Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

My Guess-timate for Bulldozer's performance

Last response: in CPUs
September 15, 2011 4:04:02 AM

Given the fact that a 2.7 turbo 16 core bulldozer opteron is roughly 35% faster than a 12 core k10.5 2.5 ghz opteron.. (As corrected by AMD officially) we can estimate an IPC of within 5% when comparing k10.5 to bulldozer.

An 8 core bulldozer at around 3.6 ghz would be roughly 35% faster than a 6 core 1100t when all 8 cores are used. (within error in the cpus' frequencies of 0.1 ghz)

Now this would be without turbo..

So given bulldozer turbos to 4.2 ghz this would ensure that bulldozer 8 core sambezi should be AT LEAST 35% faster than an 1100t at 3.3 ghz (although this most likley will increase the performance by up to 45% faster given the turbo jump of 600 mhz from 3.6 to 4.2 ghz is fairly drasitc)

With overclocks reported over 5 ghz ... (AMD is reported to incude liquid cooling system with their package, teaming up with Antec perhaps?) this will push that to around 60% faster than an 1100t at 3.3 ghz which pushes it to a 4.5 or 4.6 ghz 2600k.

There is no way that a stock 2500k is faster than Zambezi when all 8 cores are used , as seen through this reasoning . (AMD is emphasizing their turbo a lot, and i think it is necessary to beat intel 2600k's turbo)

Again these are rough estimates but they better describe around what we should expect from bulldozer in late october.

Will this be able to compete with a 5 ghz intel 2600k sandy bridge? Probably not, but AMD wants to show that hitting 5 ghz isnt as hard as with 2600ks, especially given their cold bug.

AMD also wants to show that their chip can hit 6 ghz with phase change technology, In that case it could truly compete with a 5 ghz i7 2600k.

The real test, however, will be the new 6 core bulldozer AMD FX 6110 against an 1100t.. as they roughly will be the same price.

I am guessing that it will have faster memory ,ssd, and last but no least graphics performances, but only up to 5% faster in raw cpu power at 3.3 ghz for both. Thats OK because AMD knows you can push bulldozer to 5 ghz (probably more with a 6 core and 4 core bulldozer ... wait for 6 ghz quad core bulldozer rigs popping up) which is alot more headroom than an 1100t which barley hits 4.2 ghz on a good day.

As we can tell from leaked pricing, bulldozer will be an extremely competitive product that AMD will at the end of the day be proud of. Im guessing they like the doubt and pressure and they had these push-backs in mind long before we knew it.

September 16, 2011 8:53:46 PM

I think that what you just more quantitatively analyzed with known data is probably right on with what a typical person would be most likely to bet money, though they may not realize that it is their safest guess. Nice, solid analysis, bro.
a b à CPUs
September 16, 2011 9:35:36 PM

Just throwing this out there....

Bulldozer hit 8.429 GHz this past week at 2.02 volts.

Granted it was LN cooled, but that blew the previous world record out of the water by around 700 MHz

not bad for a pre prod chip.
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2011 1:09:09 AM

A cpu with 33% more cores is estimated to have but 35% higher throughput?

A few intermediate resolution gaming benchmarks (1680x1050, etc) will quickly tell the tale within an hour of the official release...

How well it handles server-oriented benchmarks that scale well up to/beyond 8 cores is not entirely relevant to many users....