AMD Expects Better Bulldozer Performance In Windows 8 PCs

More like this
20

Comments

Comments are closed on this article

avatar

nHeroGo

October 20, 2011 at 10:25am

I don't understand why AMD is not selling more. Many Chevy, Ford and Dodge products are not the best, nowhere near the best, but somehow we love voting with our wallets and buy vehicles that are good enough. I drove a Cayenne Turbo last week, and it was so much better than a Chevy Tahoe. I had to rent an Impala while my Audi was in for service, and the Impala was horrible. The Ford Ranger is not without fault either. McDonalds do not make substancially better food products... But somehow, these substandard cars will transport poor fat ugly people to the drivethrough window on time every time. Healthy competition makes this possible. So why is not AMD doing better and selling more volumes? Surely, the big players Dell, HP, etc, don't think that AMD is not good enough for their superior boxes, do they? Is there a mysterious dealing and fixing that we do not know about? Because, lets face it, we love crap!

avatar

thetechchild

October 21, 2011 at 12:23am

The difference is that performance matters in a PC. In the real world, all cars are generally just as capable of getting you to where you need to be. And so all the middle class and below are fine with their substandard cars. It's not as if going 0-60 in 3 seconds matters when you're getting on the highway. Who cares about a GPS, smartphone dock, or touchscreen radio + DVD player, when you just need to get to work? Plus, there is also a substantial money factor in vehicle purchase. In contrast, AMD's products are losing that "best bang for the buck" title, when Sandy Bridge and its brethren are invading the $200-300 price range.

avatar

nHeroGo

October 20, 2011 at 9:51am

Question: Is Bulldozer going to be good enough for me?

I still have a Pentium4 with 2GB RAM with no way of upgrading the hardware (it's an Intel, you know). I upgraded from WinXP to Win7 and it chokes. It's almost 8 years old and I am not going back to XP.

So, if I build a sub-800 dollar desktop with a Bulldozer processor, will I be happy or sad?

avatar

kowal

October 18, 2011 at 5:40am

Being a loyal amd fan (hey i like a bargain).....was disappointed with bulldozer results vs I7.

Wonder if intel chips will show better performance in windows 8 too.

I guess i will keep my 1100t for a while.

avatar

kowal

October 18, 2011 at 5:43am

On the bright side......i guess chips would be much more expensive if intel was the only player.....so thanks amd for helping to keep cpu prices lower.

avatar

h e x e n

October 18, 2011 at 3:07am

I would love nothing more than to believe in Bulldozer, that with Windows 8, it will steamroll the competition. This sadly IS NOT the case, and I wonder if it ever will be. Will we ever see AMD back at their old Athlon heights? Probably not in the forseeable future.

I'm sorry, I held out and gave AMD another chance to shine with Bulldozer, but the fact of the matter is, is that the performance difference right now between AMD and Intel is just too large for me to exclusively buy AMD anymore. I'm looking at Intels 2500K and 2600K offerings and both seem like a better solution to me at the $250 - $350 price point.

If I ever have to build a NAS system or some piddly little system for my mother, I'll use AMD. As of now, if your seeking performance, Intel holds the crown at pretty much every price point.

10 years of system building and I've never touched an Intel chip. Well, things change. If Bulldozer had a bit more kick behind it, it might have been selected for my next build. As it is, the 2600K is my next processor purchase.

avatar

Ghost XFX

October 18, 2011 at 1:46am

AMD has their work cut out for them, but I believe with the right goals and improvements, Bulldozer can be a winner by the time Piledriver comes out.

I have one word for AMD to take heed with this CPU: Hemi

That is all.

avatar

Havokr505

October 17, 2011 at 6:22pm

see what everyone forgets to grasp is that the cores on a bulldozer are not the same as the ideology of cores from the past. this is why there saying windows 8 + BD will perform better. Windows 7 schedualer doesnt understand how to interpret and  divide tasks to the Bulldozer Cores atm and Windows 8 will solve that. for example, tests have been done that conclude that in a multi threaded enviroment, bulldozer is better off using core 1+3 rather than 1+2 because it yield better results due to the fact that there multi threaded task does not have to use the same floating point unit. maybe the windoes 8 schedualer is capable of making something like this happen which is where some performance increases are coming from. Sandy bridge shouldnt see any real performance increase because there deffinition of a core is the same as its been since core 2 duo. Also did I mention that INtel also had a similar problem with Hyper-threading when it was first implemented? it takes time for software engineers to take advantage of these little tricks and just like it took a few years for software engineers to implement hyper-threading, itll take a lil while for them to do the same with bulldozer 

avatar

thetechchild

October 17, 2011 at 10:48pm

Yes, but AMD is known for constantly trailing behind Intel... And the architecture, though better in theory, might prove to be only an average improvement, rather than the radical one expected with such a fundamental redesign.

avatar

Jims45wow

November 03, 2011 at 11:08pm

Constantly? They drove several advancements ahead of Intel.

Who knows how the CPU world would look without strong-armed survival methods?

AMD may rise again.

avatar

mikeyfree

October 17, 2011 at 3:21pm

Ya have to remember that AMD was trailing cd2 and the i5/i7 by so much, and now with Bulldozer they have covered a huge gap.  Intel now has to top there own i5/i7s in the coming releases, and get customers to buy new motherboards for the new processors, if Intel stays true to form.I have a Phenom II x6 1055t and I love this built.  It handles everything I throw at it and more.  I do have a Asus M5a87 motherboard with a AM3+ socket, so I will upgrade to the Bulldozer in the next year or so. 

avatar

dashize

October 17, 2011 at 2:01pm

Testing out myself on my netbook i was able to get my 2.3 in video in Win7Ultimate up to 3.0 in Dev Release of Win8, have yet to try it on anything more powerful then a dual atom with intel 3150 graphic but that does seem like a nice increase so far

avatar

codyandbecca

October 17, 2011 at 1:21pm

I am a hardcore amd fan, but sadly i dont think so, I used my system and my old games and got the same results...

 

Intel Pentium D 925 @3.0Ghz

Intel D945GCL (Coryville2)

2 GB Patriot DDR2@800Mhz

250 GB SATA Drive

ATI Radeon 4670

 

All of my games

WoW

LFD2

BFBC2

CIV5

all ran about 3-8% better on the dev preview...

(PS mysystem is all hand me downs)

avatar

bigrigross

October 17, 2011 at 1:11pm

Ok, Bulldozer runs better in a windows 8 enviroment.  Question is, how much better does sandybridge run in Windows 8?  Im assuming its going to be a similiar increase in performance.  AMD is just trying to stave off all the mediocre reviews on it.

avatar

Supall

October 17, 2011 at 11:24am

Apparently Win8 won't make too much of a difference, but we should see since Win8 is still in development.  Everyone wanted something greater, and this isn't a bad CPU at all, but it could be even better if they lowered the price.  My Athlon II X4 and 790FX mobo is screaming "Upgrade Me!", but I think I'll hold off just a little bit longer.

Does anyone know if Piledriver will be AM3+ or should I wait for AM4 mobos?

avatar

Jims45wow

November 03, 2011 at 11:27pm

If their designation holds-out, AM3+ is good for AM4, without all the AM4 bells and whistles.

avatar

bautrey

October 17, 2011 at 12:10pm

I highly doubt there will be any AM4 mobos.  AM3+ just came out!!!  And also, there is no use waiting if you need to upgrade and have the money!!!!!   You always gonna be wanting more so its just better to buy from whats currently available.  Piledriver is quite a ways away, so dont get your hopes up.  Just look back on how much Bulldozer was pushed back.  Waiting to Sandy Bridge-E might be a good idea though, thats not too far away.  Also the FX-8120 is possibly the best performance per price ratio.  At $215 it can be overclocked to just about the same levels of the FX-8150.  

avatar

yu119995

October 17, 2011 at 12:29pm

Some very good points there.  Maybe the 8120 route is the way to go.

avatar

warptek2010

October 17, 2011 at 11:41pm

I would wait a little bit. Remember when the Phenom II's first came out? The top of the line was the 1090T. In a few short months they released the 1100T. It was only a 100MHZ jump but you see the pattern AMD usually follows. They tend to squeeze out every last drop from their design so expect an 8190 or something along those lines.

avatar

yu119995

October 17, 2011 at 11:14am

I'm an avid AMD supporter and I can tell you that I'm going to be passing on this upgrade in the hope that Piledriver shows marked improvement. 

I just recently built a rig for a friend of mine using the new AM3+ socket paired with a PII 955 (it was on sale for $100 - couldn't turn it down) with the understanding that if he ever needed to upgrade to either BD or PD, the option was there.  That's the one thing I can honestly say about the platform as a whole; it makes upgrading much more affordable.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.
Don't have an account? Join Now.