AMD shows better Bulldozer performance on Windows 8

Last week, AMD finally released its new AMD FX processors, also known by its code name Bulldozer. The chip is the first desktop processor made for consumer PCs with an eight core set-up. However, the early reviews for the new Bulldozer processors have not been kind so far.

Benchmarks from web sites such as TechSpot have confirmed that these new chips simply don't provide the same performance compared to older Sandy Bridge-based chips from AMD's main rival Intel.

But are all these benchmarks using the wrong operating system? That's what AMD seems to be saying in a new slide promoting the AMD FX processor. Xbitlabs reports that the slide shows that the chip, running on the developer's preview version of Windows 8, shows better performance running games than Windows 7. The slide shows a two percent increase in Windows 8 when playing Deus Ex: Human Revolution, a four percent increase while playing Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty Black Ops, and a whopping 10 percent increase while playing Left 4 Dead 2.

There's no word on what kind of PC rig was used to run these gaming benchmarks. However, AMD says that the performance boost while running games in Windows 8 is due to the OS's new scheduler which handles processors with multiple cores more efficiently.

In the end, there are no PC games that can currently access the full eight processors that the new Bulldozer chips have. But for the moment, it looks like the new AMD FX chips are still not able to compete with Intel's current chip line-up.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Some Mango users report touch screen keyboards disappearing

Next Story

Microsoft Research working on "any surface" touch screen

21 Comments

View more comments

whopping 10 percent increase while playing Left 4 Dead 2...nice
huge increase in power consumption when overclocked.......bummer

Beyond Godlike said,
funny, i wonder what kinda speed increase the i7's get then on win8..probably the same or more

Not really. From the way I understand it, Windows 7 does not handle threads right with Bulldozer's unknown architecture. The engineers behind Windows 8 have taken Bulldozer into account in the new OS, and so its full potential will be unlocked.

Although its full potential is also somewhat lackluster to what they made it up to be

Beyond Godlike said,
funny, i wonder what kinda speed increase the i7's get then on win8..probably the same or more

None, it performs worse, actually.

See tomshardware review

I was really hoping AMD would hit a gold mine with the Bulldozer chip. It's such a damn shame that they can't even compete with Intel's current lineup.

Anaron said,
I was really hoping AMD would hit a gold mine with the Bulldozer chip. It's such a damn shame that they can't even compete with Intel's current lineup.

Well it kind of goes both ways. Amd seems to have better low power chip now than Atom. It is always a catch up for someone.

BigBoy said,

Well it kind of goes both ways. Amd seems to have better low power chip now than Atom. It is always a catch up for someone.

Yeah but AMD lacks the OEM deals intel has, hence we won't be seeing fusion as much as we see atoms all over the place because of this.

Anaron said,
I was really hoping AMD would hit a gold mine with the Bulldozer chip. It's such a damn shame that they can't even compete with Intel's current lineup.

It depends on the price they sell - if price/performance they beat Intel then who cares about the raw performance? I mean, there are processors that can beat Intel without any problems but when price comes into the equation the Intel offerings always come out on top.

Mr Nom Nom's said,

It depends on the price they sell - if price/performance they beat Intel then who cares about the raw performance? I mean, there are processors that can beat Intel without any problems but when price comes into the equation the Intel offerings always come out on top.


There is still a problem: If you want a CPU that has performance above some level, you cannot go AMD. If you want a i7 2600 level performance, you cannot buy it from AMD.

Intel would still crap-stomp them either way

meanless preview really , W8 is like in alpha , and would also mean more boost for intel Core CPUs
it goes both way

Ci7 said,
Intel would still crap-stomp them either way

meanless preview really , W8 is like in alpha , and would also mean more boost for intel Core CPUs
it goes both way


No it is not meaning less and it's way more stable then some old rinky dink alpha.

Who cares.
When Windows 8 is out, Ivy-Bridge will be dominating, like always, and Bulldozer and even its version would be irrelevant. Of course to gamers and enthusiasts

Sorry but 2 or 4 percent is not exciting, heck, 10 aint either and much more so because we STILL are in the Windows 7 era. Not 8. So who cares.
They've released a crappy performing processor.

Problem : Windows 8 isn't out (retail).
And an interesting thought : would Intel show similar gains with Windows 8?

I think the performance gain is rather negligible to try and palm off as a "software issue" personally.

well if their processor works better on win 8 , why didn't they postpone it till win 8 officially is out, until windows 8 is out Intel gonna smack their asses with a new Processor

TehHector said,
well if their processor works better on win 8 , why didn't they postpone it till win 8 officially is out, until windows 8 is out Intel gonna smack their asses with a new Processor

AMD is trolling the early adopters

Problem with OEM is that they optimized their software mostly for Intel chips, leavin' amd naturally behind. I love amd, I also love their low pricing, but when most developers aim for Intel arch's and spec's... They should have a chance, after all, AMD isn't exactly like Cyrix once was (old memories... I kinda liked cyrix btw).

Commenting is disabled on this article.