AMD Responds

R

Ryan45

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
209
http://blogs.amd.com/play/2011/10/13/our-take-on-amd-fx/

This week we launched the highly anticipated AMD FX series of desktop processors. Based on initial technical reviews, there are some in our community who feel the product performance did not meet their expectations of the AMD FX and the “Bulldozer” architecture. Over the past two days we’ve been listening to you and wanted to help you make sense of the new processors. As you begin to play with the AMD FX CPU processor, I foresee a few things will register:

In our design considerations, AMD focused on applications and environments that we believe our customers use – and which we expect them to use in the future. The architecture focuses on high-frequency and resource sharing to achieve optimal throughput and speed in next generation applications and high-resolution gaming.

Here’s some example scenarios where the AMD FX processor shines:

Playing the Latest Games

A perfect example is Battlefield 3. Take a look at how our test of AMD FX CPU compared to the Core i7 2600K and AMD Phenom™ II X6 1100T processors at full settings:



Map

Resolution

AMD FX-8150

Sandy Bridge i7 2600k

AMD Phenom™ II X6 1100T



MP_011

1650x1080x32 max settings

39.3

37.5

36.3



MP_011

1920x1200x32 max settings

33.2

31.8

30.6



MP_011

2560x1600x32 max settings

21.4

20.4

19.9


Benchmarking done with a single AMD Radeon™ HD 6970 graphics card

Creating in HD

Those users running time intensive tasks are going to want an AMD FX processor for applications like x264, HandBrake, Cinema4D where an eight-core processor will rip right along.

Building for the Future

This is a new architecture. Compilers have recently been updated, and programs have just started exploring the new instructions like XOP and FMA4 (two new instructions first supported by the AMD FX CPU) to speed up many applications, especially when compared to our older generation.

If you are running lightly threaded apps most of the time, then there are plenty of other solutions out there. But if you’re like me and use your desktop for high resolution gaming and want to tackle time intensive tasks with newer multi-threaded applications, the AMD FX processor won’t let you down.

We are a company committed to our customers and we’re constantly listening and working to improve our products. Please let us know what questions you have and we’ll do our best to respond.

Adam Kozak is a product marketing manager at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites, and references to third party trademarks, are provided for convenience and illustrative purposes only. Unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links, and no third party endorsement of AMD or any of its products is implied.
Click to expand...
 
Sorry, comes off as whiny and does not really face the criticism. I've seen benchmark after benchmark where it does not "speed up many applications, especially when compared to our older generation" at all. In fact, the 6 core Phenom IIs seem to be tearing Bulldozer up (or at very least keeping pace) far more often than not.

They failed -- just can't admit it. That'd be an even bigger disaster, nothing left for them to do but put on a happy face and push blindly forward. It's a shame they bought ATI, because if things continue along this path AMD won't be around much longer.
 
I like how they hedge with "it's a new architecture, new instruction sets, etc." Nobody was making those excuses when Conroe first showed up a few years back and starting ripping AMD a new asshole as a brand new architecture.
 
silent-circuit said:
...because if things continue along this path AMD won't be around much longer.
Click to expand...


With all due respect but you are talking about one slice of the big pie which in these BD CPU, are desktop.

Still have to contend in the server, GPU/Graphics, chipset world.

Remember! Even if they didn't make analyst forecast, it is still a profit! Of course the ATI aquisition did suck some money from them. So unless they start bleeding money, they are not going anywhere.

And to stay on topic... damage control
 
I don't have a problem with BD trailing a 2600K. I do have a problem with it being slower than Thuban in some lightly threaded apps.
 
So they came up with an intentionally GPU-limited scenario to be able to imply it's not slower than the competition? *yawn*

That's sort of like claiming a Prius is as fast as a Porsche because the speed limit on the freeway is the same for both cars.
 
Blacklash said:
I don't have a problem with BD trailing a 2600K. I do have a problem with it being slower than Thuban in some lightly threaded apps.
Click to expand...

Considering Thuban represents the near-end-of-life for an architecture, and Bulldozer represents the first step in the life of a different architecture that's unlike anything they've ever done, I'm willing to give AMD a pass on this one. They don't have the capacity, size, or cashflow of Intel, so naturally they're going to stumble a bit when they introduce an entirely new architecture and a smaller production process. As a whole, I think it's a bit messed up for us as tech-minded folks to criticize them given their situation, seeing as we more than anyone are equipped to understand the difficulties they face.

Now, if Piledriver ends up being the same kind of release as Bulldozer, you'll hear me changing my tune...but until then, I'll reserve my judgement.

All that being said, I'll be skipping Bulldozer :p
 
We can't forgive companies using future software as an excuse for poor hardware. Did Windows 8 exist when AMD started developing the Bulldozer architecture? Did Windows 7 even exist? Chances are even Windows Vista was still in beta. AMD could not have been using Windows 8 as a dev target. They have no excuse for releasing a new architecture that does not perform on current software.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
KazeoHin said:
We can't forgive companies using future software as an excuse for poor hardware. Did Windows 8 exist when AMD started developing the Bulldozer architecture? Did Windows 7 even exist? Chances are even Windows Vista was still in beta. AMD could not have been using Windows 8 as a dev target. They have no excuse for releasing a new architecture that does not perform on current software.
Click to expand...

Even the Windows 2000/XP scheduler had issues with dual-core K8s, that's why AMD released their Dual Core Optimizer. Not saying that this time it is exactly the same situation, but there is a possibility.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What is funny is that I always thought the shared L2 cache would be an advantage. If two threads are working on processing the same dataset, then they could essentially 'share' the data in their L2, each core in the mod accessing the same chunk of data, thus making the L2 potentially HUGE.
 
Not much of a response... A mention of a Windows Patch or BIOS update, or something to that effect would of been welcomed more than this marketing fluff.... C'mon AMD, you can do better...
 
There is no "patch" for windows that will improve it's gaming, that you would notice.
They fucked up on this, it's a HUGE goddamned Hollow Easter Bunny.
You would think with 8 cores and all the damned marketing that this thing would keep up in all apps. Instead, Thuban trumps it!

Hollow Easter Bunny!!

708681.570847869.1269288756_500.jpg
 
The real question is, can they make the same kind of adjustment that Intel made when the Pentium 4 Williamette launched, and sucked, and come back with a new stepping that fixes some of the issues, like Intel did with the Northwoods. Of course, even if they do, they have to hope the architecture doesn't dead-end the way Prescott did. Lot of parallels to the Netburst fiasco here.
 
I, for one, happen to LOVE the hollow easter bunnies. BD, on the other hand, has killed any desire for me to upgrade this year. In fact I'm so turned off by it that I probably won't have sex for a week.

I'm not gaming much these days anyway so it's likely I'll be looking at PD or Haswell for my next upgrade.
 
That's a pretty sad response really. "In order to show you BDs awesomeness, we picked an extremely GPU limited game with no set benchmarking tool, ran it a bunch of times, and eventually were able to pick out runs where we came out 1fps ahead. While we have plenty of extra 6970s lying around, we chose to run this in a single card configuration because, uh, that best demonstrates BDs awesome gaming prowess. See? BD rules!"
 
.......In our design considerations, AMD focused on applications and environments that we believe our customers use – and which we expect them to use in the future. The architecture focuses on high-frequency and resource sharing to achieve optimal throughput and speed in next generation applications and high-resolution gaming.........
Click to expand...

I'll trim it down.

... AMD focused on applications and environments that we believe our customers use....next generation applications and high-resolution gaming.
Click to expand...

So people are primarily using software that isn't out yet?
 
So my question is, what is everyones reasons for the current intels being up to 6 percent slower in window 8 beta? What is everyone reason for the Bulldozer and Phenom/Thuban doing better in window 8 beta? The only whinning is what most of the people on this forum have been doing. Yes the ipc and the wattage is way off for the bulldozer, but everything is going mulithreading. Windows 8 beta is even more multi threaded than 7 and it shows with the performance boost for amd processors.

If you truely look around the web you will see the bulldozer trade blows with intel 2600k and 2500k. Any program that is mainly single threaded the intel wins hands down. Programs that are multi threaded seem to go either way. And one thing I noticed is that diffrent sites seem to go different way on some of the same programs, have yet to figure that one out.

And like it or not, AMD is a small company and since the Athlon64, all desktop processors have really been server chips that they setup for desktop use. I don't really have a problem with it since everything is heading towards parallel and multi threaded.
 
Too little too late, AMD. I think the enthusiast community would be a lot more sympathetic if we hadnt been strung along and lied to - but as it stands, a lot of us are simply left with a very bad taste.
 
dcds1 said:
If you truely look around the web you will see the bulldozer trade blows with intel 2600k and 2500k. Any program that is mainly single threaded the intel wins hands down. Programs that are multi threaded seem to go either way. And one thing I noticed is that diffrent sites seem to go different way on some of the same programs, have yet to figure that one out.
Click to expand...

This is the problem. If multi-thread can go either way, but intel dominates single thread, and is cheaper, and overclocks easier, what is the reason to go AMD?

Pretty much the only thing I was hopeful for was that BD would hit 5ghz easy, but no one is citing much over 4.5ghz without a lot of trouble. That being the case, SB is the ONLY sensible choice for someone building from scratch right now, or anyone looking to replace the MB and CPU.
 
I was with the 99% defending AMD till the bitter, bitter end and now I'm eating crow. I would like to thank JF-AMD for the all the lies about a 15% superior IPC along with 25% more cores bullshit he was slinging.
Thank God I waited and didn't buy a damn 990FX motherboard, I'd be stuck with a turd upgrade. Try selling those 990FX boards to anyone now.
 
I've got to admit, If I were to build a new system today, I would base it around a 2600K. I hate Intel, and have used AMD in my personal builds all my life. That should tell you something.
 
griff30 said:
I was with the 99% defending AMD till the bitter, bitter end and now I'm eating crow. I would like to thank JF-AMD for the all the lies about a 15% superior IPC along with 25% more cores bullshit he was slinging.
Thank God I waited and didn't buy a damn 990FX motherboard, I'd be stuck with a turd upgrade. Try selling those 990FX boards to anyone now.
Click to expand...

I almost ordered a 990fx board, had it sitting in my newegg cart for over a week, every day I would convince myself to wait till reviews, so glad I did.

Seriously, I did not expect much from Bulldozer. I only wanted it to be better than Thuban. Never in a million years did I think it would be worse than Thuban, especially after all that hype.
 
AMD talking about high resolution gaming = "Please crank all of the details so you are GPU limited and stop noticing how slow the CPU is. Also please do not pay attention to the fact that Thuban is faster as well."

A lot of people were pulling for AMD and it just sucks that this release is so disappointing. For eight months people all over this forum and other were like "Well you should wait to see what AMD does before getting a new Intel system..." Well now we know.

Heck I even had a friend lined up to buy my 2500K + P67board so I could switch to Bulldozer. That certainly is not happening now :eek:
 
Last edited:
lol.

So BD is so next gen that there isn't any software out right now that will show its superiority? Riiiiight.
 
dcds1 said:
So my question is, what is everyones reasons for the current intels being up to 6 percent slower in window 8 beta? What is everyone reason for the Bulldozer and Phenom/Thuban doing better in window 8 beta? The only whinning is what most of the people on this forum have been doing. Yes the ipc and the wattage is way off for the bulldozer, but everything is going mulithreading. Windows 8 beta is even more multi threaded than 7 and it shows with the performance boost for amd processors.

If you truely look around the web you will see the bulldozer trade blows with intel 2600k and 2500k. Any program that is mainly single threaded the intel wins hands down. Programs that are multi threaded seem to go either way. And one thing I noticed is that diffrent sites seem to go different way on some of the same programs, have yet to figure that one out.

And like it or not, AMD is a small company and since the Athlon64, all desktop processors have really been server chips that they setup for desktop use. I don't really have a problem with it since everything is heading towards parallel and multi threaded.
Click to expand...

"6 percent" and "go either way" aren't exactly a significant gap for a supposedly "forward-looking", "multi-threaded focused" CPU being compared to Intel's which can be considered neither of those two...

In simpler terms, at best, there's a small lead for the "multi-threaded focused" CPU over the ones that aren't in multi-threaded performance. So how "focused" were they really?
 
I think its funny really. Everyone knew Bd would be slower then sb. This doesn't surprise me at all. For Bd to barely beat phenom 2 is a Damn shame. Maybe as time goes on something magical will happen and Bd will really pull away from phenom 2.

Amd hit a homer with llano but struck the Fuck out with Bd LOL..
 
so he's saying Bulldozer is not the right choice now and there are plenty of Intel solutions out there
 
My main issue is the power draw for said results.. i had planned to look at BD as a replacement for my x58 i7-930 but i just don't see it ... now i really hate my Intel system as it really never was worth it's price but BD is just not a replacment and i am not willing to give Intel anymore of my money for there overpriced tech.. maybe i will just pull the ole Gigabyte 965P back out and give 775 socket another go..
 
Ok, thuban/deneb beating Bulldozer in gaming and lightly threaded apps threw me for a loop. At the end of the day i really dont know why people are this upset. deep down 9 out of 10 of us knew it wasnt going to beat sandy bridge clock for clock. It holds it own really well in heavy threaded apps which is what it was design for. In my opinion power consumption is the biggest failure of bulldozer, but i could use the spare heat in michigan :)

I say once the price is right, ill still be proud to own an 8120. (the right price to me is 10% under i5 2500k)

My main rig is a sempron 130 overclocked to 3.6ghz, two AMD 5830's in crossfire. 4gb ddr 1333 on biostar 870 board. Know what, it does everything i need just fine. Surf the web, bitcoin mine, world of warcraft... Im not going to sit here and cry that bulldozer is somehow going to hold me back.

Some of you need to take a step back and realize the CPU is probably the least important component in your system. On another forum there is a thread where an overclocked i3-540 is actually faster then i7 in all but two gaming benchmarks when both are clocked to 4.2ghz.

If i can bitcoin mine on one 5830 while playing world of warcraft on another 5830 (1920x1080 settings = high) -- on a single core sempron and average 35-55fps --- seriously dont see what all the anger is about. pretty much any dual core or better CPU capable of overclocking to 4ghz is going to get the job done.
 
Still good enough most wont notice and intel won't charge $1000 a CPU.
 
AMD, just admit you fucked up, really a lot of benchmarks and reviews clearly show that your latest CPU can't keep up with Intel's current offerings, no need to go on how "superior" your product is.
 
This guy is just doing his job as the marketing manager to cover up the engineers' mess. Can't blame him.
 
What a pile of steaming crap. All they're doing is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. There is not one single person in their consumer marketing department that doesn't deserve a termination notice. These guys should be flipping burgers instead of pulling down six figure salaries and driving company cars.
 
fanboy said:
My main issue is the power draw for said results.. i had planned to look at BD as a replacement for my x58 i7-930 but i just don't see it ... now i really hate my Intel system as it really never was worth it's price but BD is just not a replacment and i am not willing to give Intel anymore of my money for there overpriced tech.. maybe i will just pull the ole Gigabyte 965P back out and give 775 socket another go..
Click to expand...

so...i have to admit i have no idea why you are upset you can run that 930 till ivy or whatever and be pretty damn fast (faster than BD =p for sure)

soooo you are going to get a pretty decent run you could probably hold out till 2013 even maybe beyond... so what is the problem again?


I'm really please with the results I'm getting with my $400~ish i5-2500K /GA-Z68X-UD3 / 12GB Mushkin DDR3 1333 upgrade from a couple months ago... and if happily if i simply can't resist socket 2011 next year my wife's computer could use and upgrade so i could give her my i5 and get that. Loving this thing right now however.
 
Marketing operates on sometimes different matrix.

1. By breaking H AMD Forum viewer record, 1000+ active,
2. Judging from continuous stream of active participation, (just compare usually it is 3:2 ratio for Intel/AMD forum), these few days it is breaking record, even now it is (Intel forum viewers) 88:218 (AMD forum viewers)
3. Pretty sure similar trend everywhere

calm and positive is required for Marketing
 
Last edited:
A perfect example is Battlefield 3
Click to expand...

Beta, you left out beta. Let's see how the final game performs. Even then that game is highly GPU dependent. Besides picking one game out of hundreds....well it looks sad. :(
 
PRIME1 said:
Beta, you left out beta. Let's see how the final game performs. Even then that game is highly GPU dependent. Besides picking one game out of hundreds....well it looks sad. :(
Click to expand...

Well its supposed to be the future where Bulldozer will shine... sometime... in the future.

Useless psychic powers!
 
griff30 said:
I was with the 99% defending AMD till the bitter, bitter end and now I'm eating crow. I would like to thank JF-AMD for the all the lies about a 15% superior IPC along with 25% more cores bullshit he was slinging.
Thank God I waited and didn't buy a damn 990FX motherboard, I'd be stuck with a turd upgrade. Try selling those 990FX boards to anyone now.
Click to expand...

JF-AMD has not posted a single thing since the 6th, but he did log-in on release day to witness the carnage. Pretty sad that he doesn't have the guts to face his lynch mob.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top