Has Xbitlabs already benched Bulldozer?

[Neutralman]

I don't know much about how NDA's work so I'm curious if Xbitlabs has already benched the bulldozer and know final results? Just saw their latest article regarding sandybridge E and in the final remarks, they imply bulldozer is the leader:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/lga-2011-idf_5.html

"""
Everything we saw this week that was related to the upcoming LGA 20111 platform proves that it is going to launch very shortly. The mainboard makers suspect that at this time the launch is planned for some time in mid November, but Intel may push this important even to an earlier date just as easily. So, AMD Bulldozer processors won’t be enjoying their leadership for long: they should soon face a very serious opponent.
The following slide will give you some idea about the performance of the Sandy Bridge-E processors. Here we compare Core i7-3960X against Core i7-990X for LGA 1366.""""


Movieman has already stated his next build will be using a bulldozer cpu after he saw some real benches, so maybe there's merit to this article?

 

[blackened23]

The plot thickens?

 

[lol123]

I think they're just assuming that Bulldozer as a new processor family will dominate the older ones until the competition comes up with a response (SB-E). Which is usually a reasonable assumption, but in this case it's doubtful. Unfortunately.

 

[BlueBlazer]

Speculations, they could be comparing with Socket C32 and G34 platforms (Interlagos and Valencia). Why compare high end LGA2011 and LGA1366 premium systems with AMD FX? Let look at the pricing....

AMD FX = less then $300
Core i7 990X = $999
Core i7 3960X = $999

Where's the logic in this? If AMD had an all conquering CPU, then would AMD price them below Core i7 2600K? :hmm:

 

[blackened23]

What we need is lol_wut_axel in here to spread hatred about all things AMD, then this thread will be complete.

 

[Gikaseixas]

@ Blueblazer - your entire post is a speculation too. Ok let me speculate back hehe: what if AMD top BD cpu does beats the 990X with a $300 price? Nothing's impossible.

 

[Gikaseixas]

What we need is lol_wut_axel in here to spread hatred about all things AMD, then this thread will be complete.

we have Blueblazer here already, he's up to the challenge

 

[KingstonU]

Let's hope so for the sake of all consumers. I feel like Cartman waiting for the Wii though. Just cryogenetically freeze me until it's finally available so I don't have to bare this waiting any longer.

 

[Eeqmcsq]

I dunno. I'm not ready to interpret that sentence to say that Bulldozer will be the leader. I read it more like this:

Bulldozer won't be enjoying "whatever leadership they may garner" for long...

How much longer until the benchmarks arrive???

 

[BlueBlazer]

@ Blueblazer - your entire post is a speculation too. Ok let me speculate back hehe: what if AMD top BD cpu does beats the 990X with a $300 price? Nothing's impossible.

Do you know that LGA2011 supports future Xeon server processors? I'm not only talking about the 6-core ones, but also 8-cores. The Core i7 990X price is $999, and if AMD had a processor that can beat that why would it price below $300. Remember, AMD used to charge as much as Intel does (right into the $1000 region) when they had conquering CPUs like the FX-60. I've heard all the excuses of "undercutting" competition, but we are talking about over 233% price gap here. Where's the logic in that? Don't tell me AMD doesn't want to make money and doesn't want to make shareholders happy, and contend to being a poorly funded second tier x86 CPU provider..

 

[Gikaseixas]

Do you know that LGA2011 supports future Xeon server processors? I'm not only talking about the 6-core ones, but also 8-cores. The Core i7 990X price is $999, and if AMD had a processor that can beat that why would it price below $300. Remember, AMD used to charge as much as Intel does (right into the $1000 region) when they had conquering CPUs like the FX-60. I've heard all the excuses of "undercutting" compoetition, but we are talking about over 233% price gap here. Where's the logic in that? Don't tell me AMD doesn't want to make money and make shareholders happy, and contend to poorly funded second tier x86 CPU provider..

hey, we're not being logical here, we're speculating according to you so no logic thoughts, remember??

 

[Imouto]

Sell a small batch at low prices to see the sales.
Sell the next batch according to demand.

 

[BlueBlazer]

hey, we're not being logical here, we're speculating according to you so no logic thoughts, remember??

Well, according to your logic AMD should sell a CPU capable of beating Core i7 990X for less than $300 to please a crowd of fickle budget minded enthusiasts. And in doing so, continue its trend of low ASPs and low profits since late 2006. Thus R&D will be poorly funded for next generation CPUs. AMD does not want to return to the times when it was highly profitable. :hmm:

 

[SonicIce]

I think the pricing has already told us how BD will perform. When AMD was actually competitive with the top end, they made sure to charge you out the ass for it. When AMD came out with the Athlon 64 X2 it was $800 and $1000 for their top models. Thinking a $300 BD is gunna beat Intel's $999 chip is a joke.

 

[blackened23]

I think the pricing has already told us how BD will perform. When AMD was actually competitive with the top end, they made sure to charge you out the ass for it. When AMD came out with the Athlon 64 X2 it was $800 and $1000 for their top models. Thinking a $300 BD is gunna beat Intel's $999 chip is a joke.

You sure about that? I remember their pricing during the old days, you know, back when they cloned intel chips - their prices were substantially cheaper than intel even though they performed basically the same.

I have no idea though. AMD does things that make absolutely no sense all the time. Just pretend i'm not here, carry on.

 

[GaiaHunter]

I think the pricing has already told us how BD will perform. When AMD was actually competitive with the top end, they made sure to charge you out the ass for it. When AMD came out with the Athlon 64 X2 it was $800 and $1000 for their top models. Thinking a $300 BD is gunna beat Intel's $999 chip is a joke.

Well the Intel $999 is already beaten by its own $300 chip.

 

[nonameo]

Personally I don't think this means anything. It's probably just a comment to get page hits. Sounds like it's working

 

[BlueBlazer]

Well the Intel $999 is already beaten by its own $300 chip.

Yups, Core i7 2600K is eating away some sales of its $999 Core i7 990X. Intel should be desperate enough to consider launching LGA2011 soon (the 6-core looks a bit underwhelming, perhaps they should consider the 8-core as the next "EE").

Personally I don't think this means anything. It's probably just a comment to get page hits. Sounds like it's working

You may want to ask Xbit Labs if they really had any preview samples in hand...

 

[Ultralight]

As for X-Bit Labs. I peruse their sight every day and I can tell you for fact that they will throw all kinds of "information" out there only to have it refuted by their own members who call for X-Bit to remove it.

But it sure generates hits... So, IMO, take what X-Bit says with a lot of grains of salt.

 

[classy]

Its a recent article, but who knows. They are an very good site though. Easily one of top 3-4 tech sites. Probably a mis statement I would assume. I would be shocked if AMDs new cpus overtook a 990X out the gate. Ther are only few things the 2600K is better at than the 990X, but 990 is seriously a top notch cpu all-around.

 

[nonameo]

You may want to ask Xbit Labs if they really had any preview samples in hand...

I clicked

 

[Bman123]

I doubt bd beats sb...

 

[sm625]

If AMD had an all conquering CPU, then would AMD price them below Core i7 2600K?

Most likely yes. They set their prices based on decisions made before the actual performance of the chip is even known. Companies have to push their ASPs higher. It takes a relatively long time. If BD is a smashing success then BD2 is where you will see the higher ASP.

 

[toyota]

personally I think if Bulldozer was half way decent then we would have some real leaked benchmarks or maybe even a preview from AMD. the fact that nothing even half way official has come out this close to launch gives me the feeling that this cpu fails to deliver.

 

[Black96ws6]

AMD Bulldozer processors won’t be enjoying their leadership for long: they should soon face a very serious opponent.

That is a great quote, nice find man.

That, coupled with what MovieMan said on another forum (another "trustworthy" source), seems to indicate the exact opposite of what the leaked ES benches (some fake, some possibly real) show:

That BD may in fact be a good processor for the money afterall.

And this article seems to indicate BD may not enjoy success long, but I disagree. If Intel makes SB-E more expensive ($500+ chips), then NO thanks, I'll stay with AMD...yeah it may be faster, but I'm not paying 500 bucks for a CPU, would rather put that into an SSD and video card or SLI\Crossfire setup...