Bulldozer

If this 40% stuff is true, then I'm beginning to wonder..... could Intel have struck a deal with Microsoft to intentionally cripple Bulldozer at its release? It obivously helped give Bulldozer a bad rap. Most geeks gave up on BD after reading the first round of reviews.
 
spynoodle said:
If this 40% stuff is true, then I'm beginning to wonder..... could Intel have struck a deal with Microsoft to intentionally cripple Bulldozer at its release? It obivously helped give Bulldozer a bad rap. Most geeks gave up on BD after reading the first round of reviews.
Click to expand...

Those aren't real geeks. Bulldozer just released. There is know way to be certain of just how capable it is.

Real geeks wait til they know the facts.
 
spynoodle said:
If this 40% stuff is true, then I'm beginning to wonder..... could Intel have struck a deal with Microsoft to intentionally cripple Bulldozer at its release? It obivously helped give Bulldozer a bad rap. Most geeks gave up on Bull Dozer after reading the first round of reviews.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. Look at the problems Intel had with Sandy Bridge when it was first released. I think the software problems with Socket AM3+ will be worked out in time.
 
2048Megabytes said:
I doubt it. Look at the problems Intel had with Sandy Bridge when it was first released. I think the software problems with Socket AM3+ will be worked out in time.
Click to expand...

Now that you mention it, I forgot about the Sandy Bridge problems. In the long run, I guess it didn't really affect Intel much. Hopefully the same will happen to AMD.

However, the difference between AMD's problem and Intel's problem is that Intel's was entirely their own fault. For AMD, Microsoft can be partially to blame.
 
It probably didn't hurt Intel much because they're a larger company, and the fact that most AMD fanboys don't crawl out of the woodwork to troll people about launch issues

:p
 
linkin said:
fact that most AMD fanboys don't crawl out of the woodwork to troll people about launch issues
Click to expand...
I believe that is the curse of Intel. Your mad because you overpaid, so you must attack the budget company.

As for the Zambezi issues, Give it some time to be worked out. Either AMD or Microsoft, or both will have a fix out soon.
 
ha, i just though what if they both come out with patches and they counteract each other and end up making it suck more, that would be hilarious other than the wasted time and all that went into it.
 
I think its hurts AMD alittle trying to be the first out with new technology against Intel, instead of just going for faster IPC. Some has helped them but some has hurt them. Being the first has hurt research and development on IPC. Intel has been satisfied being second and just work on IPC in a way to over shadow AMD progress and then in a year or two quietly do the same thing. They realize they cant keep up in just IPC after a point, then just incorporate AMD ideas. If it wasnt for AMD, Intel would still be making really fast 32 bit single cores.


AMD64-Intel uses it now
Onboard memory controller-Intel uses it now
First true dual core- Intel is now
First true quad core-Intel is now
Hypertransport- Now intel uses QuickPath
Module- No doubt Intel will follow in the long run and drop Hyperthreading.
 
really a module seams more like amd copying intel and adding the pipelines and 1 or 2 other things, which i'm pretty sure they're even working on, that's just an obvious step up from ht'ing
 
jonnyp11 said:
really a module seams more like amd copying intel and adding the pipelines and 1 or 2 other things, which i'm pretty sure they're even working on, that's just an obvious step up from ht'ing
Click to expand...

You seem to miss the point and concept totally. Then kinda drift off in left field lost wandering around.
 
no i got you but i was pointing out that a module really is the next step up from hyperthreading, so in that amd is improving intel's idea. So intel will use something similar to a module but not only because amd has done it but the fact that it is the most obvious step forward after hyperthreading.
 
I2TPT.png


Newegg Zambezi Review.

Pros: It came in a pretty tin, $19 next day shipping got it to me in a flash.

Cons: The tin was inside plastic wrapping, despite that it was opened and the AMD secure label seal was BROKEN. This shipped from the warehouse in NJ, I could also see a fingerprint on my chip. This make the second thing this month from Newegg that came to me opened, what gives?

Other Thoughts: I honestly just expected more from AMD. After all the hype, benchmarks, comparisons, and even the FX comic that mocked Intel, I expected more.

I am a streamer, I run x-split on 8meg UP internet. This CPU simply cannot handle the load. I don't know what's going on, I have it paired with a 2gb 6950 on the latest drivers. I am experiencing poor frames even though CPU usage never gets above 60%. Poor optimization AMD?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
mihir said:
I2TPT.png


Newegg Zambezi Review.
Click to expand...

The current problem with Zambezi is that windows is ignorant to the architecture and loads 4 threads to 100% and the other 4 to 50% resulting in about 60% utilisation. Either fixed by a software patch by MS or a CPU driver by AMD. Or both. As well as updated software to take advantage of the architecture.
 
linkin said:
The current problem with Zambezi is that windows is ignorant to the architecture and loads 4 threads to 100% and the other 4 to 50% resulting in about 60% utilisation. Either fixed by a software patch by MS or a CPU driver by AMD. Or both. As well as updated software to take advantage of the architecture.
Click to expand...

That's been overstated, as windows 8 shows only a 4% improvement. The issue is hardware related to high cache latency - to keep tdp under control - just poor design. Amazing that the faildozer has 2billion transistors and fails to compete with SB which has around 700 million -66% less lol
 
your assuming that windows 8 has a driver or update that works. Its faster on all processors, so it is doubtful that it does have a fix. PLease take the intel fanboyism and shove it till they have a fix out for BD.
 
wolfeking said:
your assuming that windows 8 has a driver or update that works. Its faster on all processors, so it is doubtful that it does have a fix. PLease take the intel fanboyism and shove it till they have a fix out for BD.
Click to expand...

You noob. Its a change in the kernel. Its been confirmed relating to the scheduler.
 
ok, and schedulers can be changed or moded via drivers. Either way, until they have a fix out, please just drop the fanboyism and gloating.
 
The issue is mainly the L1 and L2 cache latency, this is a design error, no driver will fix this mate so don't get your hopes up
 
now, we won't know that till it's out and we can try for ourselves, so untill then, as he said (slightly moddified), go shove it ya fanboy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top