Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Is it even worth getting Bulldozer?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 10:41:02 AM

Should I even spend the extra $40 to get an AM3+ socket mobo since Bulldozer doesn't seem to even match up to the 4 core Phenom 980? Or should I use that money to get a 560 instead of a 460.

More about : worth bulldozer

October 12, 2011 10:58:00 AM

I'm disappointed in Bulldozer. Sorry, but I DID expect it to kick i7's butt. Maybe it's the lack of support for the architecture - or AMD's tendency to try and slip between the cpu cracks - but this seems like a waste of money to me. My 965 runs everything I need at a decent speed. Why would I need another 4 cores? The real answer to that is that I don't. Not yet at any rate.

But sorry, to answer your question, I don't think ANYONE should upgrade to a Bulldozer. I'd play the waiting game, unless you are a real enthusiast and not just looking for the 'next best thing.' Get a 560. :-)
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 11:27:30 AM

No. Not unless you had an AMD mobo already, you could only afford to upgrade your processor, and you needed to buy now. These CPU's won't sell short of a miracle.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 12:26:32 PM

cpu's are junk...and i would not buy an am3+ mobo unless you needed some of the features they offered. I would save up, buy a Phenom IIx4 (any model really as they all OC really well), and buy a better gpu if this is a gaming rig. Or, just switch to intel if you really want true speed with Hyper-Threading tech. I am sickened to think AMD actually ran us through the loop with this "new chip" when the Phenom IIx4 series is just as good in all the gaming benches i looked at.

Point being, forget about Bulldozers, at least for the present. Serious let down AMD!
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 12:43:55 PM

Id still stick with an AM3+ motherboard. It seems pointless to buy a motherboard with no future upgradable path at all. BullDozer is still a good processor, it just doesn't meet peoples over-optimistic standards.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 1:24:34 PM

Fact is, Sandy Bridge is way overkill anyways, you certainly don't need one for gaming unless your using 3 high end video cards.

I thought the cpu scored quite well, except for you gameboy's. I expect you'll see these cpu's fare much better in the server line-up where threaded workloads are much more valuable.

I dont think TH realizes or these benchmarks show that most of today's software does not recognize that BD's modules are two cores, but rather see it as 1 core per module. I think we will hear more about this.

You can be it will be priced lower than the msrp shortly after debut.

So long as the price is right, and it will be, it's a good cpu. Either way, you ALWAYS get what you pay for in the end.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 1:31:11 PM

an i5 is cheaper, and provides longer upgrade longevity. Im sorry, but if i can get a much better cpu for $25 less, there isn't even a second thought. i5's are also better for gaming than any AMD processor still. Right now, they are the best bang for your buck high end cpu out there, followed by the PhII4.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 1:35:21 PM

For an upgrade of existing CPU/MBO setup ... Yes... From scratch NO...
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 1:41:00 PM

did you even research that before you opened your mouth? the lowest end 1155 socket intel board is $10 cheaper than the lowest end AM3+ board, and noting the i5 2500k is $25 less than the Zambezi 8150, i would say even from scratch, the bare bones is still $35 in intel's favor.

If you are referring to Phenom II's then you are forgetting the OP, which is about BD's. Please take note of the topic we are on before saying things that are completely false.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 2:06:55 PM

I suppose the first question getting back to the OP is why are you set on AMD? is this an upgrade or new build? Or a bad experience with intel?
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 2:10:50 PM

geekapproved said:
Fact is, Sandy Bridge is way overkill anyways, you certainly don't need one for gaming unless your using 3 high end video cards.

I thought the cpu scored quite well, except for you gameboy's. I expect you'll see these cpu's fare much better in the server line-up where threaded workloads are much more valuable.

I dont think TH realizes or these benchmarks show that most of today's software does not recognize that BD's modules are two cores, but rather see it as 1 core per module. I think we will hear more about this.

You can be it will be priced lower than the msrp shortly after debut.

So long as the price is right, and it will be, it's a good cpu. Either way, you ALWAYS get what you pay for in the end.

SB is way overkill? Yes because CPU bottlenecks are a better option right?

BD may need to have optimized software to show any real performance but thats the point. Will you build a new PC that has 8 cores but that none software available takes advantage of it?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 3:36:31 PM

This is a new budget build.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 3:59:08 PM

geekapproved said:
I dont think TH realizes or these benchmarks show that most of today's software does not recognize that BD's modules are two cores, but rather see it as 1 core per module. I think we will hear more about this.


Technically, one BD module is really one and a half cores. Its a SMT approch, less then a full core, but much better then Intel HT. In fact, you have the explanation backward: Software is treating the second core of a module as a true core, and using that core incurrs ~20% performance penalty over using a real one.
m
0
l

Best solution

October 12, 2011 5:29:37 PM

Budget builds to me are all about value. Given bulldozer performance, i would say spending the extra money on am3+ isnt justifiable unless that board also provides other valuable features. If you want a budget build with upgrade value, go intel/lga1155.
Share
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 5:33:29 PM

After seeing the benches, i would have to regretably agree. intel has the best chance of longevity with their products for upgrading. Also, they still have the only chip capable of using full quad-sli potential with dual GTX590's.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 8:34:35 PM

samuelspark said:
Should I even spend the extra $40 to get an AM3+ socket mobo since Bulldozer doesn't seem to even match up to the 4 core Phenom 980? Or should I use that money to get a 560 instead of a 460.

Depends on your choices. If you have to decide between a "future proof" mobo or a gpu for a rig build primarily for gaming, then the GPU would be better since you would get instant benefit compared to a possible CPU upgrade in the future. Most games are GPU bound and less CPU reliant so if you are playing GPU intesnsive games now, and would have to get say a 550ti instead of the 560, go for the cheaper motherboard.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 19, 2011 12:16:03 AM

Best answer selected by samuelspark.
m
0
l
!