Opnion: Did We Expect Too Much of AMD Bulldozer?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
All hype and 4 years is too long to work on a cpu the tech is already out of date.

The reason why people buy fast cpu's is gaming since it cant beat 2500k in gaming not much chance they will sell many.

There are VERY few applications that can use 8 cores and that is why it will fail.

I own a computer store there have been ZERO inquires about the amd bulldozer now that benchmarks are out doubt if ill be ordering any for stock.
 
It seems like AMD, at least when showing videos of Llano pitted against Intel, it seems like they were advertising multi-tasking as its strong point. Most of us don't use one program at a time, like itunes, then listen to music, then search the internet, then download/watch movies, then play games. Most of us do alot of those at the same time. I would like to see benchmarks of how multi-tasking handles with BD compared to the top processors from the last couple years.
 
i just read this:

The FX chips provide a speed boost of 50 percent or more compared to its predecessor, according to AMD. The chips started becoming available on retailer websites last week.

More cores and higher clock speed bring more performance to PCs and are especially valued by enthusiasts like gamers, who are among the first to adopt cutting-edge technology. The eight-core chips are made using the 32-nanometer manufacturing process, and are available worldwide.

AMD's FX chips will compete with Intel's six-core Core i7-990X Core Extreme Edition processor, currently based on the Westmere architecture and more expensive at $999. In a bid to gain the performance crown, Intel in the next few months will release an Extreme Edition chip based on its newer Sandy Bridge microarchitecture.

WTF!

Source
 
Most likely the blame should be put on management. This is not simply a PR failure, this is a real engineering failure. However, it's the managers that ok-ed the approach. Chris's article clearly stated that the design goal started with preserving single-threaded performance. That was 4 years ago. Any semi-decent manager should have vetoed that right out of the gate. Stagnation does not bring you market share. Now the fact is single-threaded performance is significantly worse than the older architecture, so that design foundation wasn't even kept. Did management sleep all the way through to the end?
 
Im surprised out of all these comments (only read two pages) no one is bringing up the fact that AMD blew their wad on purchasing ATI. Rather than investing in itself, they went ahead and foolishly bought ATI, and now they are paying the price in being a generation (or two) behind Intel CPU.
It is unnecessary, wasteful spending like that, which is why companies fail, and they deserve what they get. I do like competition, but when one company disregards reason, they only dig their own grave.
 
it's disappointing that BD under performed. i was so hyped to upgrade my 1090T hexa core to an octo core BD after waiting for it for so long. now, i'm going to skip over BD and wait for PD next year. I suspect we won't see PD until around Oct like what happened with BD. That would be close to when W8 comes out. by then the southern island gpus would be out for some time as well. pci express 3.0 and usb 3.0 mobo would be out too. i might just build a whole new system then. 😛
 
Could it be a matter of software optimization for the architecture?
I'm not surprised with the results. They just the confirm the unofficial performance reports that were posted several months ago. Just shows that there's usually some truth to those unofficial reports.
 
Both, we expected a lot and AMD is to blame. We would not have expected as much if AMD did not hype bulldozer so much.
I think the understated approach would have been much better, or even saying, "Look, the software at this time is not really ready for BD. The benefits of this architecture won't be seen immediately, maybe not even a year from now."
You are correct, trying to swallow "fastest CPU" after the reviews is impossible.

Now folks that have been slamming AMD all along are proven "correct", and folks that were hoping for a miracle are left wondering what the hell happened.
 
Proper 64 bits software is still not really present, so, I don't expect properly threaded software anytime soon. For home user anyway. On server side, it is another story. So, maybe AMD just pushed a server chip to desktop because it would cost too much to develop and make both.
 
I am dissapionted. AMD had the advantage 6-10 years ago when it licensed some technology from Digital equipment corp. I was hoping AMD still had some DEC engineers left but guess not.I just can't fathom why they took this direction unless they were just hoping their stock would go low enough that someone would buy them out. I am an AMD stockholder and am highly poff. Get your a in gear AMD. That's my money you are screwing with.
 
OMG! Intel must be loving this as well as the intel fans. truth be told all this doom and gloom is way out of proportion with the degree that BD under-performs in single threaded applications. Historically BD is exactly where AMD has always been except for one or two CPU cycles. and what is the big deal about the power consumption? if that is your main concern buy a APU. if you are worried about power why install 750W PSU's and power hungry SLI/CF config's. gimme a break, quit the nit picking and talk about what is important, the big picture. This is a real solution for gamer and server builders. the actual performance difference between i7,i5 and FX8150 is minimal at best. not to mention no one is talking about the FX8120 for some reason. it is cheaper than the i5 and can be easily clocked to match the fx8150 speeds.
 
[citation][nom]GeekApproved[/nom]The problem is it's not really a 8core and should never have been marketed as one. Really it's more like a 4 core with hyperthrading.[/citation
You really ought to go and take another look at the reviews that cover the architecture of 'Dozer. It is NOT like HT at all, but many reviews claim it is because they lack the skill to properly explain it and so fall back on something they are familiar with (but wrong).
 
its a mix.

with windows 8, bulldozer may peform better, as it sits.
future revisions will probably address single core per clock

but right now, if i wanted to render things, i would go intel.
in 2 years, i may go amd.
 
I wouldn't expect faster but am impressed with what AMD can do with the budget and technology they can afford. As for Global Foundries I would hope they are capable of 22nm sooner than 2014 or the gap is going to grow much larger!
 
Bulldozer performs along with my expectations. However, I didn't expect the pricing to be that much inadequate to the performance offered. I got i5-2500k on sale WITH a nice Asus board for $235. It is a 95W processor, speedy enough.
AMD's strength is in the philosophy of socket support. But recently there is little or no incentive for that either, since I will need a CPU and motherboard to upgrade. This does work financially greatly in the server or high performance clusters, where the entire infrastructure may remain upon upgrade, but for home desktop users is no more the case.

So, the chip is OK, but too expensive.
 
When Phenom was introduced, it did not break records but over time they refined the product and it became an excellent processor. Let the new architecture evolve.
My dilemma is whether I should buy an AM3+ or FM1 motherboard for the best upgrade path.
 
they burned me with this. I'm going to do a new build around next march and it just so happens to be the ivy bridge rumored release date. SO there you have it, i was going with amd(even if it wasnt the best, but came very close to it) but as bad as this ting is except for just a few scenarios, its not worth the money. I want something that will do good over everything, not something that does great on one one or two. That sounds like a luxury, not a necessity.
 
I just feel sorry for the people who kept raving about BD and waited this long. But still there are those really stubborn people who will buy it.

I've seen the BD chips referred to as space heaters. At this rate, I'm either going to stick with my original plan of using Phenom II x6 chip for my bros PC, or get a 2500k from MC and call it a day.
 
I just hope this shuts the AMD fan boys up. I used to build K6 / athlon systems for people all the time. Back in the day AMD had a great product. Now a days I gag at the thought of anyone building an AMD/ATI system. AMD's processors have been getting destroyed by intel for years now. I still run an OCed X58 i7 just because there still isn't any game out that pushes it to the limit, and it's over 2 and a half years old! Lets not even get started on ATI's awful driver support for their GPUs.

I had hopes for AMD with bulldozer, that it would at least compete with Nehalem or sandybridge (maybe drive down prices a little bit for competition's sake)... but with the results of bulldozer now out, I'm surprised they even decided to release this chip to the public. How embarrassing for AMD.

Even sadder is that this chip is sold out on Newegg. Like a bunch of starving fan boys clambering for a scrap of performance gains, grabbed up any trash AMD put in front of them.
 
Before we all jump on the bandwagon, lets look back to the release of the Pentium 4. If I remember right, the PIII beat out the P4 due to the advance instructions were not being utilized by WIN98, 2000, ect... It was not until XP started getting updates did it really take off. We have window's 8 coming out soon, so lets just wait this one out. The FX8150 might be a good option for all you guys who bought 890 or newer chipsets.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.