TR Forums

Source?

Also, besides power consumption (which i am reluctant to believe) the results don't mean much to me.

That's an incredibly small number of benchmarks, cherry picked to be the few examples where AMD is at their strongest.

Whilst they (whoever the source may be) is trying to paint a pretty picture, what I can't help noticing is the lack of significant improvement in IPC. The Piledriver is marginally better than the bulldozer, but not out of line with what I'd expect if the Bulldozer was clocked up to 4.2GHz.

Yup. The best thing you can say about these is "OK, so they've managed to bump the frequency a bit". It's a step in the right direction, but a small one.

All i can see is finally they are beating their own X6 processors.

Jigar wrote:

All i can see is finally they are beating their own X6 processors.

In highly threaded, mostly non-FP based tests. Still looks like it does better in servers than desktops.

Cute charts and all, but someone on their 1st post to come in a drops unsourced benchmark graphs (not even numbers)...

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, its a duck.

Congrats on being totally unreliable.

TheEmrys wrote:

Cute charts and all, but someone on their 1st post to come in a drops unsourced benchmark graphs (not even numbers)...

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, its a duck.

Congrats on being totally unreliable.

My exact thoughts. Im just going to forget i even came across this chart.

Well... as Chrispy_ pointed out, they're roughly what you'd expect given that they appear to have been cherry-picked to play to Bulldozer's/Piledriver's strengths. So yeah, they're unsourced; but they're certainly plausible.