News AMD Bulldozer chip allegedly benchmarked

Float round enough tech enthusiast forums and you will have been seeing "Bulldozer" benchmarks for weeks. Whether they are real or not is debatable, but I want to see actual retail silicon in the field before I start saying Bulldozer is one thing or another.

Something AMD has been good at since they took over ATi has been keeping a lid on leaks about their new chips - if their CPU development department has also managed to lock down as tight, then much of this is guesswork anyway.

What I'd want to see are how it copes with fluid dynamics simulations, rendering, encoding... things that might actually make use of that octocore chip. Benchmarks of games which are going to be a) less than capable of utilising an octocore chip and b) also heavily dependent on the GPUs don't really interest me. I'd say exactly the same if it were Intel's latest and greatest that was the subject of all this wild speculation, fearmongering and fanboyism.

 

Wow, didn't know the i7-990x used a LGA 13366 Socket ;D

And as long as Bulldozer is released soon and is cheaper/better than Sandy Bridge, I'll buy it. However, that is alot easier said than done

 

+1

 

wow there is a lot of Bias going on here on Bit-Tech against AMD, come on they have a chip that nearly performs as well as the high end offer from Intel at 1/3 of the cost. That to me is a major win and it will only get better with proper bios and driver updates.

 

Gaming perf is one thing .... I'm looking for 3D rendering and multi-threaded test.

 

Engineering sample or not, 10-20% performance gains don't magically appear with a minor die respin. Unless AMD has deliberately crippled the performance on engineering samples in order to give intel a false sense of security, then bulldozer is going to have a tough time matching penryn clock for clock, never mind sandy bridge.

 

Come on, don't start THAT topic again.

 

Exactly this.

 

Nothing to add

 

Lol this whole engineering sample testing is killing me... I'm not going to look at this crap anymore until a retail model is released. Either way, as was said, assuming AMD launches with competitive pricing this is still very attractive.

 

Looks like another budget release from AMD coming up. Since Gaming still doesnt need the greatest in terms of processor it will come down to pricing when recommending gaming builds to people.

 

with 4 more cores probably not in use! still, not expecting miracles from retail silicon, but, if the price is right then could be a winner.

SLI was a stupid decision

 

Meh, I'll wait for prices and a proper review of retail parts.

 

Without pricing, this article is useless.
The 990 is Intels top of the line.. At unaffordable prices.

Where is this chip in AMD's line up ?
Think bit tech should have caveated this article a little better.

 

Flawed tests. Maxing out graphics in a game is how you test the graphics cards **not the CPU**. If you want to test the CPU then you set the game graphics to absolute minimum. You want the CPU sending triangle data to the GPU for rendering instead of the CPU waiting for the GPU to render a pretty scene.

Also, was this an 8 core AMD chip or a 6 core?

 

I'm sorry but I do believe that at least someone in the bit tech office is an intel fan boy, what a ridiculous sub title to put, your comparing what will probably be £200 processor, to one that cost 5 times as much, by saying 'lags behind lga 1366' people would assume who perhaps don't have time to read the article that bulldozer will fall flat on its face behind even i7 940/950's etc, but its been compared to, in this test at least a 990X, well I bet it beats most of them into submission, as long as bulldozer is better than my 940, I will be completely switching away from the blue team, to the red's

 

Well put.
+1

 

The 2500k ($220) is >= the 990x ($999) in all but video encoding (or other multithreaded equivilent), so feel free to email the reviewer and ask him to redo the tests.

I'm not an intel fanboy, I just like having the best hardware for the least amount of $, and at the moment, intel foots the bill.

 

indeed the 2500k is a brilliant cheap and for the majority of tasks just as good as the 990x I have no trouble with the reviewer comparing the 990x to the AMD chip, I only really have a problem with the sub title, which seems to suggest that ES samples of Bulldozer chips lag behind all 1366 processors, which it obviously does not.

 

Who cares really? It's not available here and now, it is an unidentified chip, it was not properly tested. Let's stop getting worked up over nothing