Bulldozer Server Benchmarks Not Promising

New submitter RobinEggs writes "Some reviews of Bulldozer's server performance have arrived. Ars Technica has the breakdown, and the results are pretty ugly. Apparently Bulldozer fares just as poorly with servers as with desktops. From the article: 'One reason for the underwhelming performance on the desktop is that the Bulldozer architecture emphasizes multithreaded performance over single-threaded performance. For desktop applications, where single-threaded performance is still king, this is a problem. Server workloads, in contrast, typically have to handle multiple users, network connections, and virtual machines concurrently. This makes them a much better fit for processors that support lots of concurrent threads. ... It looks as though the decisions that hurt Bulldozer on the desktop continue to hurt it in the server room. Although the server benchmarks don't show the same regressions as were found on the desktop, they do little to justify the design of the new architecture.' It's probably much too early to start editorializing about the end of AMD, or even to say with certainty that Bulldozer has failed, but my untrained eye can't yet see any possible silver lining in these new processors."

This article makes no sense.

[hellop2]

Bulldozers do not make good servers. Use a computer. Problem solved.

Re:This article makes no sense.

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you any idea how much damage that bulldozer would suffer if I just let it roll straight over you?

Re:This article makes no sense.

[Tsingi]

None at all?

Re:This article makes no sense.

[RockDoctor]

Which is why you persuade the planning official to do the laying in the mud, squirming, while you go off to the pub for a quick couple of pints, a bag of peanuts, and the End of The World As We Know It.