Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Full bulldozer review

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 12, 2011 4:32:17 PM

Hey guys I found this review:

http://www.techspot.com/review/452-amd-bulldozer-fx-cpu...

it also reviews the FX-8120, 6100 and 4170.
Since the 8150 is a bit overpriced for its performance, it appears that the 8120 or 6100 are much better value....like a whole lot. The 8120 is 50$ cheaper than the 8150 and offers lower performance by a small margin. Just look at the review.

I wanted a 8150 initially, but after reading this, the 8120 makes much more sense.
Also the 6100 is not bad at all for budget gamers.

More about : full bulldozer review

October 12, 2011 5:21:51 PM

what do you guys think of this review?
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 5:48:24 PM

Intel's i5 2500k beats the crap out of any Bulldozer and it consumes 101W less power under full load compared to the best Bulldozer and the 2500k is cheaper. In my point of view Intel's Sandy Bridge technology it better and if the speculations are true, Ivy Bridge will put another big nail in AMD's coffin.
m
0
l
Related resources
October 12, 2011 6:07:33 PM

Ohh well, good thing my OC'ed 955BE still has some life left in, I am hopeful that AMD can refine the current cpus for the next generation.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 6:29:21 PM

It's an eight-core that barely competes with a nearly one year old quad-core that costs nearly fifty USD less.

They bundle their cores into "modules", one module equaling two cores claiming that it will increase performance and allow for more efficient power consumption. While a single module (two cores mind you..) cannot even compete with a single one of Intel's SB cores and still consumes an ungodly amount of power in comparison.

BD's eight-core requires you to "turn off" three of the "modules" to OC past 4.8ghz. Which makes it essentially a dual-core at those speeds and even then it can't compete with the 2500K/2600K or even the i3-2100 in quite a few applications. In-fact AMD insists that you turn off three of the four modules (six cores) to reach 5.0ghz.

The gaming performance is equally dismal in comparison, rarely beating out the 2500K and even being out-classes by several Phenom II CPUs in some applications.

In heavily threaded applications, a place where an eight-core should shine it can't even begin to touch the 2600K and often even gets trounced by the 2100.

AMD's top of the line flag-ship CPU cannot even compete with a mid-range Intel product.......It's a sad effort from a company that just doesn't seem to much care anymore.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 6:48:28 PM

I think AMD does care....they are just out of cash.
The thing is...we need AMD or else Intel will have a monopoly on its hands and charge us whatever they want. We all win if AMD is competitive...this is what people don't understand.
I hope AMD improve their CPUs next year to force Intel to drop prices :) 

Also, Trinity looks impressive :)  If one thing can save AMD in 2012....its trinity.
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 6:53:24 PM

samal90 said:
I think AMD does care....they are just out of cash.
The thing is...we need AMD or else Intel will have a monopoly on its hands and charge us whatever they want. We all win if AMD is competitive...this is what people don't understand.
I hope AMD improve their CPUs next year to force Intel to drop prices :) 

Also, Trinity looks impressive :)  If one thing can save AMD in 2012....its trinity.


I completely understand the gravity of not having AMD around to keep Intel "honest". I too hope that AMD gets it all together and puts out something that it truly worth while. But if BD, AMD's supposed "ace in the hole" is any indication........The future is grim.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 12, 2011 7:52:59 PM

samal90 said:
Also, Trinity looks impressive :)  If one thing can save AMD in 2012....its trinity.


IIRC that would require a different mobo than the AM3+. Whereas Ivy Bridge is said to be a drop-in for Sandy Bridge on many 1155 mobos.

Pretty funny to think Intel is maintaining backwards compatibility this time, when AMD is not...
m
0
l
October 12, 2011 8:02:23 PM

Its bad news to users.... We need pressure to Intel... Now Intel has no competition until the next round of new cpu release
m
0
l
!