Windows 7 Hotfix Promises AMD Bulldozer Performance Boost

[Guest]

Microsoft has quietly issued a Knowledge Base article that promises greater performance of AMD Bulldozer processors under Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2.

Windows 7 Hotfix Promises AMD Bulldozer Performance Boost : Read more

 

[fnugk]

anyone know about linux having the same problem / fix?

 

[araas]

yaya my new fx will have a tad bit more kick

 

[SpadeM]

The update was pulled cause of some issues so ... pls post an update to the article for ppl who own bulldozer.

 

[chumly]

[citation][nom]SpadeM[/nom]The update was pulled cause of some issues so ... pls post an update to the article for ppl who own bulldozer.[/citation]

I'm sure they will.

 

[coldmast]

Games?

 

[Guest]

so.....the mythical patch arrives......but what kind of prophesies will it behold ???

PS: go AMD go !!!

 

[danimal_the_animal]

"I'm sure they will."

Don't Assume.

 

[Dyseman]

Well, by going off of the chart given in the "Reveal" link, the Patch has a total of 36.5% drop in performance with an average of .91% drop per benchmark. More bad over good?

 

[r0ck3tm@n]

I expect that we won't be seeing the performance that we want until the next version of Bulldozer. I hope that AMD will do well. I have my first ever Intel cpu sitting on my workbench waiting for me to rebuild. I'm not really happy about abandoning my Phenom™ II X6. In fact I'm actually sad about it.

 

[ta152h]

So now it can equal the 486 in single threaded application performance?

Kind of funny that it seems to go up in benchmarks, but can go down in real performance. That's a fix? Typical Microsoft crap. It runs benchmarks better, but not necessarily real performance and games? What desktop apps need really fast processing outside of games?

I looked at the results, but they are in German. Even though I can't understand German too well (I'm pretty sure they're benchmarks, but if they're not, they're probably an updated version of the Schlieffen Plan), I can see a lot more red than green. So, most of the time, the "fix" slows down more apps than it speeds up.

That's the big fix all the Bulldozer lovers were waiting for? If so, you're heading for disappointment. It's a benchmark fixer, nothing more.

 

[CaedenV]

Could we get a re-review? I may be an Intel fanboy (admittedly), but I was really surprised at just how bad bulldozed did, it really didn't seem right. I still think the i7 will beat it, but maybe it will outshine the i5 like it should?

 

[halcyon]

Reaching for straws. "Anything, anything...just get us some respectable performance."

 

[ta152h]

[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]Could we get a re-review? I may be an Intel fanboy (admittedly), but I was really surprised at just how bad bulldozed did, it really didn't seem right. I still think the i7 will beat it, but maybe it will outshine the i5 like it should?[/citation]

Click on the lin, they have the results of the new benchmarks. It's not going to change anything substantially, except benchmarks. Most of the time it hurts performance.

 

[cscott_it]

[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom]Click on the lin, they have the results of the new benchmarks. It's not going to change anything substantially, except benchmarks. Most of the time it hurts performance.[/citation]

That's why they pulled it. The hotfix still has a lot of work to be done.

 

[josejones]

"Bulldozer FX is underperforming by 40-70%" ???

I may need to change my selection of best answer?

 

[knowom]

"The strongest gains are apparently seen in PCMark7 (+14.0 percent) as well as ScienceMark (+10.4 percent)." Strongest gains are apparently seen in synthetic benchmarks not real world applications way hop aboard the AMD/MS fail train.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

This is only going to increase multithreaded performance. Great to see some increase from this Bullcrapdozer, but it will still have the same major issues with apps that aren't well threaded.

 

[lamorpa]

[citation][nom]SpadeM[/nom]The update was pulled cause of some issues so ... pls post an update to the article for ppl who own bulldozer.[/citation]
The update was pulled because it was the cause of some issues? What happened to the other words?

 

[A Bad Day]

otacon72, you remind me of game developers that stubbornly refuse to support multicores, insisting that hardware companies should design around software, not the other way around.

 

[Max Collodi]

[citation][nom]jacekring[/nom]So AMD fails to communicate with Microsoft to get their OS's up to snuff with the Bulldozer's new architecture. And the customers are left holding the bag, now M$ is rushing to get a fix out, months after the processor has hit the shelves.Who's fault is it? M$ for not updating their systems? Or AMD for not pushing M$ for updating their systems?[/citation]
It's the customers fault for not doing the research before buying.

 

[buzznut]

Anandtech just posted that the hotfix has been pulled and there are some issues with performance:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5251/microsoft-releases-hotfix-to-improve-bulldozer-performance

 

[pale paladin]

You are all fools if you don't think that at a root level intel helps M$ optimize W7 for their architecture. The way data is passed and what instruction sets are used for different applications is based on what the x86 chip giant tells them it should be. So in turn Intel's own architecture always has the leg up. That isn't to say AMD should not try to be competitive, it only means that when they are innovative they suffer for it. ie: bulldozer. Then again that is the price AMD, VIA, ... pays for licensing someone else's architecture. They will always be two steps behind even if the innovation they strive for might be better overall it won't be properly optimized. I'm sticking with Intel for a while guys & gals.

 

[CKKwan]

[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]Why the hell should Microsoft do anything? Intel CPUs work just fine with Windows 7. Windows 7 was out LONG before Bulldozer came to market. Just another blunder for AMD. The fact you say M$ shows you're an AMD Fanboy. I'm sorry AMD lost the CPU battle..deal with it.[/citation]

Intel has a very stong team in optimizing their own compiler, and working with vendors to optimise code for their processor. At one point of time, they even ignore / disable all optimization when they detected AMD CPU.

MS is doing a favor for AMD.

 

[ta152h]

[citation][nom]CKKwan[/nom]Intel has a very stong team in optimizing their own compiler, and working with vendors to optimise code for their processor. At one point of time, they even ignore / disable all optimization when they detected AMD CPU.MS is doing a favor for AMD.[/citation]

It's not that simple. Bulldozer can be useful in server situations, if you can use the integer resources. Obviously, part of it is the workload, but another part is whether the operating system allows the workload to run efficiently on the available resources. I think we know that much is obvious.

Where I disagree is Microsoft doing AMD a favor. Software is cheap, once it's made. You pay for development, but then, you pay essentially nothing. The benefits are more enduring. If you can't compete with Linux, for example, you could lose sales. Since Bulldozer is going into a lot of server environments. if they can beat Linux to the punch, they can gain share, and if they fall behind Linux in efficient use of Bulldozer, they'll lose share. Maybe not a lot, but some. Even 1% of that market can have bigger implications than a one-time fix.

Keep in mind, Bulldozer might suck, but it's still going to sell in some environments, and it's going to be around for a long time. There's definitely going to have be some financial impact for Microsoft if they fail to use the resources efficiently. It's worth the initial cost.