved one.
but even if they had tray cpu's i would of still got a boxed only because i dont know when im getting my h100 back and i want to use it right when i get it to make sure it works.
then im going to lap it when the h100 gets here lol
It doubled the minimum frames per second in a gaming benchmark
...and even then, it was only Civilization V that saw that large increase in minimum frame rates, other games didn't matter so much. Would be nice if it magically doubled the CPU performance, but not the case. Overclocking the NB has always helped AMD performance, but not this magical 2x.[H] Thread about it here
HillbillyNinja
n00b
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 13
The amazing power of AMD Bulldozers architecture can be seen here only. The new Bulldozer architecture enables ISAS, which Core i7 2600K lacks. AMD Bulldozer FX 8150 performs 56X times faster than Core i7 2600K in OCL Perf Mandelbrot. Thereby AMD Bulldozer with its FMA4 and XOP can accelerate next generation applications with complex mathematical calculations by 56 times more than Intel Core i7 2600K.
From here...http://lenzfire.com/2011/09/amd-bulldozer-fx-processors-benchmark-results-vs-core-i7-2600k-70406/3/
The amazing power of AMD Bulldozers architecture can be seen here only. The new Bulldozer architecture enables ISAS, which Core i7 2600K lacks. AMD Bulldozer FX 8150 performs 56X times faster than Core i7 2600K in OCL Perf Mandelbrot. Thereby AMD Bulldozer with its FMA4 and XOP can accelerate next generation applications with complex mathematical calculations by 56 times more than Intel Core i7 2600K.
From here...http://lenzfire.com/2011/09/amd-bulldozer-fx-processors-benchmark-results-vs-core-i7-2600k-70406/3/
Bulldozer...optimized for Mandelbrot...
HillbillyNinja
n00b
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 13
Bulldozer, Optimized for XOP and FMA4. Big difference. Once software starts to be recompiled with new instruction sets, I think we'll see a huge difference. But the problem now lies with the software people and that's not a smart move on AMD's part.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2011
- Messages
- 10,161
HillbillyNinja
n00b
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 13
If i had the tools and liscences....
I don't know exactly how much it would or could help games to have the integer cores run XOP instead of X86 but it would have to be better than what it's doing now.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2011
- Messages
- 10,161
I just find the whole BD fiasco funny. Sure, BD parts are great for workstation but the average consumer (aka 90% or the desktop market) wants 'moar framez' in his/her games. Whenever I quote a PC for a customer, I ask what they plan on using it for. For those buying anything over $1200, 'Games' is the most common answer. Intel wins.
![Zarathustra[H]](/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1723407683){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 42,230
I wish everything were distributed in source code, so you could chose which optimizations to compile with yourself
Gentoo Linux is good in this regard, but unfortunately it relies on GCC, which is a rather unoptimized compiler, compared to better ones like the Intel compiler (which has been known to cheat with AMD CPU's and cripple them intentionally)
Gentoo Linux is good in this regard, but unfortunately it relies on GCC, which is a rather unoptimized compiler, compared to better ones like the Intel compiler (which has been known to cheat with AMD CPU's and cripple them intentionally)
Cyberbeing
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2007
- Messages
- 570
I wouldn't get your hopes up too much.
x264 (99% integer/99% highly optimized hand-written assembly per CPU architecture) was only able to exact a 1-2% overall performance boost on BD after adding FMA/XOP everywhere it could improve performance. Even though FMA/XOP can make certain operations significantly faster, their usefulness can be limited in any programs which are mildly complex. It matters little if you can speed up an operation by 10-50%, if the portions of your code where FMA/XOP are useful make up less than 10% of your program's total execution time. The fact is, the x264 devs were able to get more of a speed boost overall by tweaking their preexisting SSE/AVX code for the BD arch than any of the newly added FMA/XOP code.
FMA/XOP alone won't be able to compensate for Bulldozer's architecture limitations vs Intel.
Last edited:
WOW I am amazed at people complaining about games. I mean it has shown that bulldozer keeps up with sandybridge in games. why the heck are people still complaiing then? I have a sandybridge but I am tired of people bashing this processor for game performance, it has been shown that it is more then decent in games and keeps up with intel processors.
Its not like AMD is asking you a grand for this processor, for 200 bucks fx-8120 is one hell of a processor, stop complaining and go buy intel like I did, but if someone wants to buy this processor they don't really have to feel bad about it, it is great processor for the price.
Its not like AMD is asking you a grand for this processor, for 200 bucks fx-8120 is one hell of a processor, stop complaining and go buy intel like I did, but if someone wants to buy this processor they don't really have to feel bad about it, it is great processor for the price.
Oh yes, the "just wait" myth, I've been waiting for this one... Too funny
Only in heavily threaded games it barely keeps up SB. In lightly threaded games BD bombs hard. And in single threaded applications, like emulation which requires shittons of raw single threaded power, BD cannot even be considered since its even slower than previous gen AMDs.
This is the problem, Bulldozer is ridiculously uneven. Barely keeps up with Intel when everything favors its unorthodox design and in rest its slow as hell.
I am not AMD hater, hell I postponed my computer upgrade for 5 damn months waiting for BD because I wanted to go back to AMD again and hoped it would be atleast decent, which its not. Sandybridge is unfortunately only sensible option now. Why? Because unlike BD its fast EVERYWHERE and in every god damn application and not just when stuff clicks in place and favors its design.
anubis44
I just make shit up
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2008
- Messages
- 224
Yes, the problem does lie with the software people. For years, AMD has produced processors that somehow had to compete with Intel based on Intel-optimized code, and they actually managed to outperform Intel on numerous occasions, while playing on Intel's home turf, so to speak. Now, AMD is free of the huge overhead of running and upgrading fabrication plants, they are directing much more of their resources into research and product development. Look at how many different chips AMD is fielding at the same time:
-Bobcat/Llano APUs
-Athlon II/Phenom II
-Athlon FX
-Opteron
AMDs main goal right now should be to get as many FX/Opteron processors out into the marketplace as possible (even dumping them if necessary) in order to build up an installed base of their new architecture processors. Software optimization is always a chicken/egg type of thing: the developers won't write optimized code unless there are enough CPUs out there that can run it, and the CPU manufacturer has trouble selling CPUs that are designed to run like the wind if only the code is optimized, when not enough key programs have been optimized. This is the key struggle for AMD.
It also seems to me that AMD is dealing with this perennial problem in a very pragmatic manner. They're designing CPU cores to appeal to large scale supercomputing applications and mid to high end server requirements with huge integer calculating capacity, and relegating the FPU circuitry to secondary status in order to gain this additional integer performance. The GPU will be expected to perform the lion's share of the floating point calculations. This makes tremendous sense, as the server market is potentially more lucrative for them than the desktop CPU market. The insidious thing for Intel, is that specialized supercomputing and server applications can be so demanding, that companies like Cray are perfectly willing to create the tools and re-write and re-compile code to distribute integer and floating point calculations between the x86 integer cores in the Bulldozer and the stream processors in the Radeon/nVidia GPUs, and once these tools exist and proliferate, it becomes tremendously easier for game companies and other software makers to optimize code for the Bulldozer architecture. It also means that their desktop CPUs only get faster and faster over time, as more applications are optimized for them, and Intel's chips essentially stay the same.
We'll see how successful AMD is over the coming year or so with this strategy, but I'd be willing to bet money (in fact, I HAVE bet money - I bought shares of AMD recently) that this essential strategy will pay off for them.
Last edited:
I've always been an AMD fanboy but with all this nonsense BS I'm ditching them for good. All my PCs are gonna be Intel from now on (I build at least 40 PCs per year). AMD is officially a freaking FARCE. The current pricing for what you get is totally retarded. They would need to slash price a LOT to be competitive. Biggest letdown in CPU history I believe.
The FX 8150 would need to be @ 175$ before I even consider building a system with it.
The FX 8150 would need to be @ 175$ before I even consider building a system with it.
mzs_biteme
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2001
- Messages
- 1,595
Hey, I'll let them make a little money.... I'm nice like that...
How about $175 for the 8120 and $195 for the 8150....? Good? No....?Considering Thuban represents the near-end-of-life for an architecture, and Bulldozer represents the first step in the life of a different architecture that's unlike anything they've ever done, I'm willing to give AMD a pass on this one. They don't have the capacity, size, or cashflow of Intel, so naturally they're going to stumble a bit when they introduce an entirely new architecture and a smaller production process. As a whole, I think it's a bit messed up for us as tech-minded folks to criticize them given their situation, seeing as we more than anyone are equipped to understand the difficulties they face.
Now, if Piledriver ends up being the same kind of release as Bulldozer, you'll hear me changing my tune...but until then, I'll reserve my judgement.
All that being said, I'll be skipping Bulldozer
well said