Discussion in 'Processors and motherboards AMD' started by Hayden202, Oct 6, 2011.
Kind of interesting.
That would go right in line with it's price point, cheaper then 2700k but only a little behind
If this is where it's going to be at I'll very seriously consider getting it, Sandybridge-E looks too pricey for my blood
Edit: Just added more thoughts
Yeah, I'm pumped to see real world performance results.
You mean 2600k? 1300 more points, I don't see 2700k
Nah he meant i5-2500k and i7-2600k. Bulldozer falls right between them as expected.
Haha sorry good catch, 2600k. And now that you say that I realize I was looking at the 2600 which is only 300 points ahead. Yeah we'll just have to see how things perform in real world situations.
It's still a couple thousand ahead of the 2500k, so another 1500 or so behind the 2600k still puts it in a very competitive price point. I'll be most interested in how they compare in gaming situations.
I see them performing well in multi threaded stuff, but i just dont see how they could make gaming performance much better. We will have to wait and see, not sure when the review is allowed to go up, im guessing launch day.
Yeh, exciting stuff though. I wonder how it will compare to sandy bridge in games that only use 2 threads.
If what is shown here is right, Bulldozer has a fighting chance and I may well jump on board, even the 8120 sounds good at this rate.
6 more days :banana::banana:
I hope so, they did have a good year to beef BD up. :nerd:
First decent indication of performance and it looks like the recently implemented price drop makes some sense.
When does the NDA lift on this chip? Gogogo on the review!
Looks like the leaked slides we saw a week or 2 ago were at least partially based in reality, based on the final ones shown by AMD. The i5 vs 8150 vs i7 slide had some colors switched. http://forums.********************/showthread.php?t=18237926&page=183 (looks like the originals on www.techbang.com were removed)
Obviously these will be biased coming from AMD themselves, with tricks to allow bulldozer to look as appealing as possible. However, I am still excited by the results, especially the Eyefinity page, as I run a 2d surround setup.
Looking at their comment about Bulldozer having 2 full x16 PCI lanes for crossfire, this may indicate that the Sandybridge platform they used in that benchmark may have had 2 lanes at only x8 which could explain the disparity. As usual, I will need to wait for more detailed benchmarks but i'm allowing myself to get a little hopeful here!
Im not sure if thats a legit test... can u tell me why the i7 2600k has 1000 more points than the i7 2600 @ the same clock? ints the SAME CPU but unlocked :biggun:
I have heard recently that Passmark is heavily dependent on the rest of your system, and can be "tricked" so you have to use it more as a general reference for performance then anything concrete.
I'm guessing people with 2600ks have moar optimized OS and the 2600 comes with pre-built pcs that have alot of crap on them.
probably because it's simply comparing cpus from different systems that all have different components, hence why this should be taken with a grain of salt.
So that same statement applies to the AMD-8150P. It could have been run on the lowest end motherboard and other components, and 2GB of DDR3-1066/1333 for all we know!
Am I correct to observe that it supposedly provides about 100% performance gain compared to Phenom II x4 980? It has twice as much cores, so in CPU-oriented test that means... there's no performance gain per core and it only comes from the number of cores?