Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Bulldozer vs SandyBridge

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 2, 2010 8:11:34 AM

I'm planning on building a new system in January, but I can't decide whether I should build an AMD or Intel system. Which of these processors do you think will offer the best value for my money and why? Also what are the release dates for these 2 new processor lines, and should I just build a 1366 or AM3 system instead of waiting??

More about : bulldozer sandybridge

December 2, 2010 8:42:21 AM

bulldozer is not coming out in january, its coming Q2 or Q3 of 2011, however sandy bridge is coming out in January, around the 5th, i have put a hault on my build until january for Sandy bridge and the rest of the ATI 6xxx series, its worth the wait, just keep in mind the Sandy bridge CPUs are not overclockable only the k ones are, so the i5 2500k will be overclockable and the i7 2600k will also
Score
0
December 2, 2010 8:58:21 AM

so will the sandy bridge CPUs be better than the bulldozers? and will LGA 1366 be discontinued, or only 1156?
Score
0
Related resources
a c 103 à CPUs
December 2, 2010 9:37:37 AM

Cs342 said:
so will the sandy bridge CPUs be better than the bulldozers? and will LGA 1366 be discontinued, or only 1156?

None knows which will be better and 1366 will be discontinued but alot later than 1156
Score
0
December 2, 2010 10:06:52 AM

so if i build a 1366 rig for christmas/late january will it last me 2 years? i don't think so but just asking...
Score
0
a b à CPUs
December 2, 2010 3:50:15 PM

Cs342 said:
so if i build a 1366 rig for christmas/late january will it last me 2 years? i don't think so but just asking...


It should. AFAIK, there is one new CPU planned for 1366 - the i7-990X which will probably supplant the 980X, assuming you have $1K to spend on it :p .
Score
0
December 2, 2010 4:35:37 PM

So will the sandy bridge i5 2500 or 2500k be better than the i7-950? I know, and I kinda hope that the current CPUs will probably go down in price, but I too want to have something that will last for a while.
Score
0
December 2, 2010 5:20:35 PM

Nooooooooooooooobody really knows and don't believe anyone who tells you that they do. :)  Tthere will be no confirmation of anything solid until the benchies come out on shipping silicon, likely by the end of this month.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
December 2, 2010 8:20:49 PM

^ +1. Also, if BD does ship in April or so, there should be some engineering samples out in January or February, and perhaps some leaked performance 'benchies'. Although AMD seems to be playing hardball with information control on this one, however..
Score
0
December 2, 2010 8:53:48 PM

There seem to be a lot of motherboards supporting 1155 that have already been leaked... nothing about Socket AM3+ though...
Score
0
December 2, 2010 9:26:02 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
AMD seems to be playing hardball with information control on this one, however..


They either have a game-changer or a dud. I'd hate to guess which one! :bounce: 
Score
0
December 3, 2010 2:39:44 AM

halfcalf said:
They either have a game-changer or a dud. I'd hate to guess which one! :bounce: 



i agree with you entirely, on the one hand if BD is as powerful as the i7 range or dare i say sandybridge then why are they not giving an approximation of where it will sit in the performance hierarchy, i cant answer this, i wish i could.
It seems if they, AMD, were capable of competing with SB then it would be very much in their interest to make such a claim to encourage people to await their chips before buying SB or an older i7 assuming their prices recede somewhat, at this moment in time ive seen very few solid announcements indicating where AMD think their new chip will sit in the performance table. Im a staunch AMD fan but unless BD out performs at least the i7 range or performs on par at a reduced price range i think BD could become a hard sell.

personally id like it if BD was capable of beating intel on performance while also beating them on value rather than the current situation wherein the main selling point of AMD is their value. Im a 955 owner and find it very difficult to imagine AMD making such a huge leap forward, though i hope, oh boy i hope. If BD lives up to the figures it is supposed to then i will save and i will support AMD if its not so impressive i think i would wait till the 955 becomes a hindrance and buy when needed the most value orientated gaming cpu at that time, Id just reallly sooner it was an AMD "super" chip.

I think im a wanna be fanboi unable to escape the harsh realities of this world
Score
0
December 3, 2010 4:31:00 AM

bulldozer will be better then sandy bridge (as it is coming out quite a bit later) bulldozer is actually competing against ivy bridge, sandy bridge will be on socket 1155, ivy bridge will be on socket 1365 and bulldozer will be on socket am3+
Score
0
December 3, 2010 4:33:24 AM

I have put a hault on my build waiting for sandy bridge as it is coming just around the corner.... I think its worth the wait as the rest of the ATI 6xxx series is coming out and the rest of the gtx 5xx series, im going to pick up an hd 6950 or a gtx 570
Score
0
December 3, 2010 5:51:20 AM

So waiting for Bulldozer would be better?
Score
0
December 3, 2010 6:39:11 AM

SO WHAT SHOULD I DO?!!!!! lol
Score
0
December 3, 2010 6:52:49 AM

that face palm made me laugh like a goon for about 3 minutes, ty very much.

op- id wait, if your looking for next gen tech it wont be out till it is, if bulldozer competes with sandybridge then prices will be forced to drop and that will force all the last gen tech down a notch, its got to be said even on the gpu front waiting now is the only reasonable option unless you dont want to wait in which case go crazy or go budget and sell it off when new tech comes along.

this is the best advice I am capable of providing, i rekon at least a month after bulldozer comes out and we should see some semi reasonable prices from both camps across their ranges, I hope so at least.

Im basing this on my opinions so can only call this advice, gl either way
Score
0
December 3, 2010 9:06:59 AM

yes but bulldozer will be released closer to ivy bridge.... thats why i said it and i read that bulldozer will be 28nm so shove those hands up your ass :) 
Score
0

Best solution

December 3, 2010 9:41:44 AM

I dont know what to believe.... I dont believe in speculating, just wait for the SB chips to come out and choose then, no one really knows 100% what SB and BD are going to be like and it is said bulldozer is expected Q3 of 2011 and ivy bridge is expected Q4 2011 just buy an SB when it comes out otherwise you are going to be waiting forever for newer and newer tech that will be on the brink of coming out, just dont get a 1366 build right now as it would suck knowing that 1366 will be dead in a month or so (im not saying that 1366 cpus wont be good anymore, im just saying it would suck knowing it is dead)
Share
December 3, 2010 11:06:34 AM

exhail said:
I dont know what to believe.... I dont believe in speculating, just wait for the SB chips to come out and choose then, no one really knows 100% what SB and BD are going to be like and it is said bulldozer is expected Q3 of 2011 and ivy bridge is expected Q4 2011 just buy an SB when it comes out otherwise you are going to be waiting forever for newer and newer tech that will be on the brink of coming out, just dont get a 1366 build right now as it would suck knowing that 1366 will be dead in a month or so (im not saying that 1366 cpus wont be good anymore, im just saying it would suck knowing it is dead)


If it still works and does everything you want it to what's the problem?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2010 11:13:25 AM

1: C2Q's are still sufficent; an i5/i7 build (Nehalem) will "last" for two years, but you likely won't have significant upgradability should you go that route, ESPECIALLY on 1056.

2: Right now, I'd WAIT. With a socket change in the VERY near future (two-three months), a new intel arch, and very promising benchmarks, it doesn't make sense to make a new build that is meant to last. Nothing quite like buying a Pentium 4 right before the Core 2's dropped, after all...

3: AMD is VERY tight lipped about BD. That itself is VERY worrysome, as AMD has been very good about leaking benchmarks...when they beat the competition. And given how Phenom I = C2D, Phenom II = C2Q, I suspect BD = Nehalem. If thats indeed the case, and SB is a significant performance upgrade, AMD could be left significantly out in the cold.

Right now, I would just wait until we start seeing more benchmarks, and get an idea where performance for SB will land.
Score
0
December 3, 2010 4:57:46 PM

rebus_forever said:
It seems if they, AMD, were capable of competing with SB then it would be very much in their interest to make such a claim to encourage people to await their chips before buying SB or an older i7 assuming their prices recede somewhat, at this moment in time ive seen very few solid announcements indicating where AMD think their new chip will sit in the performance table. Im a staunch AMD fan but unless BD out performs at least the i7 range or performs on par at a reduced price range i think BD could become a hard sell.


gamerk316 said:
AMD is VERY tight lipped about BD. That itself is VERY worrysome, as AMD has been very good about leaking benchmarks...when they beat the competition. And given how Phenom I = C2D, Phenom II = C2Q, I suspect BD = Nehalem. If thats indeed the case, and SB is a significant performance upgrade, AMD could be left significantly out in the cold.


Let's face it. AMD can't afford to keep playing second fiddle on the high end for much longer. That's why the Bulldozer silence is worrysome. Does AMD have the tech cojones to come out with a paradigm shifting CPU or is it going to be nothing more than a good strong competitor to something along the lines of the i5 750... Booooooooooooooooooring! :kaola: 
Score
0
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2010 5:38:12 PM

gamerk316 said:
1: C2Q's are still sufficent; an i5/i7 build (Nehalem) will "last" for two years, but you likely won't have significant upgradability should you go that route, ESPECIALLY on 1056.


+1. I myself just bought an SSD and an ATI 5770 to upgrade my old Q6700 machine that had an 8800 GTX card. It'll last me until I can see the benchies and decide on my next build - either Bulldozer or a performance Sandy Bridge (not mainstream which is what is coming out next month).

Quote:
2: Right now, I'd WAIT. With a socket change in the VERY near future (two-three months), a new intel arch, and very promising benchmarks, it doesn't make sense to make a new build that is meant to last. Nothing quite like buying a Pentium 4 right before the Core 2's dropped, after all...

3: AMD is VERY tight lipped about BD. That itself is VERY worrysome, as AMD has been very good about leaking benchmarks...when they beat the competition. And given how Phenom I = C2D, Phenom II = C2Q, I suspect BD = Nehalem. If thats indeed the case, and SB is a significant performance upgrade, AMD could be left significantly out in the cold.

Right now, I would just wait until we start seeing more benchmarks, and get an idea where performance for SB will land.


I sorta think AMD started a new coroporate policy about not leaking performance info on unreleased products, after the Barcelona PR fiasco, where the AMD VP Randy Allen (?) was claiming 40% performance over Core2 in a bunch of benchmarks. I really haven't seen a lot of leaked stuff since then. So given than, I'm not too concerned about the lack of Bulldozer benchies at this point. Once the engineering samples get out to the mobo OEMs, then I expect we'll see some.

Now what is hilarious is reading some of the other enthusiast site forums that are linked in this thread. One guy is posting that he is absolutely sure that Bulldozer is going to bulldoze Sandy Bridge, given the name "Bulldozer", and then in the next sentence admits he knows nothing about Sandy Bridge.. :p 
Score
0
December 3, 2010 6:36:35 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
Now what is hilarious is reading some of the other enthusiast site forums that are linked in this thread. One guy is posting that he is absolutely sure that Bulldozer is going to bulldoze Sandy Bridge, given the name "Bulldozer", and then in the next sentence admits he knows nothing about Sandy Bridge.. :p 


Well, that's pretty obvious... Bulldozer is no match for Sandy Bridge. Let's take the Cat D11T for example. At an operating weight of 230581 lbs., there is no way that any Bridge built on a Sandy basis is going to be able to support the weight of this Bulldozer! :pt1cable: 
Score
0
December 3, 2010 6:56:02 PM

Quote:
Bulldozer will be based on 32 nm fabrication process.While ivy bridge will be based on 22nm fabrication process.That difference is enough for any one to say that ivy bridge will destroy bulldozer.Bulldozer will compete with sandybridge.


Anyone that comes to that conclusion without any available evidence or benchmarks is clueless.

Score
0
December 3, 2010 7:36:36 PM

keithlm said:
Anyone that comes to that conclusion without any available evidence or benchmarks is clueless.


Yes, but definitely NOT dense. :pt1cable: 
Score
0
December 4, 2010 12:06:31 AM

So if I want to build a gaming rig, will Socket 1155 be a good choice or will I have to wait for IVy Bridge? I've heard rumors that Ivy Bridge CPUs will all be Xeons but I'm not sure if that's true. And if 115/1365 are anything like 1156/1366 then 1365 will be much better than 1155, although it might not be worth the wait. The Bulldozer CPUs should launch around the same time as Sandy Bridge, so I have no idea why AMD hasn't released a single benchmark yet.
Score
0
December 4, 2010 12:17:22 AM

1. AMD does not have a "new" PR policy. It is standard corporate policy not to release benchmarks until launch. Nothing has changed. We also won't comment on how we would perform relative to any unanounced competitive product, that is just crazy because no official benchmarks exist.

2. 32nm. Any 28nm is a crap rumor. Period.

3. SB launches in Q1. Bulldozer (client) launches in Q2. To say that Bulldozer will launch closer to ivy bridge says that someone really doesn't understand either company's schedules.

IF, for some crazy reason, intel is going to launch SB and IB within a 3 quarter span, it would say that intel was really concerned that BD was going to be a lot faster. It is extremely expensive to move to new processes, you don't rush that unless you are really under the gun. If you believe SB is faster, then intel would have no reason to spend the extra money to pull IB in. Take your pick on that one.

4. If you are going to bring up Randy and Barcelona, then you might was well bring up intel's claim that the Pentium 4 will hit 10GHz. Remember that Randy was in the server business (he was my boss) and he would not be talking about C2D ever because he was not running client.
Score
0
December 4, 2010 1:07:15 AM

I'm always pleased to see Mr. Fruehe comment as it really shows that he is listening to what the enthusiasts are saying, and that is an overwhelming positive. Therefore thank you.

In the discussion of where Bulldozer fits in the overall scheme of CPU performance, though, I believe that Mr. Fruehe has given us a very oblique indication in this comment (as it is naturally all he can say at this time).

His comments discussing Bulldozer versus Sandy/Ivy Bridges "seem" to indicate that Bulldozer is not designed to be just another midrange also-ran, but is aiming for the top of the heap. That is certainly gratifying and definitely calls for a thumbs up!

2011 is going to be a great CPU year! Let's toast true competition as it makes everything better! :) 
Score
0
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2010 8:14:58 AM

Quote:
You donot need rocket science knowledge to come to that conclusion.Anyone with basic chip knowledge will know a series with smaller die will always beat a series with larger die.

Always?

Why does an Athlon 64 beat an Atom then? Granted that's an extreme example, but it does show my point - chip speed is a combination of process and architecture, and process alone cannot tell you which chip will be the fastest.
Score
0
December 4, 2010 9:36:54 AM

Cs342 said:
SO WHAT SHOULD I DO?!!!!! lol



...may I presume that if you can wait...that maybe you don't need to upgrade.

...As for me. I cycle between mobo/cpu/RAM and the GPU...12 months a piece. I find that 2 years gives enough time for significant development in architecture to justify an upgrade. By then the products have been tested, matured and most bugs ironed out....that's unless one likes to iron out bugs of course....

I like to gain extra features with an upgrade...not just speed..so for me at this point...affordable hexacore, eyefinity, fusion, unlocked multies, upgrade portability and software support of vendor hardware give AMD "the nod," in my book.

....Whether SB can outrun BD on some/any or all benchmarks whilst supported by an AMD/Nvidia product is of no real significance....

..but as an active participant in the ICT upgrading stakes, it does appear that AMD is continuing to successfully broaden it's user appeal and product base....more important than BD will be the reception of Bob Cat into the lappy market...and by the look of the new dual graphic support laptops being brought to the table by the big manufacturers, it does look to me like the Bobby is gonna keep the Itanic Warehouse over-stocked.
Score
0
December 4, 2010 11:21:46 AM

Quote:
Ok Jf amd how come tons of benchmark started leaking before the launch of ati 6000 series?


Well, I am not in charge of GPU so I have no idea. And, when you say leaking, it probably has to do with the web site releasing data. There is a difference between leaking and someone breaking NDA. How soon before launch did reviews start popping up?
Score
0
December 4, 2010 12:43:56 PM

I kept my eyes on the 6xxx benchmarks, popped up a few of weeks before launch.

And as far as i know it didnt "leak", it was released by the manufacturers... Same as when the manufacturers received the 1120 shader 6850. Look for those benchies and you will find the "more or less" date to when the figures where released.
Score
0
December 4, 2010 12:57:26 PM

jf-amd said:
Well, I am not in charge of GPU so I have no idea. And, when you say leaking, it probably has to do with the web site releasing data. There is a difference between leaking and someone breaking NDA. How soon before launch did reviews start popping up?


The current Bulldozer vs. Sandy Bridge benchmarks secrecy is a bit of a WikiLeaks situation. Country A says that Country B must never be told of weapon XYZ in a leaked cable. Country B publicly reacts with shock that Country A has such a weapon. The reality is that both countries already know everything about each other's weapons programs right down to the brand of coffee in the weapon lab cafeteria. Both Intel and AMD are multizillion dollar companies. They are both very well informed about each other's development programs. If they were as in the dark as the public, then heads should roll in the boardroom. However, it's a game that they have to play publicly. That's another reason why I respect and thank Mr. Fruehe for continuing to hang out here! :D 


Score
0
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2010 1:17:46 PM

jf-amd said:
1. AMD does not have a "new" PR policy. It is standard corporate policy not to release benchmarks until launch. Nothing has changed. We also won't comment on how we would perform relative to any unanounced competitive product, that is just crazy because no official benchmarks exist.

2. 32nm. Any 28nm is a crap rumor. Period.

3. SB launches in Q1. Bulldozer (client) launches in Q2. To say that Bulldozer will launch closer to ivy bridge says that someone really doesn't understand either company's schedules.

IF, for some crazy reason, intel is going to launch SB and IB within a 3 quarter span, it would say that intel was really concerned that BD was going to be a lot faster. It is extremely expensive to move to new processes, you don't rush that unless you are really under the gun. If you believe SB is faster, then intel would have no reason to spend the extra money to pull IB in. Take your pick on that one.

4. If you are going to bring up Randy and Barcelona, then you might was well bring up intel's claim that the Pentium 4 will hit 10GHz. Remember that Randy was in the server business (he was my boss) and he would not be talking about C2D ever because he was not running client.


Hmm, my bad - from the youtube video, he was apparently talking about the server version of Core2 (which is what I said - not "C2D"), aka Clovertown:



Re the Intel claim, IIRC a P4 did hit over 8GHz on LN2 - holds the world's record for overclocking I think. So Intel was ~80% correct in their prediction. I don't want to do the math on Mr. Allen's claim but I'm willing to bet it is considerably lower than 80% correct, in desktop apps anyway :D .
Score
0
December 4, 2010 1:31:32 PM

This reminds me of a policy dictated to me by the CEO of a fairly large corp I worked for in the 80s: Keep Your Big Fat Mouth Shut Until It Ships! :)  He also liked to say Speculation Is Ma$turbati0n!
Score
0
December 4, 2010 9:08:22 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
Hmm, my bad - from the youtube video, he was apparently talking about the server version of Core2 (which is what I said - not "C2D"), aka Clovertown:



Re the Intel claim, IIRC a P4 did hit over 8GHz on LN2 - holds the world's record for overclocking I think. So Intel was ~80% correct in their prediction. I don't want to do the math on Mr. Allen's claim but I'm willing to bet it is considerably lower than 80% correct, in desktop apps anyway :D .



we beat clovertown by more than 40% in stream, so technically you could claim that he was right.

And Intel's specs don't count overclock and the intel claim was base clock speed, not overclock, so you can assume that they are only ~30-40% right. So it can go either way.

This is precisely why it is not a good idea for either side to talk about benchmarks prior to the product being out. Everyone is crying that they want benchmarks NOW, but the reality is that this is what you end up with when you ask people to make statements prior to final shipping silicon.
Score
0
December 4, 2010 9:32:33 PM

Well, my Xmas wishes for AMD is that Bulldozer is a technological marvel and an outperformer extraordinaire! That way everybody wins, especially the enthusiasts! :) 
Score
0
December 4, 2010 10:19:30 PM

Quote:
You donot need rocket science knowledge to come to that conclusion.Anyone with basic chip knowledge will know a series with smaller die will always beat a series with larger die.


Anyone with any intelligence would be smart enough to not make blanket claims concerning new architectures when there is NO DATA available.

Your comment about "a series with a smaller die" would be completely true IF you were comparing two CPU that have identitical architectures. However, it would be very stupid to make the same claim when the architectures are distinctly different AND there is no available data.

But you just keep right on doing that... we'll bookmark this thread.
Score
0
December 5, 2010 2:08:45 AM

Blanket statements are never correct.

Wait, that is a blanket statment. Doh!
Score
0
December 5, 2010 9:22:00 AM

My birthday is in March, so if both Bulldozer and Sandy Bridge are released before then then I should have a pretty good idea of what to expect.... although I've always favored AMD because their products are much more reasonably priced than Intel's.
Score
0
December 5, 2010 12:20:33 PM

jf-amd: Prince Michael Jackson II makes Blanket statements all the time! :) 

Cs342: You'll have Sandy LGA1155 by then but that's about it.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2010 2:21:52 PM

jf-amd said:
we beat clovertown by more than 40% in stream, so technically you could claim that he was right.


Heh, not to flagellate a deceased equine too much, but about 10 seconds into the video Mr. Allen claimed "many" workloads, and elsewhere a "wide variety of workloads".

I dunno about other enthusiasts sites, but 3 years ago the impression in many threads here was that Barcie was a dud.. And especially so for the gamers here, although they knew that Barcie was designed as a server CPU.

AMD's efforts to rewrite Barcelona history remind me of this plucky lad: :D 



Quote:
And Intel's specs don't count overclock and the intel claim was base clock speed, not overclock, so you can assume that they are only ~30-40% right. So it can go either way.


I'd like to see a link or quote of Intel's claim, if you have one handy. IIRC, the first gen of P4 was on a 180nm process - maybe they could have reached 10GHz stock using their present 32nm..

Quote:
This is precisely why it is not a good idea for either side to talk about benchmarks prior to the product being out. Everyone is crying that they want benchmarks NOW, but the reality is that this is what you end up with when you ask people to make statements prior to final shipping silicon.


That I agree with, since it's what I've been saying for 3-4 months now - wait for the benchies :) .
Score
0
December 5, 2010 3:53:40 PM

fazers_on_stun said:

I'd like to see a link or quote of Intel's claim, if you have one handy. IIRC, the first gen of P4 was on a 180nm process - maybe they could have reached 10GHz stock using their present 32nm..



http://www.design-reuse.com/news/4850/intel-building-bl...

The original statement was made in 2000 IIRC, this was a follow-up at ISSC basically saying the building blocks were there to have 10GHz by the end of the decade (Dec 31, 2009).

If you just google "Intel 10GHz" you can find enough references to know what was said. I used to have the interview with the guy that made the statements, but it has been so long that I can no longer find it.
Score
0
December 5, 2010 4:04:22 PM

Sun is now saying that they're going for 5 GHz stock CPUs in the SPARC. Is thermal the only reason keeping AMD and Intel from shipping silicon at these frequencies?
Score
0
December 5, 2010 4:15:36 PM

RISC is a different architecture and Sun is in a different business model. For instance, what if you could get there with a $1000 cooler. On a $100K system that is not a big impact.

Thermal is the biggest reason for today's clock speeds. Look at what you have to do to get an x86 chip there today.
Score
0
December 5, 2010 4:37:34 PM

Actually I know a guy who spent well over a grand cooling his system... and it's just a Q9400! However, I can see what you mean about the RISC. It just seems disappointing that the max frequency on the highest announced Sandys is the same as it was on the old and unlamented Prescott (talking about blast furnaces...) :) 
Score
0
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2010 4:39:24 PM

jf-amd said:
http://www.design-reuse.com/news/4850/intel-building-bl...

The original statement was made in 2000 IIRC, this was a follow-up at ISSC basically saying the building blocks were there to have 10GHz by the end of the decade (Dec 31, 2009).

If you just google "Intel 10GHz" you can find enough references to know what was said. I used to have the interview with the guy that made the statements, but it has been so long that I can no longer find it.


OK, thanks. Guess it goes to show that it's pretty hard to predict the future accurately. Take Jen-Sun Huang's "can o' whoop-ass" statement a couple years ago :p .
Score
0
!