Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Which new bulldozer will you most likley buy???

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 12, 2011 3:02:41 AM

Well it seems like were getting pretty close to this damn chip coming out finally :o  ......i just wanted to get a feel for which version people want to buy...

i myself am pretty sure that ill opt for the 4170 quad core...... as i dont really see myself needing 8 cores.......i only game and use for multimedia purposes and the 4200mhz stock............thats nice.......the only part that concerns me is the turbo is only 4300mhz......


anyway.....im only interested in hearing from those who are actually considering this purchase........im not looking to start a flame war........just which one you want and why........

thanx
bTx

More about : bulldozer likley buy

a c 138 à CPUs
September 12, 2011 8:23:49 AM

bulldozer FX-8120
Score
0
September 12, 2011 8:30:58 AM

I do want to get a new cpu, just not sure if I want BD or I7 2600k. If I was to get BD, it would probably be the 8150. According to a post from the Tankguys, their price was going to be $260.

Like everyone else, need to see benchmarks first. If the results have it being pretty much neck & neck with the I7, then I'll probably get BD. Hopefully they will add some more overclock room, since I can't get past 3700 with the 1090T

badtaylorx said:
Well it seems like were getting pretty close to this damn chip coming out finally :o  ......i just wanted to get a feel for which version people want to buy...

i myself am pretty sure that ill opt for the 4170 quad core...... as i dont really see myself needing 8 cores.......i only game and use for multimedia purposes and the 4200mhz stock............thats nice.......the only part that concerns me is the turbo is only 4300mhz......


anyway.....im only interested in hearing from those who are actually considering this purchase........im not looking to start a flame war........just which one you want and why........

thanx
bTx
Score
0
Related resources
a c 86 à CPUs
September 12, 2011 8:39:49 AM

unless your doing something thats actually going to use 8 cores efficiently, the 8 core cpu idea is pretty useless for 90% of situations. I would go for the high clocked quad core, maybe the 6 core depending on prices. I would rather have 4 brutally fast cores then 8 pissweak cores, hopefully the per-core performance of these chips is good.
Score
0
a c 103 à CPUs
September 12, 2011 9:13:24 AM

I'm thinking the 4100 or 4120, I'll have to wait and see what the cost is and ofc if my ancient mobo will support it :p 
Moto
Score
0
a c 172 à CPUs
September 12, 2011 9:27:38 AM

No planning. I am waiting for benchmarks.
Score
0
September 12, 2011 9:47:43 AM

im happy with my i7 950 but for christmas im getting one of the 4k series and giving it to a family member.
i cant wait till next year for 4170. its rumored to be with the second wave of processors released in Q1 2012
Score
0
a c 86 à CPUs
September 12, 2011 10:38:43 AM

honestly, im pretty close to jumping on the i5 2500k bandwagon.......delays, delays, delays. Had enough, need fast quad core now.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 10:46:26 AM

iam2thecrowe said:
honestly, im pretty close to jumping on the i5 2500k bandwagon.......delays, delays, delays. Had enough, need fast quad core now.

I think you should.
Intel fanboy
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 10:52:27 AM

Quote:
So he's a fanboy because he wants to buy a proven processor with rave reviews and a mature platform, a chip that has received multiple editor's choice awards and in all honesty probably represents the best value of its generation. Right, he's a fanboy, not you and others who recommended as early as THIS JANUARY that people wait for bulldozer, a chip we know next to nothing about (including its release date, which for all you know could be next year, or hell, even the year after that).

I was stating i am the intel boy.
I mean the i5 2500k is amazing!Its because of this cpu i become an intel fanboy.

I do doubt Amd but hope they succeed.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 12:42:54 PM

Waiting on reviews before deciding.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 1:56:01 PM

Reviews b4 decide ofc...
Score
0
September 12, 2011 1:59:51 PM

FinneousPJ said:
Waiting on reviews before deciding.

Hi RinneousPJ :hello:  . I'm also waiting on reviews,so that makes two of us. :lol: 
Score
0
September 12, 2011 2:09:58 PM

cats_Paw said:
Reviews b4 decide ofc...

Yeah! I'm the same here also. Although I hope that there are some good reviews about the Bulldozer processors,because I ain't going to buy any that will run out of diesel early. :lol: 
Score
0
September 12, 2011 2:13:33 PM

CPU666d1 said:
Yeah! I'm the same here also. Although I hope that there are some good reviews about the Bulldozer processors,because I ain't going to buy any that will run out of diesel early. :lol: 

Hi CPU666d1 :hello:  . I actually agree with you & don't want to get any bulldozers that will run out of diesel also. :lol: 
Score
0
September 12, 2011 3:02:56 PM

heres a possible price leak
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/21620

heres the good part of the artice.
The e-tailer, Bottom Line Telecommunications Corporation, is listing three chips:

An FX-6100 model with six cores, a 3.3GHz clock speed, 14MB of cache, a 95W thermal envelope, and an asking price of $188.32.

An FX-8120 model with eight cores, a 3.1GHz speed, 16MB of cache, a 125W TDP, and a $221.73 asking price.

And an FX-8150 model, which looks similar to the FX-8120 except for its 3.6GHz clock speed and $266.28 price tag.
Score
0
September 12, 2011 3:51:29 PM

farrengottu said:
heres a possible price leak
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/21620

heres the good part of the artice.
The e-tailer, Bottom Line Telecommunications Corporation, is listing three chips:

An FX-6100 model with six cores, a 3.3GHz clock speed, 14MB of cache, a 95W thermal envelope, and an asking price of $188.32.

An FX-8120 model with eight cores, a 3.1GHz speed, 16MB of cache, a 125W TDP, and a $221.73 asking price.

And an FX-8150 model, which looks similar to the FX-8120 except for its 3.6GHz clock speed and $266.28 price tag.

Well thank you farrengottu. :)  You've made my day just that little bit better. :) 
Score
0
September 12, 2011 3:55:02 PM

farrengottu said:
heres a possible price leak
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/21620

heres the good part of the artice.
The e-tailer, Bottom Line Telecommunications Corporation, is listing three chips:

An FX-6100 model with six cores, a 3.3GHz clock speed, 14MB of cache, a 95W thermal envelope, and an asking price of $188.32.

An FX-8120 model with eight cores, a 3.1GHz speed, 16MB of cache, a 125W TDP, and a $221.73 asking price.

And an FX-8150 model, which looks similar to the FX-8120 except for its 3.6GHz clock speed and $266.28 price tag.

Once again,thank you & by your points that you've scored so far since august 2011,I'm sure you'll be a veteran in no time. :lol: 
Score
0
September 12, 2011 4:00:50 PM

farrengottu said:
heres a possible price leak
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/21620

heres the good part of the artice.
The e-tailer, Bottom Line Telecommunications Corporation, is listing three chips:

An FX-6100 model with six cores, a 3.3GHz clock speed, 14MB of cache, a 95W thermal envelope, and an asking price of $188.32.

An FX-8120 model with eight cores, a 3.1GHz speed, 16MB of cache, a 125W TDP, and a $221.73 asking price.

And an FX-8150 model, which looks similar to the FX-8120 except for its 3.6GHz clock speed and $266.28 price tag.

Also thank you from me for the link and god speed to veteran. :) 
Score
0
September 12, 2011 4:35:19 PM

farrengottu said:
heres a possible price leak
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/21620

heres the good part of the artice.
The e-tailer, Bottom Line Telecommunications Corporation, is listing three chips:

An FX-6100 model with six cores, a 3.3GHz clock speed, 14MB of cache, a 95W thermal envelope, and an asking price of $188.32.

An FX-8120 model with eight cores, a 3.1GHz speed, 16MB of cache, a 125W TDP, and a $221.73 asking price.

And an FX-8150 model, which looks similar to the FX-8120 except for its 3.6GHz clock speed and $266.28 price tag.

the six core looks saucy if it gives performance that rival the snb i5's and if intel decides to price the 2500k at the same price then its a really close call man...
Score
0
September 12, 2011 4:42:49 PM

Here is another link for another article in regards of the prices. I would be curious if this would help people decide. While I'm thinking that it won't be as good as SB, how much faster compared to Amd's existing desktop offerings will it be.


http://www.extremetech.com/computing/95633-amd-bulldoze...

Score
0
September 12, 2011 5:07:36 PM

cscottm90 said:
Here is another link for another article in regards of the prices. I would be curious if this would help people decide. While I'm thinking that it won't be as good as SB, how much faster compared to Amd's existing desktop offerings will it be.


http://www.extremetech.com/computing/95633-amd-bulldoze...

wow the six core is only $155, which is about £99 thats blooming amazing as here in the UK, i3 2100 is £86 so bulldozer would give intel hefty competition man and ill certainly be getting one if this is the case. WOW, a unlocked six core for the price of i3 dude
Score
0
September 12, 2011 5:16:43 PM

Quote:
Oh PUH-LEASE! As an AMD lover you've never tasted 4.3 Gs.


ahh i should rephrase that........im concerned that the turbo is only 100mhz above stock!!!




actually im clocked above 4300mhz right now!!!

and furthermore it booted @ 4515mhz on air......but crashed when i tried to cpuz it :sweat: 


farrengottu wrote :

im happy with my i7 950 but for christmas im getting one of the 4k series and giving it to a family member.
i cant wait till next year for 4170. its rumored to be with the second wave of processors released in Q1 2012




good news.....that 4170 is coming out in the first wave!!! :bounce: 
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 5:23:07 PM

That pricing looks awesome.
Score
0
a c 129 à CPUs
September 12, 2011 5:39:39 PM

The pricing looks great. I want to see benchmarks on it though, and not just on pure performance, but also on power use. For pure performance, my 970BE @3.8GHz handles all my apps and games just fine, even if SB does put it to shame in benchmarks. I bought my Asus Sabertooth anticipating a Bulldozer upgrade, but how quickly I do so is uncertain. The justification may be that I'd upgrade my wife's 720BE with the 970BE, which would definitely be a jump for her.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 7:21:43 PM

FX-8170
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 7:22:33 PM

Yes i no i will have to wait a little longer for the above flag ship CPU to be released, but i want it so i will wait.
Score
0
September 12, 2011 7:28:42 PM

An FX-6100 model with six cores, a 3.3GHz clock speed, 14MB of cache, a 95W thermal envelope, and an asking price of $188.32.

Oh yeah, 6 core at below 200$, with bigger cache, higher frequency than i5.

My money is ready for taking AMD, get those chips out!
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 7:53:08 PM

FX-8470
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 7:55:58 PM

Nice to see the L3 cache is 8MB across the board.
Score
0
September 12, 2011 7:57:39 PM

I think we need to see performance benchmarks first. I'm starting to think if the news was good, we would've heard about it already. Hoping for the best.

As far as ACTUAL physical cores, the 8 is actually a 4, but listed as an 8 due to "threading" like processes in the architecture.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4767/pricing-revealed-for...
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 8:03:13 PM

Zambezi will be just fine as far as performance goes. It may not dethrone Intel but no one needs to support a criminal company like Intel who has illegally tried for 20 years to crush AMD and eliminate all choice for consumers. Consumers should be thanking and supporting AMD everyday because you could be paying $1000 a pop for a Pentium 90 CPU.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 8:15:12 PM

beenthere said:
Zambezi will be just fine as far as performance goes. It may not dethrone Intel but no one needs to support a criminal company like Intel who has illegally tried for 20 years to crush AMD and eliminate all choice for consumers. Consumers should be thanking and supporting AMD everyday because you could be paying $1000 a pop for a Pentium 90 CPU.


You know what happens to a company when they're all alone right?

I hope AMD does good. Hopefully they'll at least pass up 12MB L2 C2Q IPC. =P

I'll be proud if they beat Nehalem IPC, not surprised if they don't.
Score
0
September 12, 2011 8:22:52 PM

Need to see some benchmarks. Don't know if I can resist the temptation of getting the 2500k.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2011 9:40:40 PM

Meh I don't know. I was thinking I'd just get an AM3+ board so I can get alot of DDR3 RAM and add bulldozer latter, but it looks like I might want to wait till the next stepping if you listen to half the rumors. Oh well, we'll see soon enough.
Score
0
a c 86 à CPUs
September 12, 2011 10:02:31 PM

ghnader hsmithot said:
I think you should.
Intel fanboy

are you calling me a fanboy? or yourself?
I assure you im not, my core 2 duo is my first ever intel cpu, the rest have been AMD going back to the amd k5/k6 days and even back to when they were in the 486 game. I also own an AMD graphics card. But due to the timing of when i have been ready to upgrade the last 2 times, intel has had the better product. I just get the bet i can afford at the time, which used to be AMD.
Score
0
a c 143 à CPUs
September 12, 2011 10:05:06 PM

I'm another thinking of jumping ship, man those SBE's beat the snot out of my Thuban in rendering & transcoding...
Other than that just about any current quad core will game fine. So you dont run 115fps, not like you can see them right?
Score
0
September 12, 2011 11:26:10 PM

It was mentioned in another reply that HE was the fan boy

iam2thecrowe said:
are you calling me a fanboy? or yourself?
I assure you im not, my core 2 duo is my first ever intel cpu, the rest have been AMD going back to the amd k5/k6 days and even back to when they were in the 486 game. I also own an AMD graphics card. But due to the timing of when i have been ready to upgrade the last 2 times, intel has had the better product. I just get the bet i can afford at the time, which used to be AMD.

Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
September 13, 2011 12:14:04 AM

I'll buy the one that can beat an Intel Core i5-2500k.

Actually, I'm just kidding. My Intel Q9450 still provides me with enough performance for my needs that I will not be upgrading this year.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2011 12:52:20 AM

I will buy SandyBridge-E 3960X, it's the most powerful CPU with Quad Channel and PCIE 3.0... i would buy if i got money lol... This is IvyBridge Vs. BullDozer
Score
0
September 13, 2011 12:58:06 AM

I got a 2500K...It does everything I need it to do and then some...I c no need for upgrade in the near future unless gaming decides to take the leap it has needed to take...oh idk since now...

I would love to go for bulldozer if it beat the 2500k by at least a 15% margin and actually had a real significant increase in performance in gaming but the current gaming standard is really low unless you count maybe Metro 2033 but I would really like to see Engines like Cryengine 3 or Unreal 3 used to its full potential...saw some of the latest vids on unreal 3 and they say it took 3 gtx 580s to render at 30 fps at full potential...wow

now maybe I just aint seeing it but gaming hasnt made any huge leaps in a while...blame console?...Handheld?...idk

But like I said its a no point for value right now...and I use a hd 6970 whichs runs all games on max @ 35 fps avg or higher...

again just making my pt...:) 
Score
0
September 13, 2011 2:16:59 AM

I'm going to be getting an 8150.

I consider a "Module" to be a "core" with SMT.

Therefore I see the 8-core, as a 4 core with Hyperthreading.

That's my logic.

And seeing as how I already have an 890FX motherboard, it's cheaper to get the 8150 than build an intel system
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2011 4:13:37 AM

^ that's pretty much how I see Bulldozer modules. I think the implementation is clever since it allows the FP unit to do one 256 bit AES calculation (which isn't too common) or two FP calculations at the same time. Of course, the same time part comes with some caveats. I guess we'll see how efficient it is when it's finally released.

Bah, 8 core unit. Darn marketing, it's quad module. What's important is how it will compare to the 2500 and 2600
Score
0
September 13, 2011 5:03:18 AM

On another thought, I'll buy whatever beats 2500k and rub it into Intel fanboys faces ;) 
Score
0
a c 127 à CPUs
September 13, 2011 6:07:41 AM

cmcghee358 said:
I'm going to be getting an 8150.

I consider a "Module" to be a "core" with SMT.

Therefore I see the 8-core, as a 4 core with Hyperthreading.

That's my logic.

And seeing as how I already have an 890FX motherboard, it's cheaper to get the 8150 than build an intel system


So you have the GA-890FXA-UD5? Because thats the only 890FX Gigabyte mobo that will support BD since it has a AM3+ socket.

And BD modules is not a core plus SMT. Its much more. It has about 90% of a second core. SMT is nothing compared to it.

Maksym said:
On another thought, I'll buy whatever beats 2500k and rub it into Intel fanboys faces ;) 


So if you have to pay more for a CPU? Or what if the top of the line doesn't beat the 2500K?

This si why benchmarks help decisions.
Score
0
September 13, 2011 7:14:50 AM

Afraid I won't have the opportunity to support amd this time around. My old i7-920 is still doing just fine. But if the new amd chips fit into old am3 boards, I wouldn't mind upgrading my web server to an 8 core version instead of the 3ghz quad it's using now. I just don't want to replace the motherboard (and thus reinstall the windows 2008 r2)
Score
0
September 13, 2011 7:26:51 AM

jimmysmitty said:
So you have the GA-890FXA-UD5? Because thats the only 890FX Gigabyte mobo that will support BD since it has a AM3+ socket.

And BD modules is not a core plus SMT. Its much more. It has about 90% of a second core. SMT is nothing compared to it.



So if you have to pay more for a CPU? Or what if the top of the line doesn't beat the 2500K?

This si why benchmarks help decisions.


If you notice I say "I consider" then proceed with my opinion. Because it is my opinion, it's not wrong. Sure the BD module will theortically have better performance than SMT. But I consider it SMT with more umph, and I will expect it as such. This is my take on the process and my expectation. Therefore it's a 4 core, with SMT, as far as I'm concerned.

An AM3+ socket isn't a requirement to drop in a BD chip. I haven't done in depth research but I expect Gigabyte to provide a BIOS update like the other motherboard manufacturers.

Yes I understand that AMD doesn't support BD in AM3 sockets, but with a BIOS update they will operate just fine, just with reduced functionality(which hasn't been addressed yet)

Also I do in fact have a GA-890FXA-UD5 but as stated earlier it's an AM3 board.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2011 8:58:38 PM

HMMM in the CPUz screen shots it shows the CPU as only having 2 cores and 2 threads, and the CPU is supposed to be an FX8150 ??
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2011 9:02:46 PM

Buy the one that oc's to 8ghz.........that must give one sleepless nights trying to fine tune that sick puppy.......I do fear it is a flash in the pan trick, high clock speeds, insanely high TPD's, sounds like another popcorn maker.
Score
0
!