Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Bulldozer vs Core i7?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 16, 2011 7:02:26 AM

I know that AMD's bulldozer chips are just a few months away from becoming available to the consumer. I was wondering if there are any benchmarks available to compare the bulldozer performance to the Intel Nehalem.

The Bulldozers allegedly have quad-channel DDR3 memory while the Nehalem is only tri-channel. Intel's enthusiast 8-core Extreme Edition Sandy Bridge processors won't become available until Q4 2011.

Do the Bulldozers have hyper-threading? I heard that each Bulldozer core has Two CPU modules in them, meaning that a quad core Bulldozer has 8 CPU modules.

It's nice to see AMD put out a blazingly fast enthusiast CPU. The Phenom II's were kind of mediocre.

More about : bulldozer core

January 16, 2011 8:42:02 AM

INTEL: GREAT PROCESSORS, SHITTY GRAPHICS
AMD: SHITTY PROCESSORS, GREAT GRAPHICS
a b à CPUs
January 16, 2011 10:39:32 AM

Honestly, everything is just speculation at this point.
Related resources
January 16, 2011 10:41:34 AM

well it's easy to see that the fanboy patrols have already arrived.. :p 

I don't remember seeing any benchmarks on bulldozer so far. but i do hope that bulldozer will push amd back into the top performance tiers..... because a little healthy business competition is never a bad thing for the consumer.
January 16, 2011 10:52:11 AM

archer7282 said:
well it's easy to see that the fanboy patrols have already arrived.. :p 

I don't remember seeing any benchmarks on bulldozer so far. but i do hope that bulldozer will push amd back into the top performance tiers..... because a little healthy business competition is never a bad thing for the consumer.


I built my Core i7 (Nehalem) rig with Two HD 5870's in CF and 6GB of RAM only a few months ago. Should I have waited and built an AMD bulldozer rig instead?

I'm not a fanboy of Intel or AMD, but I would like to see AMD take back the throne for top-tier CPU performance like they did with the Athlon 64 vs the Pentium 4 many years ago. Is it really true about the quad-channel DDR3 for the bulldozers?

Off-topic but what about the 28nm Radeon HD 7xxx series (Northern Island) graphics cards due for release? Any info on them yet?
January 16, 2011 11:01:37 AM

I can live with a so-so CPU and good graphics. I can't justify spending so much for poor GPU performance and having to buy a discrete graphics card as well. That's not smart.
January 16, 2011 3:41:47 PM

Quote:
No ones gets discount from being a dedicated fan



Wise words!
January 16, 2011 3:43:59 PM

ambam said:
I built my Core i7 (Nehalem) rig with Two HD 5870's in CF and 6GB of RAM only a few months ago. Should I have waited and built an AMD bulldozer rig instead?

I'm not a fanboy of Intel or AMD, but I would like to see AMD take back the throne for top-tier CPU performance like they did with the Athlon 64 vs the Pentium 4 many years ago. Is it really true about the quad-channel DDR3 for the bulldozers?

Off-topic but what about the 28nm Radeon HD 7xxx series (Northern Island) graphics cards due for release? Any info on them yet?



seems to me that you built yourself a kickass rig at the time you wanted to have it...... however... time marches on and waits for no one, such are the woe's of the enthusiast.... :p 

January 16, 2011 4:17:34 PM

Only thing that will change in 2011 is the low-end market (Atom - Fusion).

My bet is, the Desktop CPU Will not change its ways - just like last year. I7 will wipe the floor with AMD but will have less cores.

a c 448 à CPUs
January 16, 2011 4:54:19 PM

Wait....
a c 100 à CPUs
January 17, 2011 12:58:21 PM

OK, I have never made a post on this subject before but here is my best guess (I don't think anyone has any real idea outside of AMD).
AMD must know they need to be better than the i5 760 series but a margin and hopefully competitive with an i7 950 as a minimum what they have not known for long is how good sandy bridge is for the money.
Sorry the more I think about what I was going to say the less sense it seems to make so I will leave it at that and say I hope there will be Bulldozer Athlon x 3s for $100 that can unlock to 12 cores.
January 17, 2011 1:24:22 PM

My expectations for bulldozer is that they will have comparably good architecture to the sandy bridge chips, but looking to compete on price rather than top-echelon performance.

It should return parity to the CPU market, with AMD being a serious contender to anyone who is working on a budget, but I don't think that they will take the crown.

I'd love if they did, because I just LOVE AMD, and you never know till they arrive. With the whole two cores per unit thing, theres the possibility they can come out with a top tier 8 cored CPU for less cost than 4 cored HT chips, but I'm certainly going to hedge my bets on their traditional 'better value, less top end' approach.
January 17, 2011 1:44:36 PM

Will bulldozer be better at the price range of 200€ or dollars? I want to built a new pc soon. Will they be better then the i5 2500?
January 17, 2011 1:49:59 PM

In which month will they release it +- ?
a b à CPUs
January 17, 2011 5:03:21 PM

Bulldozer will have dual channel ram and up to 8 cores(4 modules, sorry, no hyperthreading :(  ) for the client version(released in Q2).

Bulldozer will only have dual channel ram, but that will provide enough bandwidth for it; Sandy Bridge can use dual channel Ram up to 2133mhz and it still doesn't provide any difference when compared to 1333mhz.

Bulldozer uses SMT, which is basically two integer cores sharing a floating point unit. They can supposedly get 80% of the performance out of the second integer core when both are used so when 1 is being used it's 100% of the core's performance and when 2 is being used it's 180% of both core's true performance.

I believe the 8 core should destroy any Intel processor out there right now, except maybe Intel's 980X 6-core with HT(That's clock for clock, and AMD might clock much higher than the 6 core). Which means AMD will return to the top for a short while. Once Intel releases their 8 core Ivy Bridge processors in Q4, Intel will be on top again.

Prices will most likely depend on performance. I haven't been an enthusiast long enough to know what the companies would do exactly(only since the first i7 came out), but I've read what has happened in the past, and if Bulldozer performs like a 980X, expect prices to be according to it's performance.

There aren't any benchmarks out that show Bulldozer's performance; this is just info I've picked up along the way and my opinions.
a b à CPUs
January 17, 2011 5:20:57 PM

ambam said:
I built my Core i7 (Nehalem) rig with Two HD 5870's in CF and 6GB of RAM only a few months ago. Should I have waited and built an AMD bulldozer rig instead?

I'm not a fanboy of Intel or AMD, but I would like to see AMD take back the throne for top-tier CPU performance like they did with the Athlon 64 vs the Pentium 4 many years ago. Is it really true about the quad-channel DDR3 for the bulldozers?

Off-topic but what about the 28nm Radeon HD 7xxx series (Northern Island) graphics cards due for release? Any info on them yet?

Don't worry about it. It seems to me that Bulldozer will only be about the same performance per core as Nehalem, and most games don't take advantage of 4 cores very well yet. It'll be a few years before you will have to upgrade that processor.

When Intel was making the P4 they weren't focusing on IPC like they are now, they were trying to get the P4 to clock as high as possible, but they hit a wall that would be impossible to climb, which is mostly why AMD pulled ahead. Not trying to bash AMD, but once Intel started focusing on IPC again, AMD really fell behind.

This is the most they have redesigned their architecture since 2003, so they might stand a chance against the new i7 out now.

I would like to see AMD gain back some of their sales just so they can be competitive. Even if they release a great processor, there aren't many people out there that buy AMD. Back in the P4 days, AMD had been on top, but they only got ~25% of the market anyway.
January 17, 2011 11:02:58 PM

All of the data that you could ever want (except benchmarks, pricing, clock speed and launch date) are in my blogs.

Start with "what is bulldozer" then read the 4 "20 questions" blogs. Read all of the Q&As at the end because I answer pretty much any question you could have.
a c 83 à CPUs
January 18, 2011 4:03:52 AM

Quote:
I have to ask this. Here we have Jf Amd which I think does a splendit job for his company but where is the Intel guy doing the same sort of thing?


Too busy not caring? :lol: 
July 8, 2011 5:49:27 AM

Yah know what ? all this negative feedback such as demoting group's of people that love amd, and calling them fanboy's is really annoying. Please if you dont like the individual's prefrences...keep it off the thread. Yes amd might be the forrest gump of the cpu market, but think of all the potential it has into blosseming into a downright good cpu manufacterer with decent prices...I mean id be a fanboy for that, wouldnt you ?


Oh and im not a trolling person lol, I couldnt think of a better name.....I really put a hole in my boat with this one :cry: 
a b à CPUs
July 8, 2011 6:32:13 AM

ambam said:

The Bulldozers allegedly have quad-channel DDR3 memory while the Nehalem is only tri-channel. .


Since BD is running in the AM3+ socket already released boards, clearly it will have but standard dual channel memory access....
July 8, 2011 3:36:13 PM

lol....duh I knew that XD, and I dont know a thing about mobo's :wahoo: 
a b à CPUs
July 9, 2011 3:05:48 AM

G33K707 said:
INTEL: GREAT PROCESSORS, SHITTY GRAPHICS
AMD: SHITTY PROCESSORS, GREAT GRAPHICS


lol I guess I'm not the only one that noticed that. Why doesn't Intel just buy Nvidia already? And when will AMD finally get their act back together?
a b à CPUs
July 9, 2011 3:58:51 AM

ambam said:
It's nice to see AMD put out a blazingly fast enthusiast CPU. The Phenom II's were kind of mediocre.


When it is released, and actually compared in at least a small variety of benchmarks that matter (Prime95, SuperPi, Crysis, encoding, etc..) , perhaps then we can agree on which one of the below adjective/descriptive phrases applies:

1. Blazingly fast/faster than 2500k/2600k/i7-990X
2. As fast as 2500k
3. As fast as older i7-950 rigs
4. no faster than current Phenom II X4 rigs at equal clocks

I, for one, truly hope number 1 actually applies, it will be good for all AMD and Interl fans, give good competition to the market, potentially start a 'lowest price' war, etc....
:)  (I will go on record as predicting Number 3, but, hoping I am wrong!)
July 9, 2011 9:34:12 PM

I forsee them taking away the i5 2500k spot on the market but still performing less than the 2600k. At least till Ivy Bridge moves in and waves it's **** everywhere.

Interested in seeing what the GPU is like on the Bulldozers if that is what AMD are going for now or if that was just a brainstorm to make the Llano more fair than the i3.
July 9, 2011 10:20:31 PM

Was that slide mentioning that the BD 8 core would be 50% faster than the current phenom 2 x1100t and i7 950 proven fake?I am a bit behind on the these news.I I seriously hope BD can compete with Ivy Bridge though,not sandybridge as this will push the competiton and price wars amazingly. The 8 core BD should be just as fast core for core as the i7 2600k at the very least.If not I'll ocnsider it a failure as I don't see it being priced any lower than that.That's my 2 cents.
a c 83 à CPUs
July 9, 2011 10:40:42 PM

BeCoolBro said:
Was that slide mentioning that the BD 8 core would be 50% faster than the current phenom 2 x1100t and i7 950 proven fake?I am a bit behind on the these news.I I seriously hope BD can compete with Ivy Bridge though,not sandybridge as this will push the competiton and price wars amazingly. The 8 core BD should be just as fast core for core as the i7 2600k at the very least.If not I'll ocnsider it a failure as I don't see it being priced any lower than that.That's my 2 cents.


So you'll consider Bulldozer a failure if it's not 40% faster than a 2600K when it's going to be priced about the same? Highly doubt AMD is going to sell processors that out perform Intel's Extreme Edition models for a mere $300. :lol: 
July 10, 2011 8:40:27 AM

loneninja said:
So you'll consider Bulldozer a failure if it's not 40% faster than a 2600K when it's going to be priced about the same? Highly doubt AMD is going to sell processors that out perform Intel's Extreme Edition models for a mere $300. :lol: 


I said I hope it will compare to Ivy Bridge,but I will consider it a failure if it doesn't match the i7 2600k core for clock.I don't mean to be rude,but please read the post you're quoting twice before responding next time.
November 14, 2011 8:22:02 PM

trolling troll said:
Yah know what ? all this negative feedback such as demoting group's of people that love amd, and calling them fanboy's is really annoying. Please if you dont like the individual's prefrences...keep it off the thread. Yes amd might be the forrest gump of the cpu market, but think of all the potential it has into blosseming into a downright good cpu manufacterer with decent prices...I mean id be a fanboy for that, wouldnt you ?


Oh and im not a trolling person lol, I couldnt think of a better name.....I really put a hole in my boat with this one :cry: 



I agree. Fanboys are generally clueless. I would hate to see either AMD or Intel as our only CPU provider. As each respective fanboy apparently wants.

Remember when the <insert any computer product here> was the only decent one available? The prices for it were ridiculous, due to no-competition.

Thank <some higher power here> that corporate wars exist.
!