AMD's Bulldozer-based FX-8130P benchmarked early

Jos

Posts: 3,073   +97

Last month at the E3 conference in Los Angeles AMD officially reintroduced the FX brand for their top performing processors aimed at PC enthusiasts and gaming aficionados. Although no actual products were launched, we already have a pretty good idea of the initial lineup, and now Turkish website DonanimHaber is offering a glimpse at the performance we can look forward to.

The site managed to get their hands on an engineering sample of AMD's forthcoming FX-8130P and ran it through a range of tests. The 8-core chip features 3.2GHz clock speeds, 2MB of L2 cache per each pair of cores (8MB in total), and 8MB L3 cache shared between all modules. The motherboard used was a Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5, which was paired with a GeForce GTX 580.

Bulldozer scores P6265 in the 3D Mark 11 benchmark, 3045 in PCMark 7, 24434 in Cinebench R10 and manages 136 and 45 frames per second in x264 encoding tests for Pass 1 and Pass 2, respectively. In addition, it took 19.5 seconds to complete SuperPi 1M. Unfortunately there are no Core i7 2600K scores to compare with -- and the benchmark programs used differ from our usual range of tests -- but VR-Zone claims typical scores for Intel's top Sandy Bridge part are lower in all tests except SuperPi 1M, where it is significantly faster.

Compared to the Thuban-based Phenom II X6 1100T, Bulldozer should end up about 50% faster, while overall it slots right in between the Sandy Bridge Core i7 2600K and Gulftown-based Core i7 990X in terms of performance.

Of course scores will vary from platform to platform so we'll reserve judgment until we can put Bulldozer to the test ourselves. If these early comparisons hold up, though, AMD could finally have an answer to Intel on the high-end. The rumored $320 price tag suggests that will be the case considering Intel's Core i7 2600K costs roughly the same.

Permalink to story.

 
Anything that creates competition in the market is a good thing.

Can someone correct me if I wrong but don't all those tests weigh number of cores heavily? So an 8core should do amazingly well in a test but real world not seeing that much of an improvement unless your app takes advantage.
 
are u insane no current computer can run notepad maxed out cuse they developed it for future hardware.
 
I'm looking forward to these ! I'm going to purchase one just to run multiple notepads at once ! :3
 
...but will it run Notepad

It's a an 8 core CPU with 4.2 Turbo core and a new architecture! of course it will run.....Oh you minx!:p

I upgraded to a GA-990-FXA-UD7 with a x6 1100T as a placeholder....make with the FX already!
 
will my notepad be in 480i? or will i get 320p? this is all i care about
 
It's a an 8 core CPU with 4.2 Turbo core and a new architecture! of course it will run.....Oh you minx!:p

I upgraded to a GA-990-FXA-UD7 with a x6 1100T as a placeholder....make with the FX already!

I've got the same motherboard in my newegg wish list along with a Corsair H80 and 8GB of Corsair Dominator GT DDR3 2000. If this is typlical of the results we'll see with Bulldozer I'll probably go ahead and pull the trigger.
 
I upgraded my 64x2 5200 to the i5 2500k! I'm impressed and have always been anti Intel since my nexgen cpu 486 build but not no more.
 
I've got the same motherboard in my newegg wish list along with a Corsair H80 and 8GB of Corsair Dominator GT DDR3 2000. If this is typlical of the results we'll see with Bulldozer I'll probably go ahead and pull the trigger.

ohhhh, I see. Your one of those guys that has commitment issues! hehehe

BTW, I really am liking the UD7. I picked up a Asus Crosshair Formula V as well which is also top notch. I ended up building with the UD7 for the quad CF capabilities. It also is a extremely good Oc'er.
 
Well Real World wise, I push my computer to the limits, using all the CPU power my CPU can muster. AMD, it's hard to, even with my quad-core 9600. Real people use the cores, it's the Windows and its Programs that doesn't use the cores to their extent. Linux sure does though =D
 
Irrelevant question: I've always wondered: how come the terms 'oct-core' and 'hex-core' never caught on, but got called six-cores and eight-cores instead? Why don't we call a quad core a 'four-core'?
 
It will run notepad but you have to upgrade you video card to at least 1gb ddr5 :) lol
 
Back