You have xfire tho.
Even if that was AMDs point its still taking it to the extremes because they did not show a more realistic scenario.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Bulldozer Finally!
- Thread starter AceTK
- Start date
You have xfire tho.
Even if that was AMDs point its still taking it to the extremes because they did not show a more realistic scenario.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,566
- Location
- Dormanstown.
LULWUT?
AMD technology, needing an Intel CPU to push it?
Nice point.. Epic..
My cards are only midrange.
What if it was a 6970 Trifire?
Last edited:
If you don't have the money for both then yes.
But who would want to take such a high Intel in the first place if they didn't have the cash to match it with a GPU worthy of it unless GPU performance was not the factor for the purchase, then having more money for the GPU would not matter and even if they did have $800 left they would not put it towards more GPU.
Last edited:
Not my point, the point was that they should have done the Intel tests with all the gfx cards used in the AMD tests.
I want to see the truth and not only the best cases that i think AMD have gone too far with this time.
Last edited:
Xfire is not midrange.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,566
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Guess we'll wait and see.
I'm sticking to my 2500k and rightfully so.
Once Ivy comes I'll get that, it should clock better than my crappy chip.
The fact that my 6870's in Crossfire equate higher than GTX580 performance doesn't stop them being mid range cards.
I'm sticking to my 2500k and rightfully so.
Once Ivy comes I'll get that, it should clock better than my crappy chip.
That's a strange statement? Would Crossfiring two 6670's not be mid range? What you just said was a blanket statement. My cards are indeed both midrange cards, so it's a mid range crossfire set up. A 6970 Crossfire would be high end, as the 6970 are "Higher tier cards".
The fact that my 6870's in Crossfire equate higher than GTX580 performance doesn't stop them being mid range cards.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 6,534
- Location
- London/Camberley
Huh? The whole point is simply that AMD can match a $1000 Intel CPU with theirs in game performance and that's it. It's exaggerated because it shows that AMD are apparently better value for money. It was never meant to be a fair comparison or what people would do in real life.
In real life, people would buy an i5 2500k and still get the same performance as the 980x but if AMD had made that comparison, it wouldn't have shown their own CPU to be as good value for money wise, would it?
You're looking too much into this...
it's just a personlly thing...
i've always liked user results/info because u can ask them questions or ask them to run a program that your interested in to test it...
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,566
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Depending on the reviewer, you can ask them the same thing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 6,534
- Location
- London/Camberley
Visit the right review sites and I'm sure the reviewer will be more than happy to do the tests you'd like to see.
I think that the today's vote would be a terribly fickle thing, based on the silly hype and unreliable benchmarks to date
However...Suspicion: no. Don't believe it's going to be "all that." I hope it will be, but I suspect it won't
After benchmarks are out:
If a 95W BD beats a 2600k consistently: definitely yes.
Else if it places between i7 and i5: maybe, depending on specific applications.
Else absolutely not. I'm too old and have too much "Christmas" cash lying around to take 2nd best this time!
(No interest in 125W models, wrong direction, imho
)It does not matter that AMDs CPU can match it and its better value for money when Intel themselves have CPUs that can match it and is better value for money.
Im not slating BD but what AMD is doing here to me is getting close to the sort of marketing when NV took a very low end physx capable card and benched it against a high end ATI card in BAA with full physx on.
Last edited:
why do that when you've got users on forums including me that are willing to do that? also users results cover awide range of rigsVisit the right review sites and I'm sure the reviewer will be more than happy to do the tests you'd like to see.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 6,534
- Location
- London/Camberley
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,566
- Location
- Dormanstown.
I'm not debating that, simply that your point was moot, it's probably quicker to ask a forum user though.
Im not slating BD but what AMD is doing here to me is getting close to the sort of marketing when NV took a very low end physx capable card and benched it against a high end ATI card in BAA with full physx on.
but users results cover awide range of rigs
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 6,534
- Location
- London/Camberley
Well you're saying reviewers can't be trusted. I'm merely saying that they are no different to a regular user and as such they are no less trustworthy than anyone else.
That's always been how marketing works hence me saying that we should probably wait for the reviews to see how it really performs. Even now, no one can really say for sure what it will be like. I've seen a couple of benchmarks myself but that's hardly anything to go by.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 6,534
- Location
- London/Camberley
how they convincing us that bulldozer is good? Helios?, with those slides i dont understand specially cinebench slide, 4.8 ghz bulldozer scores what was it 5,8 pts and 1090t @ 4ghz can score more then 7pts in my case 7.11pts.
No according to that leaked slide, it scored 5.95 at stock and more when overclocked to 4.8GHz. It's merely showing how overclocking scales in performance.
Anyway, those leaked slides were never meant to be out in public so they aren't supposed to be convincing anyone anything. God know how sites like Donanimhaber get hold of these information.
Last edited: