Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

OMG AMD BULLDOZER!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Related resources
October 12, 2011 5:14:53 AM

quick question. why do you 2 have '18' after your posts?
m
0
l
a c 120 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 5:18:28 AM

Giggity18
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 5:21:45 AM

yeah bulldozer is a let down lol. Hmmm $260 for best 8 core cpu by amd or $190 for a 4 core cpu by intel that out performs it hmmmm hard question :p 
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 5:23:26 AM

cangelini said:
And here you go with some more ;-)

http://bit.ly/nBPhwP

Best,
Chris


Thanks Chris. Enjoyed the review. And THANK YOU for pointing out marketing trickery BS. I always hate that crap.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 6:17:00 AM

so everyone has '18' in there posts... why? is this some strange html error im having or am i missing some new thing on the internert?

the benches are very disappointing, i was hoping for a real contender against intel but amd is sub par yet again... its like after core2's came out amd just stopped trying. they dont even hold the price point anymore.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 6:36:52 AM

I am disappoint AMD. After recommending people to get AM3+ then I learn that it's just a sidegrade to the phenom ii x4. WTF!
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 6:41:28 AM

ncc74656 said:
so everyone has '18' in there posts... why? is this some strange html error im having or am i missing some new thing on the internert?

the benches are very disappointing, i was hoping for a real contender against intel but amd is sub par yet again... its like after core2's came out amd just stopped trying. they dont even hold the price point anymore.


OMG we are all infected with the Skynet Eighteen virus.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 6:51:57 AM

jimmysmitty said:
Thanks Chris. Enjoyed the review. And THANK YOU for pointing out marketing trickery BS. I always hate that crap.


Very welcome jimmy. Just trying to call them like I see them. Was a little surprised myself about that misguided comparison. Unfortunately, the folks most likely to buy into it probably aren't the enthusiasts reading these stories. :( 
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 6:52:59 AM

ncc74656 said:
so everyone has '18' in there posts... why? is this some strange html error im having or am i missing some new thing on the internert?

the benches are very disappointing, i was hoping for a real contender against intel but amd is sub par yet again... its like after core2's came out amd just stopped trying. they dont even hold the price point anymore.


Sorry, don't see any 18s over here!
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 7:13:33 AM

I see 14's....
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 7:22:20 AM

siege_templar said:
yeah bulldozer is a let down lol. Hmmm $260 for best 8 core cpu by amd or $190 for a 4 core cpu by intel that out performs it hmmmm hard question :p 
While i agree about this being a let down, the FX is not 260 and the 2500K is not 190. Most of the other sites are saying the 8150 is on par or better then the 2500K in new apps.(it IS brand new architecture) It should of kicked the 2600K ass but again its IS a let down. Now the 8120 is NOT a let down. Its priced right and can have just as much uph as the 8150 with a small overclock...which BTW the 8150 dominates in according to "other" sites. One got to 5.0 in 10 minutes.
m
0
l
a c 172 à CPUs
October 12, 2011 7:54:20 AM

ncc74656 said:

the benches are very disappointing, i was hoping for a real contender against intel but amd is sub par yet again... its like after core2's came out amd just stopped trying. they dont even hold the price point anymore.

Disagree. Not a bad CPU chip, but not an Intel killer either.

I suspect that CPU architecture is reaching a point of diminishing returns, at least until software catches up.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 7:57:13 AM

ncc74656 said:
quick question. why do you 2 have '18' after your posts?


The same reason you have 14 after yours! It was hapenning all day yesterday, weird
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 8:03:21 AM

i havent heard anything about the other cpu's like the 4 or 6 cores, can anyone enlighten me on these processors
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 8:06:11 AM

BUlldozer is FAILDOZER!@
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 8:18:36 AM

It's been a long time since I had an AMD-system (Winchester cpu) and by the looks of it, it's gonna be even longer. That's it - I'm asking Santa for an i5 2500k and 16Gbs of memory.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 8:28:37 AM

Really disappointed with the 8150 after reading the review on here. I'm wanting to build a new PC ready for BF3 at the end of the month and have been waiting patiently for the release of Bulldozer but will be going with an i5 2500k it seems.

Thanks for the great review, has helped me decide immediately what to go for.
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 8:40:54 AM

jsc said:
Disagree. Not a bad CPU chip, but not an Intel killer either.

I suspect that CPU architecture is reaching a point of diminishing returns, at least until software catches up.

intel doesnt seem to be having diminishing returns.
Now what AMD needs to do is halt bulldozer production and throw them all in the bin. Then make a die shrink of the phenom II cores, increase clock speed and sell them off cheap to keep any kind of market share, while designing a new CPU that is actually better than their previous one. I am absolutely shocked at the abysmal performance and high power consumption of that 8 core disaster. This is one sad day for AMD. its exactly like when intel released the P4. but intel still managed to sell them somehow, i dont see the same happening for amd. F#%KING EIGHTEEN GO AWAY!
m
0
l
a c 103 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 8:45:37 AM

I may as well get a 955 ffs lol
Moto
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 8:49:45 AM

^+1 , im hoping they drop the price of the phenom x4 range so i can snap one up really cheap. but then what would i upgrade to later? bulldozer? lol, what a joke. Should probably just get the extra cash together and go for the intel setup and IB ready motherboard.



m
0
l
October 12, 2011 8:55:52 AM

10 + 5 + 3 =
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 9:00:20 AM

iam2thecrowe said:
intel doesnt seem to be having diminishing returns.
Now what AMD needs to do is halt bulldozer production and throw them all in the bin. Then make a die shrink of the phenom II cores, increase clock speed and sell them off cheap to keep any kind of market share, while designing a new CPU that is actually better than their previous one. I am absolutely shocked at the abysmal performance and high power consumption of that 8 core disaster. This is one sad day for AMD. its exactly like when intel released the P4. but intel still managed to sell them somehow, i dont see the same happening for amd. F#%KING EIGHTEEN GO AWAY!


Snap a screenshot, send it to me, and I'll forward it to the tech team if it's a bug :) 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 9:00:21 AM

RazorBurn said:
10 + 5 + 3 =


Hahaha, epic! 2x7=
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 9:01:41 AM

It seems some people see 14 and others see 18. Is it by region? US or EU?
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 9:14:16 AM

im aus i got 18

also any word on other bulldozers or will they just be as bad as the 8150
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 9:17:35 AM

Just testing to see if an 18 pops up LOL.

Also, glad i took my own advice and jumped on a 2500k a few months ago instead of waiting!
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 9:18:07 AM

Yep, definitely did not type that 18 at the end of the sentence lol.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 9:23:08 AM

cangelini said:
Snap a screenshot, send it to me, and I'll forward it to the tech team if it's a bug :) 18

^^ That's what your post just looked like to me (but funnily I had to manually add that 18 at the end, it doesn't pick it up when quoting). 18 1 81818181818 181818
m
0
l
a c 103 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 2:28:53 PM

The 14/18 phenomenon seems to be gone now, still can't 'show the right column' though :) 
Moto
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 2:50:51 PM

iam2thecrowe said:
^+1 , im hoping they drop the price of the phenom x4 range so i can snap one up really cheap. but then what would i upgrade to later? bulldozer? lol, what a joke. Should probably just get the extra cash together and go for the intel setup and IB ready motherboard.


c_h1132 said:
im buying a i-7 2600k. Bulldozer is a fail!!!!


That's exactly the wrong type of attitude towards the PC hardware market; without competition Intel has no obligation to step up their game and basically just cash in with what they have for the next ??? years. There needs to be a fair amount of competition between the two(or more) CPU/GPU giants to keep prices competitive. This is why I feel sorry for "fan boys" because they don't realize that if the other giant falls; a) prices will probably skyrocket due to the monopoly b) there will be a lack of competition to encourage new designs, innovations and the list GOES ON. I rest my case

~Coffee

Edit: While the new AMD Bulldozers definitely isn't a intel killer; it has many potentials since it's a completely new design by nature - one significant update could be all it needs to close the gap and turn this into a heated tie. I for one will wait and see.
m
0
l
a c 103 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 3:08:40 PM

^Admire your optimism man, I really do,

My earlier comment is easy to read as negative so I apologise for that, I'm not adding to any dissent lol
I think its a lot like folks getting wound up over christmas then getting a mediocre gift, it stings lol, but at the end of the day, you have a perfectly good pair of socks :) 

I'm annoyed myself, I've waited a while for this and feel let down to the point of knee-jerk buying a 975, but as you said, its possible an update/tweak will bring what we wanted
I totally agree on your other point too, whilst Intels faithful are crowing loudly about BD slamming hard, their team is under no pressure to bring anything new to the table, and in fact could/will charge a higher premium 'for the better chip'
without competition, everyone suffers
as for now, I'm throwing a 975 into the new build and looking forward to real life user reports to start flowing in.
Moto
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 3:16:43 PM

Honestly, I'm an AMD fan, kinda thought bulldozer would be decent. But at this point, not impressed with the numbers I'm seeing, and keep in mind I've been using AMD chips since the old K6 series. So 10+ years. Hoping that these chips would have been better. My little Athlon x4 will soldier along for a couple more years, lol. Still running an AM2 board with a bios flash and Athlon x4 at 3.1 ghz, decent video card and still plays my games just fine. Oh well. Maybe as they do updates bulldozer will go faster.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 3:50:29 PM

I was a huge AMD fanboy from amd k6 and on. when intel launched there core series i had a FX-60... amd never fully recovered from that and in many ways i believe they stopped trying. they gave up on the idea that they would be able to bring back the days of there 3d now tech and the launch of there AMD64 lines. they went for the price point in the market, witch is fine as many people dont want to spend thousands on a computer. the problem with this is that intel realized after there 1366 socket that they too could lower prices. The 1155/1156 boards and cpu's are only a hairs breath price difference for a mid range consumer end computer.

Sure intel still have there 1K dollar CPU's but thats beside the point because AMD cant match them so there is no reason to compare them aside from the flagship to flagship argument. the phenom chips had some serious performance issues, mostly in the range of bottle necks.

at best i see AMD bulldozer as AMD fixing the *** that was broken on there previous gen, i.e. better memory bandwidth, better memory support, there new CPU's dont seem to bottle neck video cards as bad as the phenoms did either.

at worst AMD has released a new flag ship that roughly equals that of there competitors mid range CPU. (the 2500k)

it has yet to be seen how the future will take advantage of all the cores amd has now but i was very surprised to see a non HT, quad core intel stomp a AMD 8 core on alot of the tests. the single threaded tests really surprised me as the AMD and intel cpu's are pretty damn close in clock frequencies and yet amd is half the speed...

I was really hoping for an intel killer but as far as im concerned at the moment there is no reason to buy a bull dozer right now. not performance, not future expandability, not price point...

on a side note, my 18's are gone. i spent 20 min searching the web (urban dictionary) to see if there was some strange inside joke i was missing about 18. so hard to tell if it was a legitimate issue or i was being mocked :/ 
m
0
l
a c 87 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 4:14:56 PM

2500K is midrange? There are two CPUs that are faster, the 2600K and the 990x. I would argue that the 2500 is a top of the line chip.

I agree the 8150 isn't very good, and the 8120 is the better deal. Hopefully AMD can keep working on this and get us a better dozer. Cause right now they are only partially there.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 4:24:33 PM

I am Dissapoint.

Once again I look at it as a 4-core CPU that tries to do two threads really well. It's not really an 8 core CPU. They also seem to have failed with IPC even though I thought that worst case single thread performance would be on par with Deneb but in some cases it shows up a little worse. Yes it does really well in some cases, and in others it fails hard. Too much of a mixed bag for performance.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 4:41:45 PM

I view the i5 as a mid range chip. i currently have a i7 and that comes with a feature or two more along with HT. perhaps the i5 is the high end of the mid range with the 2400 more in the middle. the i3 bringing up the entry level of course.
considering the i5 can be put into most budget builds it seems to me that is a requirement of a mid range CPU.

just how i look at things.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 4:55:08 PM

We need kick ass parts from AMD.... Intel has history of screwing up and not being creative enough when there is no incentive to beat AMD.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 5:22:34 PM

ncc74656 said:
I view the i5 as a mid range chip. i currently have a i7 and that comes with a feature or two more along with HT. perhaps the i5 is the high end of the mid range with the 2400 more in the middle. the i3 bringing up the entry level of course.
considering the i5 can be put into most budget builds it seems to me that is a requirement of a mid range CPU.
just how i look at things.



On a completely unrelated note, NCC-74656 is USS Voyager, right?
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 5:33:36 PM

yes it is. i love the intrepid class
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 8:20:59 PM

ncc74656 said:
yes it is. i love the intrepid class


I'm mostly a Galaxy fan myself, although the Sovereign-class is awesome.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 8:31:42 PM

coffeecoffee said:
That's exactly the wrong type of attitude towards the PC hardware market; without competition Intel has no obligation to step up their game and basically just cash in with what they have for the next ??? years. There needs to be a fair amount of competition between the two(or more) CPU/GPU giants to keep prices competitive. This is why I feel sorry for "fan boys" because they don't realize that if the other giant falls; a) prices will probably skyrocket due to the monopoly b) there will be a lack of competition to encourage new designs, innovations and the list GOES ON. I rest my case

~Coffee

Edit: While the new AMD Bulldozers definitely isn't a intel killer; it has many potentials since it's a completely new design by nature - one significant update could be all it needs to close the gap and turn this into a heated tie. I for one will wait and see.


If you want to pay more $$ for a CPU that underperforms the i5-2500K in most scenarios, in order to support AMD, that is your choice. However don't expect the rest of us to reward AMD with our $$ when clearly Bulldozer does not merit it, at least in its current iteration.

Also, if indeed Intel "skyrockets" prices, most people would just hang on to their current systems, or go with non-x86 CPUs instead. Which would force Intel to lower its prices pretty quickly, as they have stockholders to please. I'm pretty sure Intel marketing has run all sorts of price vs. quantity models in order to determine their pricing, and with over 80% of the market by revenue, they probably don't pay much attention to AMD already..
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 10:10:28 PM

Bulldozer uses over twice as many transistors, uses more power, has a bigger die, and has a higher clock speed than Sandy Bridge and the best case is that it's between the 2500k and 2600k? No matter how you look at it Bulldozer is inferior when it comes to desktop performance and there is simply no excuse. AMD would have been better off with a Phenom III, a 32nm Deneb with power optimizations and a 4th instruction decoder. It's hard to imagine they can make too much money with Bulldozer considering the large die and likely poor yeilds.
m
0
l
a c 87 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 13, 2011 12:58:45 AM

Quote:
Bulldozer uses over twice as many transistors, uses more power, has a bigger die, and has a higher clock speed than Sandy Bridge and the best case is that it's between the 2500k and 2600k? No matter how you look at it Bulldozer is inferior when it comes to desktop performance and there is simply no excuse


I guess I'm an AMD fanboy after all as I don't see it that way. The 8150 sure, but the 8120 not so much. Around the same price, and can score higher then the 2500K many times. (stock 2500k that is...) Yes the power is bad, and single core performance is HORRIBLE. Dud? Failure? I think you are being a bit harsh on it.
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 13, 2011 2:43:06 AM

megamanx00 said:
Bulldozer uses over twice as many transistors, uses more power, has a bigger die, and has a higher clock speed than Sandy Bridge and the best case is that it's between the 2500k and 2600k? No matter how you look at it Bulldozer is inferior when it comes to desktop performance and there is simply no excuse. AMD would have been better off with a Phenom III, a 32nm Deneb with power optimizations and a 4th instruction decoder. It's hard to imagine they can make too much money with Bulldozer considering the large die and likely poor yeilds.

i totally agree with the Phenom III idea, I posted nearly the same argument in another thread. If they did that they would have at least have released it on time as there would be no major re-designing of the chip. and it would perform better. Bulldozer is Intels Pentium 4 disaster all over again, only AMD dont have as much public popularity and marketing to hang in there and make a come back.
m
0
l
!