System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2011: System Value Compared

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I dont even know what to say about how screwed up the Bulldozer build is. The fact that a build that cost half as much can spank it in most regards is just sad. I hope AMD is able to save some face when the revised Bulldozers come out, but sadly, it will be too late for me.

Edit: Fixed typo. Oops 😛
 
[citation][nom]Darkerson[/nom]I dont even know what to say about how screwed up the Bulldozer build is. The fact that a build that cost half as much cant spank it in most regards is just sad. I hope AMD is able to save some face when the revised Bulldozers come out, but sadly, it will be too late for me.[/citation]

I'm guessing you meant "can" spank.

And spank it does.
 
Just curious how 2x 6950s loose to a 580.... My AMD 1100t @ 4.2 with a MSI R6970 Twin FrozrIII isn't much behind a 580... This is a joke.
 
[citation][nom]zloginet[/nom]Just curious how 2x 6950s loose to a 580.... My AMD 1100t @ 4.2 with a MSI R6970 Twin FrozrIII isn't much behind a 580... This is a joke.[/citation]

NM, the original part of the thread I thought I read 1x 580, now I see 2x...
 
[citation][nom]zloginet[/nom]NM, the original part of the thread I thought I read 1x 580, now I see 2x...[/citation]

I need to reply once more... 2x 6950s and a extremely overclocking BD 6100 with only a 650watt ps? These fuggen builds suck
 

whats the matter with 650W?

gaming tdp of 6950s = max 160 * 2 = 320
bd 6100 95W officially.

320 + 160 = 480
overclocking won't need more than an extra 100W max.

nothing else uses much power. These are budget builds, they're not made for upgradeability.

EDIT: LOL, I just looked at your profile. Your system has a 1200W PSU for one 6970.
I'm laughing, yet cringing at the waste of money.
 
There is something horribly wrong with putting multiple GPUs on Bulldozer. I've seen time and time again that a single GPU is generally the faster option. Probably would've made more sense to have the FX6100 build as the $600 one and elevated the $600 build to a dual-GPU config as the CPU can actually cope.

I think we need a single/multiple GPU article to find out if there's anything that can be rescued from this. Throw in a couple of different motherboards, that sort of thing. Does memory speed make a big difference? Would Windows 8 Beta help in any way?
 
Be nice to see another SBM in about 6-8 months, i forgot how often you guys do this. But indeed switching out the bulldozer for a Sandy bridge processor like the 2500k sounds like the best idea equipped with a Z68 board n a single or dual gpu's. I'm surprised with the $600 PC build, i wonder how it would handle BF3, since most my friends who want a PC want it for that game specifically. Great overall builds minus the 1200 bulldozer build, hoping to win one of them so i can be generous and give my friend a great christmas gift =D.
 
imho, all the sbm builds of this month are good. they show how different systems, components at different price, performance points perform. the articles were fun to read. i loved how the locked i5 2400 bested the unlocked, 3 module, 6 core fx 6100. i wonder if other fx cpus bottleneck gfx cards in single mode or multi gpu combo.
 
[citation][nom]Darkerson[/nom]I dont even know what to say about how screwed up the Bulldozer build is. The fact that a build that cost half as much can spank it in most regards is just sad. I hope AMD is able to save some face when the revised Bulldozers come out, but sadly, it will be too late for me. Edit: Fixed typo. Oops[/citation]

and its properly implemented into windows, i dont expect it to be good in windows 7, but i expect their threading solution to get it crap together in windows 8.

[citation][nom]de5_roy[/nom]imho, all the sbm builds of this month are good. they show how different systems, components at different price, performance points perform. the articles were fun to read. i loved how the locked i5 2400 bested the unlocked, 3 module, 6 core fx 6100. i wonder if other fx cpus bottleneck gfx cards in single mode or multi gpu combo.[/citation]

realistically, its a 3 core system with threading, and the threading isn't properly implemented yet.

what i find funnier is how the high end and the low end are so close together that its hard to justify the extra cost.
 
There's inherent value in supporting AMD over Intel. :)
Enough that there's only one supplier choice for me when building PC:s...
 
It is good that there is experiments in SBM ,its from our mistakes we learn best.I would like to see next time 600$ PC with BD with the same graphics card to see which CPU is best in the 120$ range(Phenom II vs core i3 vs FX4xxx).
 
would be nice for someone to investigate the problem with the $1200 build
http://ht4u.net/reviews/2011/amd_fx_6100_4100_review/index29.php

The review used a single 6950 so its similar in setup

Mouseover the 6100 shows the I5 2300 121% speed. however somehow this build is 215% to a I5 2400 with a lesser video card (stock to stock @ 1600x1050 no aa)

There is something besides the cpu crippling the system because you can't go from 121% to 215% while having less gpu power.
 
[citation][nom]noob2222[/nom]would be nice for someone to investigate the problem with the $1200 buildhttp://ht4u.net/reviews/2011/amd_f [...] ndex29.phpThe review used a single 6950 so its similar in setup Mouseover the 6100 shows the I5 2300 121% speed. however somehow this build is 215% to a I5 2400 with a lesser video card (stock to stock @ 1600x1050 no aa)There is something besides the cpu crippling the system because you can't go from 121% to 215% while having less gpu power.[/citation]

I suppose the explanation is that when it was only one graphic card, there is not enough gpu power and thats whats causing the bottleneck, the CPU has to do less to catch up and an i5 might not be fully utilised. So when you get two GPU, the graphic power are increased and there is more demand on CPU and the 6100 just can't keep up hence the lesser performance with dual card.
 
[citation][nom]Darkerson[/nom]I dont even know what to say about how screwed up the Bulldozer build is. The fact that a build that cost half as much can spank it in most regards is just sad. I hope AMD is able to save some face when the revised Bulldozers come out, but sadly, it will be too late for me. Edit: Fixed typo. Oops[/citation]
It's a very, very tough time to be an AMD fanboy. 🙁
 
I think the $1,200 build's SSD may be showing corruption slow down. Many will tell you this drive can slow systems to a crawl. I wonder if just using the HD would make a difference. Surly 2 6950's should easily win over a single 6870 in high resolution gaming. Think this system has some major problems.
 
[citation][nom]elbert[/nom]Surly 2 6950's should easily win over a single 6870 in high resolution gaming. Think this system has some major problems.[/citation]
Yes it does have major problems. It has bulldozer.
 
I like this marathon for the information it gave us. From reading others' comments, I too am now curious about what would happen to gaming performance if you took out one of the CF cards on the 1200 machine, but I am much more looking forward to the next marathon. With SB-E, IB (when does that show up?), the HD 79x0 Radeons and other technologies out, plus a hoped-for decay in HDDs, there is ample room for a lot of different technology to be showcased.
 
[citation][nom]slicedtoad[/nom]whats the matter with 650W?gaming tdp of 6950s = max 160 * 2 = 320bd 6100 95W officially.320 + 160 = 480overclocking won't need more than an extra 100W max.nothing else uses much power. These are budget builds, they're not made for upgradeability.EDIT: LOL, I just looked at your profile. Your system has a 1200W PSU for one 6970.I'm laughing, yet cringing at the waste of money.[/citation]
Don't you know that a more powerful psu makes your components faster? Derrr
 
[citation][nom]grody[/nom]Yes it does have major problems. It has bulldozer.[/citation]
I think its a bit more as the HD scores comparing just the WD black to the $600 green drive should produce the scores we see all but the starting of apps.
 
For some reason the $1200 build is the worst performing bulldozer build I've ever seen.
There is definitively something wrong with the memory configuration.

I made some test with a FX 4100 in my pc that normally uses a Phenom II 965 using the same memories of the $1200 build, and the FX 4100 reached 16.8 GB/s at SIS sandra memory bandwith, while my 965 achieves only 15.8 GB/s.

I think the problem is that Biostar motherboard, cutting off the memory bandwidth, and maybe even a complete channel.

I know this will not change the fact that the BD is a bad performer, but things like these can change the results, giving you at least more competitive results.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom