Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Releases FX-Series Bulldozer Desktop CPUs

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

  • deanjo
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kano
    replied
    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...

    Leave a comment:


  • tuke81
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcirsta
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • droidhacker
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Licaon
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • mcirsta
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • alexThunder
    replied
    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 :/

    Leave a comment:


  • mcirsta
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X