Bulldozer is out and it sucks

[omegaman7]

Well, x264 can be quite demanding.
Especially if you use higher settings to obtain higher quality results, slows it down a lot. Dowsizing 1080 --> 720P, De-Interlacing etc all add into that as well.


From the tests Ive seen, it doesnt look like Bulldozer fairs all that well with a conversion of Bluray/DTS --> x264 AC3.
It still struggles to keep up with a i2600k.
In fact, from the ones Ive seen, the Phenom x6 actually beats it by a few FPS.

I would think, in a multithereaded application like this, the Bulldozers 8 cores should make the Intel Quads look silly. But that doesnt seem to be the case.
Not sure why exactly.

I have to assume it's because of it's new design.

If I were to go to the future, and get the most advanced AM3+ processor, I'd still probably be unimpressed. Because nothing has been updated to run it yet. There's no coding for its unique design.

I'm not suggesting that it could smoke intel otherwise. I'm simply saying performance would no doubt be better. I have to take this into account.

 

[FerchogtX]

Well, it seems that I'd better go for a Phenom II processor rather than this one, I don't need more than 4 cores...

s for that lame excuse from AMD, Windows XP didn't support too well dual core prosessors, but AMD released the dual core handler and problem solved... but with Windows 7... Windows 7 was releases when 4 cores tecnology were released so far, so this OS supports up to 4 cores and maybe more due to the architecture of the OS (basuc improvements so far) So that excuse of Windows 7 not handling 8 cores too well, is just... lame...

What they need is just upgrade and improve Bulldozer, I guess next versions will be better.

See ya!!!

 

[omegaman7]

It's not just about 8 cores, it's the overall design of the processor...

But I'll be steering clear as well. It simply wants too much power LOL!

 

[simmo]

A guy on OCAU forums is benching one atm..he's getting 4.8?Ghz from all 8 cores on air no crazy voltages etc. Not so shabby really..

Mind you I was going to line up for a BD but I think I'll wait for the X78 whatever from Intel..My rigs smashing everything atm anyway so I'm not in any hurry to upgrade..except for cards...for BF3

Cheers

 

[BES]

Well ...I found this right here:
AMD Bulldozer Registry Fix*|*Apple AMD Bulldozer patch, the Crash, Web-bots, Greece Default, Free Stock Footage

They claim they are working on a patch to fix Windows 7 so that it works properly with Bulldozer..

" By most estimates the AMD Bulldozer FX is underperforming by 40-70% in most Windows 7 benchmarks. By forcing Windows 7 to recognize 8 cpu cores a huge performance hit has happened. The Bulldozer FX-8xxx design… really isn’t 8 cores, it’s a 4 core CPU with an extra integer pipeline on each core. If the FX-8xxx series scale according to the 4 and 6 core Bulldozer design than there is a serious bug in Windows 7 that is crippling the FX-8150 performance."

I don't think Microsoft cares, or else a patch or service pack or SOMETHING would be released from Microsoft to solve the problem..

I have my FX-8150 on back order, I planned on trying to use Windows 8 Preview with it for a while ..unless Microsoft sends out an update for Windows 7 OR the dudes above put out a working patch ..

 

[linnemeyerhere]

BES,
Excellent post and let's hope these fix's allow a good bit of improvement. I'm wondering if the server crowd has run into these same issues. I believe the future looks bright for AMD and though I would love to see these chips performance grow by 60-70 percent if it's only on the low side of 40 plus then we'll have lots to cheer about.

 

[ignatzatsonic]

It's not just about 8 cores, it's the overall design of the processor...

But I'll be steering clear as well. It simply wants too much power LOL!

High power usage isn't necessarily a bad thing:

 

[SlasherIT]

More power used means higher electricity costs, and then you have the whole issue where using more electricity is not good (bad for environment).

 

[pparks1]

" By most estimates the AMD Bulldozer FX is underperforming by 40-70% in most Windows 7 benchmarks. By forcing Windows 7 to recognize 8 cpu cores a huge performance hit has happened.

So, why didn't AMD address this with MS before the launch of this product? Why did they not mention this would be the case until X, Y and Z happened with software? Why would they more or less launch a product and let it fall on it's face with the tech community? ?

I don't think Microsoft cares, or else a patch or service pack or SOMETHING would be released from Microsoft to solve the problem..

Why would they design a chip in this fashion if they knew it would not work out with present day and forseeable software for the next near until Windows 8 is closer to release??

I think most of this is wishful thinking by AMD fans who hope to somehow save face with their magical processor.

 

[Solarstarshines]

Well ...I found this right here:
AMD Bulldozer Registry Fix*|*Apple AMD Bulldozer patch, the Crash, Web-bots, Greece Default, Free Stock Footage

They claim they are working on a patch to fix Windows 7 so that it works properly with Bulldozer..

" By most estimates the AMD Bulldozer FX is underperforming by 40-70% in most Windows 7 benchmarks. By forcing Windows 7 to recognize 8 cpu cores a huge performance hit has happened. The Bulldozer FX-8xxx design… really isn’t 8 cores, it’s a 4 core CPU with an extra integer pipeline on each core. If the FX-8xxx series scale according to the 4 and 6 core Bulldozer design than there is a serious bug in Windows 7 that is crippling the FX-8150 performance."

I don't think Microsoft cares, or else a patch or service pack or SOMETHING would be released from Microsoft to solve the problem..

I have my FX-8150 on back order, I planned on trying to use Windows 8 Preview with it for a while ..unless Microsoft sends out an update for Windows 7 OR the dudes above put out a working patch ..

That pretty much should shut alot of people up

But that was already some of the speculation on why it was running so weak

Not looking to save face by the way I went to AMD because intel ran to hot and used to crash alot
I went red because i wanted to see how it was compared to intel , I am in no way dis-satisfied

There will be a time when they will work this out just have to give them a little time and room this was years in the making

 

[SlasherIT]

pparks1 - True.

Also, that link does look fake-ish. First he talks about a Russian hacker doing it then moves onto Kubuntu, and he don't give any proof about Kubuntu doing it, no source. Read the entire page including comments...

 

[Wishmaster]

" By most estimates the AMD Bulldozer FX is underperforming by 40-70% in most Windows 7 benchmarks. By forcing Windows 7 to recognize 8 cpu cores a huge performance hit has happened.

So, why didn't AMD address this with MS before the launch of this product? Why did they not mention this would be the case until X, Y and Z happened with software? Why would they more or less launch a product and let it fall on it's face with the tech community? ?

I don't think Microsoft cares, or else a patch or service pack or SOMETHING would be released from Microsoft to solve the problem..

Why would they design a chip in this fashion if they knew it would not work out with present day and forseeable software for the next near until Windows 8 is closer to release??

I think most of this is wishful thinking by AMD fans who hope to somehow save face with their magical processor.

My thoughts exactly.
They've been working on BD for what? 4years now?
You would think in that time someone would have noticed and said something.

Maybe they had access to Windows 8 or even 9, and that what internal testing was done on?

 

[smarteyeball]

Doesn't it simply all boil down to this?


AMD - not bad, just not as good.

 

[BES]

" By most estimates the AMD Bulldozer FX is underperforming by 40-70% in most Windows 7 benchmarks. By forcing Windows 7 to recognize 8 cpu cores a huge performance hit has happened.

So, why didn't AMD address this with MS before the launch of this product? Why did they not mention this would be the case until X, Y and Z happened with software? Why would they more or less launch a product and let it fall on it's face with the tech community? ?

I don't think Microsoft cares, or else a patch or service pack or SOMETHING would be released from Microsoft to solve the problem..

Why would they design a chip in this fashion if they knew it would not work out with present day and forseeable software for the next near until Windows 8 is closer to release??

I think most of this is wishful thinking by AMD fans who hope to somehow save face with their magical processor.

Well .. in my opinion its kind of hard to get Microsoft to do anything you want them to do..
AMD may have been nagging them for a while now about fixing the problem, AMD wont fiddle with Microsoft code, thats on Microsoft..

ALSO, its been said that Windows 8 solves the problem with Bulldozer..at least partially, SO ...maybe Microsoft is holding a Windows 7 update until after Windows 8 is released..
That is what Microsoft did with Vista, they held DX11 until Windows 7 was released so they could get more sales..

The Bulldozer design is almost perfect, it could use SOME improvement though, but right now I really believe is suffers from software code related problems, most of the software code atm cant utilize the technology right now, its sad really since AMD is losing sales atm over this Bulldozer release..

 

[Layback Bear]

Do I understand correctly. AMD puts out a processor that doesn't work correctly with the number one selling operating system in the world and it's Microsoft's fault. I do not understand this kind of thinking. Maybe it's just me.

 

[omegaman7]

I think most of this is wishful thinking by AMD fans who hope to somehow save face with their magical processor.

It's not about routing for AMD. It's simple logic here. It's not about faith. It's about design. We knew it was a completely unique design. Isn't it logical to assume, that coding isn't ready for the bulldozer?

Ladyback bear. That's the price we pay for cutting edge...

 

[Layback Bear]

I understand and like cutting edge. I just don't understand releasing a new product that doesn't work correctly with most computers in the world.

 

[Solarstarshines]

I understand and like cutting edge. I just don't understand releasing a new product that doesn't work correctly with most computers in the world.

Very true point But does anything really work well in the first couple years of comming out

They built this design for future technologies just because win 7 can't use now doesn't mean it won't be a heavy hitter later with a newer OS

I have the new board and all the gear except the BD chip im in no rush because time always tells the story

 

[omegaman7]

Perhaps AMD couldn't get Microsoft to update quickly enough :S Time will tell. I certainly won't be buying this one. It's too power hungry for my tastes. Perhaps a revised chip. I may just buy 1100t or 1090t and wait out the storm. I'm already set up for amd. Intel's offerings are compelling, and tempting, but I can't see spending so much right now.

 

[BES]

I found something else, linux benchmark with the Bulldozer vs Phenom 2 x4 965:

OpenBenchmarking.org - Bulldozer Benchmarks [1110165-GR-1110131LI42]

I suggest keeping an eye on that site for more benchmarks...maybe vs an Intel CPU..

I may have to get linux going if its gonna perform better than Windows ...