Is Bulldozer considered a failure

[Allan_01]

???????

 

[ghnader hsmithot]

In games=Yes.
In Multithreaded apps=Not really.

Overall they needed to sell more cores so more money goes out of the company.

 

[Maziar]

IMO,Performance wise its fine but I(and I think most people)were expecting a far better performance,because it took a long time for AMD to release the bulldozer CPUs and now the fastest model falls behind Intel's 2500/2600 CPU(in most benchies)

 

[Chirag Borawake]

Not really a failure, it happens, when the competitor is Intel..!! LOL
Its quite good actually, But even I had more expectations from Bulldozer being an Intel fan.
I thought at least for some months, or days, it will be the fastest CPU on the planet. But even core i5 sandy bridge beats it in many benchmarks.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8150-zambezi-bulldozer-990fx,3043.html
It aint no failure, but its relatively cheaper. Not everyone can afford core i7 2600 or higher..!!

 

[warmon6]

What the hell is this '18'??

System glitch.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/33896-12-tomshardware

 

[ghnader hsmithot]

Actually the more i see it the more it is a failure.The Old arch K10 phenom II X4 980 and Phenom II X6 1100t is actually a good competitor to bulldozer.

 

[Scoregie]

Sigh.. I was planning a epic build for bulldozer... even started reading up on watercooling... Might buy one anyway so i don't put my efforts to waste.... I wish i was --->

 

[ghnader hsmithot]

Sigh.. I was planning a epic build for bulldozer... even started reading up on watercooling... Might buy one anyway so i don't put my efforts to waste.... I wish i was --->

Why not sell the board?

 

[Scoregie]

Because i just planned it haven't bought anything yet.... Plus i like wasting money on pointless things

 

[dhicks19]

bulldozer is a failure in my eyes, its more expensive than 2500k and the 2500k whips its ass at gaming. I was expecting the BD to at least give it a challenge. In my honest opinios AMD are only good for one thing in the past few years and that GPUS. 19 21 14 14 14 21 14 61 25 25 116 38 155 12 45 78 98 65 14 14 14

 

[ghnader hsmithot]

Because i just planned it haven't bought anything yet.... Plus i like wasting money on pointless things

Alright mate.But if i was you i would sell the board.

 

[chefman21]

Sort of. I think the hype outweighed the reality. I do think AMD does pretty well in getting close to Intel with what resources they have available, but until they up their budget and resources, then it's a rare occurrence when they catch Intel. Bulldozer needed to be better. It had to be. I kind of feel sorry for them.

 

[Hellboy]

Ive given this some thought before all the fanbois come on screaming about this..

Bulldozer = is it a failure

yeah for sure

AMD has produced a 8 core processor which is beaten by something with only 4.

and its older..

AMD had loads of time to get there act together and in that time Intel will be releasing is new series of processor to knock bulldozer dead..

Ive been selling quad core AMD chips this year and a few Intel 5700's

I was really hoping AMD would pull out trumps here but as usual this is a weak release, just as it was since the Phenom came out

Stroll on core i series

 

[hunuok]

Looking at the early reviews, Bulldozer seems to get "steamrolled" by Intel.

It didn't really surprise me really.

Intel came out with such a "WIN" product which makes Bulldozer look even worse.

I hope AMD price these accordingly.

A lot of people were waiting for Bulldozer.

A lot will be disappointed.

 

[lozz08]

I find it quite laughable that the IPC of bulldozer is lower than Phenom. No, seriously, I haven't stopped laughing.

On another note, it was shown in another benchmark that 1 bulldozer core at 4.9ghz is slower than one sandy bridge core at 3.11ghz. LOLOLOLOLOLOL

18

 

[rottingsheep]

Performance/Watt for BD is really bad.

Has anyone noticed AMD's high stock frequencies post Core2?

They're raising frequency, adding more cores just to keep up with Intel's offerings.

 

[jitpublisher]

We have been reading and hearing and hoping about Bulldozer for so long, I finally gave up and went with Sandy Bridge myself a few months back. Now that the release is finally here, my decision not to wait on Bulldozer proves itself out as a good one.

Perhaps they should have named it Back-hoe.............

I don't know if I would call it a failure, but it certainly is not impressing the enthusiast crowd.

 

[AdrianPerry]

Unless BullDozer can overclock better than SandyBridge (which currently it seems its about the same if not a little less) then generally SandyBridge is going to remain the processor of choice. The multiple-cores just aren't necessary for most end users, its all about each cores speed/potential that makes a difference.

EDIT: Its not a failure, its just not what many people expected (too high expectations IMO).

 

[jj463rd]

This compares to the initial Phenom flop disaster although so far no big bugs unlike the first Phenom series.The fixed Phenoms were not really that bad like the 9850 and 9950 except for high TDP's.
Phenom II gave us hope although it was behind Nehalem.I hope that AMD will have a better plan ahead because this is not looking good.I like their APU series though (great for low cost laptops,ultraportables etc).Many people still bought AMD CPU's although I think that more people are going to jump ship to Intel for this fail.

 

[C0rehound]

I had my fingers crossed that AMD would be able to relase a real winner with the Bulldozer. I've always been a fan of the underdog and have had AMD rigs for years. My last Intel CPU was an i486 33MHz (for Doom baby!) After that I went AMD, then regrettably a Cyrix MX333MHz chip (omg what a pos) then back to AMD to this day.

That being said... I believe my next build will have an Intel CPU, unless BD does a complete 180 before release.

 

[leon2006]

It was a let down since users like us want to see a better CPU from AMD to compete w/ Intel...

This is bad for all users like us since Intel has tendencies to screw up when there is no competition.

 

[uncfan_2563]

This compares to the initial Phenom flop disaster although so far no big bugs unlike the first Phenom series.The fixed Phenoms were not really that bad like the 9850 and 9950 except for high TDP's.
Phenom II gave us hope although it was behind Nehalem.I hope that AMD will have a better plan ahead because this is not looking good.I like their APU series though (great for low cost laptops,ultraportables etc).Many people still bought AMD CPU's although I think that more people are going to jump ship to Intel for this fail.

Good point but I think some delusional people were expecting AMD to somehow trash Intel this round and yea, that's just not gonna happen. Hopefully they'll find something to turn it around and provide a good value draw just like the PhenomII's




yea. 18

 

[gamerk316]

The 8120, when OC'd is an attractive option. But its single threaded performance is horrid, and has significant power draw issues. Its only real saving grace is that it outperfoms when all 8 cores are used, and even then, the i5 and i7's more then hold their own.

I have yet to see 4 core BD results, but expect them to be outright bad. If so, then yes, BD is a failure. If those cheaper 4 core modules are at least competitive, however, then there may yet be a spot for BD in the budget segment.

 

[jitpublisher]

I had my fingers crossed that AMD would be able to relase a real winner with the Bulldozer. I've always been a fan of the underdog and have had AMD rigs for years. My last Intel CPU was an i486 33MHz (for Doom baby!) After that I went AMD, then regrettably a Cyrix MX333MHz chip (omg what a pos) then back to AMD to this day.

That being said... I believe my next build will have an Intel CPU, unless BD does a complete 180 before release.

Sounds like your PC history nearly parallels mine, but I did go one better than the 48633DX and dropped in a DX4/100 overdrive for Doom, now that rocked! And I did the Cyrix 166+ nonsense as well for short time. I have ran nothing but AMD up until this spring when I retired my 965 BE system for a Sandy Bridge. There were so many years during the Pentium era that I simply refused to pay for Intel crap, and we have AMD to thank for releasing the Athlon and getting Intel off the "sit back and bump the mhz up by 200 every 3 months and charge more money" mentality and actually roll up their sleeves, do some work, and release better products.
Now we are all waiting on AMD to bring another Athlon type release to the table, and I doubt it will ever happen.

 

[SteveH3671]

Snap to jitpublisher and Corehound. I always root for the underdog.

486-66DX2 then K6-2 350, Athlon XP2800+ now Athlon 64X2 6000+ been waiting for BD and unfortunately I'm going to be hard-pressed to ignore the low per-core performance. Sad. I hate near-monopolies....