Quote:iam sorry but bulldozer is crappier then phenom Ö_ö
That depends on the test. In the vast majority of tests it is not slower than phenom. In some tests bulldozer falls flat on its face, in some tests it matches the 2500k, in some tests it falls in between the 2500k and 2600k, and in some tests it beats both the 2600k and 1100T (phenom II X6). This is exactly what I expected considering the type of architecture it is. Multithreaded floating point heavy software will run faster on sandy bridge/phenom II X6 since 6 floating point cores (or 4 floating point cores with higher IPC for sandy bridge) are going to be faster than bulldozers 4 floating point cores. Single threaded applications will run faster on sandy bridge for obvious reasons (higher IPC). Memory bandwidth seems to be equal to sandy bridge now but it requires faster ram to reach the same speeds than sandy bridge can achieve with lower frequency ram (due to a better integrated memory controller design). However you can expect heavily multithreaded integer heavy software to run faster on bulldozer than sandy bridge (8 integer cores vs. 4). Also if you read the article you would know that they clocked them all at the same core clock rate (3.3GHz) to do an IPC comparison, bulldozer has higher stock clock rates than sandy bridge or phenom II so this is a very unfair comparison meant only to show the IPC of each architecture.
Most of the benchmarks are overall disappointing to bulldozer, although it did do very good in the media encoding and content creation tests. Performance is very inconsistent but that was to be expected.
Performance for bulldozer on windows 8 appears to be significantly better than windows 7 due to optimizations for bulldozers unique threading system. The problem is that right now multithreaded applications running on bulldozer are distributing their threads in order of available cores, this means that two threads will end up running on the same module rather than two separate modules. Windows 8 fixes this by treating it like a CPU with HT, so threads will be distributed to different modules instead of just different cores until all of the modules are occupied. Luckily dolphin is already set up to do this but in the meantime this is a serious bummer for AMD until windows 8 becomes common (which won't happen for a very long time).
AMD is stating that piledriver (which will replace bulldozer next year) will focus on IPC and power efficiency, which is exactly what bulldozer is lacking. Bulldozer is desperately lacking in IPC which means it will likely perform poorly with dolphin (perhaps even slower than phenom II).
With these results it looks like AMD will have to drop the prices on bulldozer cpus big time if they want to compete with intel at all.
Quote:ivy bridge will strike with 2x architecture
Ivy bridge is expected to be 20% faster than sandy bridge on average according to intel (assuming you're comparing quad core models). Which means it will actually be 10-15% faster since companies always use ideal situations
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson
"I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. "
-Mark Antony
-Ron Swanson
"I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. "
-Mark Antony