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