Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Releases FX-Series Bulldozer Desktop CPUs

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AMD Releases FX-Series Bulldozer Desktop CPUs

    Phoronix: AMD Releases FX-Series Bulldozer Desktop CPUs

    AMD has finally lifted the lid on their new FX-Series "Bulldozer" desktop CPUs, but how well do they work under Linux?..

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTk5OA

  • #2
    Ranting about not receiving samples in your articles probably doesn't help much (but yes they should be supplying you)

    Are these APUs?

    Comment


    • #3
      maybe it will do better in Linux

      Given how sad the Bulldozer performed under Windows maybe it will do better in Linux.
      AMD has no excuse for not providing Phoronix with some samples to test , it's probably the only serious website to do any testing under Linux.
      Did you ever try getting in touch with someone at AMD to ask why you're not getting any AMD cpus for review at Phoronix ?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
        Ranting about not receiving samples in your articles probably doesn't help much (but yes they should be supplying you)

        Are these APUs?
        I'm upset that Michael didn't receive any samples to test. I opened Phoronix today hoping to see how the new chip does under Linux , with all that Windows testing it would have been nice to see.
        So I think the "ranting" is perfectly normal.
        And to answer your question , no , these chips have no graphics inside whatsoever.

        Comment


        • #5
          Bulldozer-based APUs are rumored to launch early/mid 2012; the code name is "Trinity".

          edit: benchmarks I've seen so far say that single-threaded performance is crap. Phenom II is beating it.
          Last edited by Ex-Cyber; 10-12-2011, 08:13 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            I've fired off an email this morning to the two new AMD CPU contacts asking about Linux tests.... Waiting for response :/ Otherwise I'm hoping I can get remote SSH access from a third party this week to an FX system, but that's less than ideal when not having the same other system components here so that I can conduct a direct/fair comparison.
            Michael Larabel
            http://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #7
              Taking a look at the numbers I wish they just launched some AM3+ Phenom II x4 and x6 ... manufactured in 32 nm this could actually be better than Bulldozer. It's sad because the Phenom II is very old stuff but that's the way it is.
              AMD screwed up big time and they should do their best to fix it. Intel did the same with the P4 way back but they could afford to, I'm not sure AMD can. And when they did fix it they came up with something that's very good , the Core CPUs.

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm planning to get one of those. Can anyone recommend a good AM3+ board (i.e. with fully supported onboard-audio) for Linux? Right now I have an Asus Striker Extreme (plz don't ask me why ), which actually works fine, but I always have some sound issues :/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by alexThunder View Post
                  I'm planning to get one of those. Can anyone recommend a good AM3+ board (i.e. with fully supported onboard-audio) for Linux? Right now I have an Asus Striker Extreme (plz don't ask me why ), which actually works fine, but I always have some sound issues :/
                  Alex I'd sugest not to worry about onboard audio too much. I just got a Creative X-fi for like 20 pounds ... that's probably about 30 $. You can also get some Asus Xonar cards for about 30-40 $. Both X-fi ( first gen ) and Asus Xonar should be well supported under Linux as far as I know.
                  Just slap those on and never bother with the onboard stuff which is usually crappy.

                  Michael, those AMD contact people are probably too busy containing the "launch" . You should phone them maybe if you can. People tend to ignore/ overlook mails.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    here's a summary: http://www.techpowerup.com/153452/Re...rwhelming.html

                    not worth the upgrade price yet, maybe if price drops below an i5 2500K

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Do you people even realize that for a new processor architecture to actually perform the way it was designed, you need to actually build your binaries to take advantage of it? All the so-called "benchmarks" being tested on it are actually built to make older and especially intel architecture look good. Benchmarks are acceptable for comparing similar hardware against each other.... i.e., you can compare one bulldozer chip to another bulldozer chip. Benchmarking is virtually pointless in comparing different architectures against each other.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                        Do you people even realize that for a new processor architecture to actually perform the way it was designed, you need to actually build your binaries to take advantage of it? All the so-called "benchmarks" being tested on it are actually built to make older and especially intel architecture look good. Benchmarks are acceptable for comparing similar hardware against each other.... i.e., you can compare one bulldozer chip to another bulldozer chip. Benchmarking is virtually pointless in comparing different architectures against each other.
                        I'll agree with you, I think this might be true, especially for Bulldozer. The problem is this, how are you going to get Bulldozer optimized binaries ? It will have to run whatever is out there and that's that. Unless you're willing to use Gentoo, as a former user I'm not.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Michael if you get one, there is a patch coming in kernel for it:
                          http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux..../focus=1170744

                          Hopefully we see benches with and without patch in phoronix.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The new cpus seem to have got even more inefficiant single cores than the phenom series. That means every apps that prefers to use mainly 1 core is even slower with a new cpu. even the cheapest pentium g620 (with only 2.6 ghz) beats the new chips in that discipline (cinebench 11.5). As there are not that many games that run faster with more than 4 cores it is really weird that the chips should be for GAMERS, thats absolutely not logical. For Linux it might be better when you compile lots of apps, so it is more a Gentoo/Arch/BSD optimizied cpu There should be a kernel patch out there that could improve Linux speed (also Win8 could be faster than Win7 i read somewhere) but i don't find the link now. Maybe oc freaks like it when they use powerful liquid cooling solutions and disable everything with the exeception of 2 cores... btw. intel i7-2600k often beats that cpu in common tasks and needs only 95w tdp compared to 125w for the new fx cpus...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                              Do you people even realize that for a new processor architecture to actually perform the way it was designed, you need to actually build your binaries to take advantage of it? All the so-called "benchmarks" being tested on it are actually built to make older and especially intel architecture look good. Benchmarks are acceptable for comparing similar hardware against each other.... i.e., you can compare one bulldozer chip to another bulldozer chip. Benchmarking is virtually pointless in comparing different architectures against each other.
                              This is true to an extent. However other introduced processor architectures (i3/i5/i7, K7, etc) have shown great leaps in performance even without rebuilding of binaries. When the binaries were redone that leap in performance just got greater.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X