How did Ayyyymd fuck up so bad with bulldozer/piledriver?

Shit design, using a single FPU for 2 cores.

You don't need 8 threads in most software applications. Especially not games.

is that why quadcores are still so competitive?
lmao @ your life

not long after Bulldozer's launch an AMD engineer stated the reason was that AMD tried to get their CPU division, and ATI to work closer together, which meant portions of the CPU design normally done by hand, were automated instead, leading to a more underwhelming product.

That said. Bulldozer wasn't necessarily bad. The problem was no program or game could make use of the 8 threads when it came out. By 2015/2016 though, that had changed, and the FX 8 cores were putting out respectable framerates in more modern games.

I had an FX-8320 machine. It's not bad actually considering all negative press around it. However ryzen did help with handbrake rendering quite a lot. I'm still considering making FX my server, however the TDP (and fan noise) is worrying me.

This and they banked on software devs to improve multithreading when there was literally no point.

I'm not your pal, buddy

Depends what you use. 3d rendering, video editing, CAD, don't take too kindly to less than 8 threads.

>> (You)

That's what he said,isn't it?

Attached: Screenshot_20180620_122641.png (122x207, 39K)

Not sure what you're trying to say. Try english maybe.

you have to go back
>>>/plebbit/

*crack* *sips* Ah, I've got an fx-8350 over here. It does everything I need it to do. Apple fags still cant even achieve my performance with the help of a FUCKING freezer.

Go back to Jow Forums bulldozer was shit and always will be shit and jews had nothing to do with it

Hate to break it to you friendo, but Intel makes Microsoft look like a team player.

>amd shills claiming bulldozer is good and intel is more melicious than m$

Attached: 1530125199076.gif (352x264, 1.99M)

user...
youtube.com/watch?v=56cPsi0mNCk

>all these mental gymnastics to suck corporate cock that doesn't even know you exist

Attached: 1481235322867.jpg (800x733, 38K)

>lower IPC than previous Phenom
>couldnt handle threading properly
but it was shit

It was a catastrophe. Even the Phenom II was better. They tried to implement hyper threading but on their own style with those modules.

We can be glad AMD returned.

Attached: ryzen.jpg (814x808, 147K)

They just tried to save on costs/power/design by only using one FPU per 2 integer cores.

It would have been alright if they just stuck with more FPUs.

Has nothing to do with Hyperthreading/SMT

it has to do with THEIR implementation if it

>Even the Phenom II was better
My first (and last) gaming build, which I put together in the summer of 2010, featured a Phenom II X4 955. Good processor actually, held its own against the Q9550. Single-thread performance was good, just the power consumption was a bit high and it ran a little hot. But it performed every bit as well as the Intel option and cost less.

In 2012, one of my friends put together his own rig with an FX-8100. On paper it would eat the Q9550 and the 955 for lunch, but I was pretty surprised to see that the real-world performance wasn't much better. We ran some benchmarks and found the single-core performance was actually worse than the 955, despite two years of supposed progress. The individual cores were quite weak, the pipelines were too long, and the cache performance was abysmal. The whole architecture relied on high clock speeds to keep things going. In other words, it was AMD's version of the Pentium 4, only they thought "if we have long pipelines, high clock speeds AND more cores, it will work this time!" It's sort of funny, really, because Intel learned from their mistakes, ditched the Pentium 4 and went back to the old Pentium 3, whereas AMD flat out refused to dust off the K10 and tweak it even though it was miles better. It was even more of a disappointment because the AMD shills of Jow Forums had been going on about Bulldozer for months, turned out it was a dud.

I'm glad AMD is back on track, I've always had a soft spot for them. Probably not going to build another gaming PC since I've lost interest in most games from about 2015 onwards, but I am considering one of those AMD-powered Thinkpads.

Unlike most people here that were in elementary school when this launched, I remember Jow Forums from back then and denial was hard around here. Eventually anons gave up and started to get jewtel.

I got a A10 5800k back in 2012 and boy was it shit. It wasn't that bad for the price I got it for (about 80 bucks) and the IGP was INSANE when compared to whatever intel had to offer, but CPU-wise a fucken 50 dollar Pentium D matched it. In the end tho, it met my needs (gayms at 1366x768) for quite a while. I didn't even needed a dedicated GPU until years later when I got a 750ti.

I stuck with that piece of shit on my main desktop until last year, when I fell for the Ryzen meme and got a R5 1500x because the single core performance is identical to the 1600 and 4 coars are still enough today. I also got it for peanuts (90 bucks). Holy shit it was night and day. Emulators were flying. I was VR ready all of the sudden. Bottlenecks dissapeared (I have a 8GB Rx480).

AMD finally got it right, took them long enough.

Just how poor were you to have a desktop but no dedicated GPU?

I had the money for it but realized the was no need for it at the moment, the IGP could handle my games just fine. My plan was to do a virtual crossfire (that's why I got an APU instead of a CPU) but I never got around to it.

Someone here is saying that the A10 was as bad as a Pentium D, someone is saying that it was the same as a Phenom II, which was the same as a Q9550.

Someone here is exaggerating.

oops, I meant pentium G

cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Pentium-G3470-vs-AMD-A10-5800K-APU-2012-DTr/m28614vs2007

Windows 7 and 8 schedule was shit for multiprocessor, bulldozer get decent performance in Linux and Heavy parallel task.

My first game rig had a G3220. God damn was that ever a shitty CPU. But then again, didn't the Haswell Pentiums have two years of development on the A10? Wouldn't you expect it to perform about the same? The real shock is if it cannot outperform a Phenom from 2 years BEFORE

When I switched from my Phenom II 940 to a H61 platform in my cheap PC I got a board with a Pentium G 530 (Sandybridge).

I decided to use it because I had ordered a i5, so I could set everything up already. The Pentiums performance was absolutely equal in benchmarks, some points more even, while having twice the singlecore performance at only 2.8 GHz. Phenom was 3 GHz. It was also much quieter, cooler and didnt consume 150 W in idle.

Intel, by that point, had damn near driven them out of business with shady practices and they had fuck all for cash flow to invest in R&D

>bulldozer/piledriver
stll the best processors on the market
price-integer speed-relability(time to termopolish become rock)

bibelines lmao

It was more like AMD themselves rested on the laurels of the Athlon 64, while Intel quietly de-fucked their product line and then entered a virtuous circle. By the time AMD knew what was going on, they were already in trouble, but they still had time and money to counter. THAT is when Intel perceived a threat and began the shady practices. But still, the position AMD found themselves in until very recently was at least 30% their own fault.

I like it
I use it