Bulldozer is out and it sucks

To make matters worse for AMD, Intel's latest Sandy Bridge-E processors are coming out next month; as well as their Ivy Bridge platform in early 2012, which will crush AMD even more. AMD really dropped the ball here, I was expecting some competition, but instead, Bulldozer only managed to bulldoze itself, it couldn't even compete with its predecessor Thuban which is utter disappointment and hate to say it -- failure. They went backwards in performance, I have no idea how that is possible. Maybe if they released Bulldozer when Nahalem (Core i7) first came out, it would have been justified. But that doesn't seem to be the case here; Intel is really light-years ahead of AMD.

The only bad I see coming from this is it gives Intel an incentive to raise their prices since there really is no competition coming from AMD at all in regards to the desktop market. AMD will lose more market share as the time goes by, which Intel has about 81% of the global market.

For me the most important benchmark is with Adobe Photoshop CS5 and the FX-8150 shines at this operation. I sometimes edit 100's of photo's in 1 sitting and this chip appears it would save me lots of time over a full day of editing.
I'm not a gamer at all and I do very little video encoding. I'm not a AMD fanboy either, I also just finished a i5 2500K system to test CS5 for myself, I just need to pick a Nvidia video card to try out the cuda acceleration.

Lebon14 said:

1foxracing said:

For me the most important benchmark is with Adobe Photoshop CS5 and the FX-8150 shines at this operation. I sometimes edit 100's of photo's in 1 sitting and this chip appears it would save me lots of time over a full day of editing.
I'm not a gamer at all and I do very little video encoding. I'm not a AMD fanboy either, I also just finished a i5 2500K system to test CS5 for myself, I just need to pick a Nvidia video card to try out the cuda acceleration.

I don't know but I've seen similar tests with the FX-8150 and ina ll tests I've seen, never, ever, that the Bulldozer won.

Check this out :
AnandTech - Bench - CPU

There is one test with Photoshop and Bulldozer lost.

Check your link, the bench was performed using CS4. Looks like they need to update their test software to CS5, it's only been out for almost 2 years now
It really doesn't matter which system it performs better on, since I now have both AMD & Intel systems I'll do some of my own test then keep the best one for my own uses. I just need to decide what graphics card to put in the Intel system, the 560Ti or 570. There is a $100 price difference between the 2.

Wishmaster said:

Do you do alot of Gaming?
The 570 will be the better gamer, and able to push much higher settings (AA, AF etc)

It also has more CUDA cores, so technically its faster at anything that can take full advantage of it.
Folding, Cuda accelerated Video encoding etc.
But this will be largely dependant on the software you are using.

Thats not saying the 560 is a bad choice. They are both good cards.
Can't go wrong with either.

I suppose its a matter of determining what you'll be using it for the most, and then if the 570 is worth the extra $100.

To me personally, the Refrence design 570 is worth the extra $100.
Not only for the reasons listed above, but also the cooling.
The Vapor Chamber cooler vents all hot air out the back of the case, rather than part inside and part outside.

But again, really comes down to what you want/need out of the card, and what features are important to you.

Thanks for the tips, I do absolutely NO gaming of any kind. From the little research I did though the cuda cores will help accelerate the CS5 process. It seems to average 12 to 18% faster edits and if I'm working on a few hundred images in a day that will definitely make a difference in time.
I just need to do more research and see what the 570 might offer over the 560 in Photoshop only though. That extra $100 might be better invested in another SSD or larger RAID scratch disk.