• 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!

I'm happy that my AM3 board supports AM3+ now due to a bios update from gigabyte, but part of me wishes AMD would just design a completely new socket and really compete with Intel in raw speed and performance.
 
SheepBeast said:
doesn't matter. gen2 is nowhere near saturated there will only be a couple of percent performance gains by using gen3. it'll likely be 2 or 3 years before gen3 starts making more than 10% performance difference in even the highest end cards
Click to expand...

Ivy Bridge will be limited to PCI-E 3.0 8X too in SLI and Crossfire setups. This means a maximum of 4 GT/s and with the 20% reduction in overhead is around the same as PCI-E 2.0 16X running at 5 GT/s. Since the 990FX or X58 motherboards can run at least two cards in Crossfire or SLI at PCI-E 2.0 16X there won't be much difference.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Ivy Bridge will be limited to PCI-E 3.0 8X too in SLI and Crossfire setups. This means a maximum of 4 GT/s and with the 20% reduction in overhead is around the same as PCI-E 2.0 16X running at 5 GT/s. Since the 990FX or X58 motherboards can run at least two cards in Crossfire or SLI at PCI-E 2.0 16X there won't be much difference.
Click to expand...

cool, i didn't know IB only had 16 lanes. i guess intel figure it's their mainstream platform so anyone that wants multi-GPUs can bite the bullet and go SB-E. bit **** though given IB will be similar performance at like half the price.
 
When this is realeased how will i go about updating my bios for AM3+ . Will i have to update bios then install processor or would i have to install processor then update bios for AM3+ ???
 
Zinth said:
When this is realeased how will i go about updating my bios for AM3+ . Will i have to update bios then install processor or would i have to install processor then update bios for AM3+ ???
Click to expand...

I would think you update bios first, then install new cpu.

Otherwise, if you put cpu in first, how will you update the bios, if the mobo cant communicate with the cpu properly?
 
drunkenmaster said:
Everything you said is beyond wrong, its stupid.

You say people are making excuses and looking to the next generation, then pointing out Intel's next generation will be faster.

Heres a hint, thats always the case, thats why some people are excited about Ivybridge aswell.

This is ACTUALLY whats being said, Bulldozer IS out this month, its not having excuses made for it, its faster than a 2500k and slower than 2600k in some stuff, probably faster than it in others, no one knows quite how much. Its FACT that the latest bios's, microcode IS faster than the older ones, what benchmarks are done on the new or old no one knows, its pro Intel guys that automatically assume the worst, I have assumed neither, its already fairly good, it WON'T get slower, it COULD get faster.

As for the next generation everyone knows exactly what this is for Ivy, and its been mentioned MANY times, Ivybridge is a circa 5% clock for clock increase, with a roughly 5% clock increase, it will be 10% faster than Sandy, last minute pushing clocks higher if AMD are competitive, maybe another 5% clocks, even then, thats just going to take away from the overclock so who cares.

Anyway, anyone that knows whats going on knows Ivy is around mid next year, its no more than 10% faster basically, Haswell isn't till a year after that, basically 2 years from now, Intel has NO significant changes between now and then, AMD has at least one new architecture, but its fairly minor and another major update due around the same time as Haswell.

The leaks are putting AMD within 5% of a 2600k, they are currently 30-40% down, Intel and AMD are both planning a roughly 10% bump next year, meaning AMD has spent the previous 3-4 years, anywhere from 20-50% down in performance on Intel, for the next two years they should be within 5%, maybe even pulling ahead with Piledriver next year.

SO, no one is ignoring Ivybridge, you're ignoring we all know how it will perform, from Intel's own mouths. You're ignoring the potential for speed increases, and that AMD's architecture has FAR more room for tweaking than Intel's at the moment.

AMD and Intel are going on die gpu, Llano is already insanely competitive with Sandybridge in APU's, when factoring in gpu benchmarks and acceleration of aps on GPU, Llano is already ahead, Trinity will INCREASE this lead, and again Intel has nothing new till Haswell, and Ivybridge won't close the gap on Trinity on the gpu, not even close.

Then we've got the rubbish about prices, Passmark lists the x1090t as the best value chip for the performance, Sandybridge is right behind it, the ONLY reason the 2500k is priced where it is, is because of AMD's pricing on the hexcore phenom. Intel's prices are already 100% down to AMD's prices. AMD's prices when their chips improve in speed to be closer, will simply get closer to Intel pricing, not vice versa.
Click to expand...


That's an impressive wall of text but no matter how much you bluster your can't single handedly start to push up AMD's share price back to its former glory.

Is everyone aware that AMD as a group are currently valued at less then what AMD paid for ATI back in 2006? :o
 
Freddie1980 said:
That's an impressive wall of text but no matter how much you bluster your can't single handedly start to push up AMD's share price back to its former glory.

Is everyone aware that AMD as a group are currently valued at less then what AMD paid for ATI back in 2006? :o
Click to expand...

Why would I care a jot about share prices?:confused:

I'm not looking to buy shares in a company, I'm looking to buy a cpu from a company.;)
 
Freddie1980 said:
That's an impressive wall of text but no matter how much you bluster your can't single handedly start to push up AMD's share price back to its former glory.

Is everyone aware that AMD as a group are currently valued at less then what AMD paid for ATI back in 2006? :o
Click to expand...

Yeah probably because of the '08 recession where every company lost out.
 
tbh ill be happy if it is around same performance clock per clock as i7 920 , i7 930 etc and if it clocks on crosshair IV to about 4.5 ghz more then happy, and it if it is better then those i7 it just bonus for me.

the thing about amd i like is that premium motherboards are much more cheaper then intel ones and cpu are accordingly priced for there performance, so upgrade is much more feasible
 
Freddie1980 said:
That's an impressive wall of text but no matter how much you bluster your can't single handedly start to push up AMD's share price back to its former glory.

Is everyone aware that AMD as a group are currently valued at less then what AMD paid for ATI back in 2006? :o
Click to expand...

Well done for posting inane crap that has nothing to do with what I said, or what Sunama said.

AS I listed, EVERYTHING Sunama said was wrong, and invalid, and flew in the face of what everyone else in this thread was saying.

I don't have AMD stocks, but its always obvious who is on straw man arguments when they ignore the points being made and try and bring up something completely not related as a point.

Heres a hint, if stocks don't move down, and they stay the same always, theres no profit to be made. I bought most of my shares at $1.81, I sold when they hit just over $10's, I bought again at around $6, and sold again at $9.50 or so, I bought again at, I forget what, and sold at around $7.50, I'll buy again probably soon, and make another killing.

The further AMD stock goes down now, while people over estimate the bad results and manufacturing problems the MORE I'll make when the stock rebounds...... so even your single, completely unrelated point is wrong, right now I want AMD to go as low as possible so my money goes further when I buy back in.

Here's something else for your final point, if AMD didn't buy ATi when they did, they wouldn't have been able to afford them 3 years later after ATi in the stock market crash had crashed itself to probably $2bil or so. If AMD couldn't buy ATi, they'd have had a very very serious chance of being bankrupt a few years ago before Glofo was split off. Without ATi, AMD would either not exist, or be in a truly epically awful state right now, it was one of the single best moves made by a struggling tech company in the past decade.

Phenom 2 can't compete with Sandybridge, yet, Llano can, Bulldozer won't trounce Sandybridge or Ivy bridge(but will be closer) but Trinity the APU will trounce anything Intel has for the next two years.... Phenoms are in almost zero demand by OEM's and Llano's are in massive demand even from companies who previously did their best to ignore AMD.

Every valuable chip with high volume AMD is selling now, and for the next decade is down to ATi.
 
Last edited:
Intel is not perfect either..

TechPowerup said:
Production of the C1 stepping should have already started, or is about to start. However, the C2 stepping isn’t expected until next year, as the qualification process isn’t expected to be complete until the end of this year.

Waiting for full qualification before purchasing is therefore advised, or an expensive motherboard replacement may be required in the not too distant future.

We wish AMD well with their new processors and chipsets, as competition can only be a good thing here and is clearly needed.
Click to expand...
 
drunkenmaster said:
... and Llano's are in massive demand even from companies who previously did their best to ignore AMD.

Every valuable chip with high volume AMD is selling now, and for the next decade is down to ATi.
Click to expand...

It seems to me like you know stuff about CPU sales that nobody else knows.
Given that AMD is apparently doing so well and that in 2 years time, Intel will basically be flattened (which I don't believe for 1 second), perhaps you should buy some shares in AMD? What's holding you back?
 
Predicament said:
Intel is not perfect either..
Click to expand...

Of course not.

But currently and over the last few years, Intel have always had better CPUs available than AMD.

Where AMD has done well is the budget arena. What they do is sell slower CPUs, but at rock bottom prices (lower than Intel's Celeron CPUs). Intel CPUs typcially carry a slight price premium of AMD.

Right now, the 2500k and 2600k are some of the best CPUs around. AMD currently has nothing available which would persuade an enthusiast to jump ship. Certainly, in a few months, AMD "might" produce something...but there is no evidence of this happening, at this point in time (except for sheer speculation).

Personally, I would buy whatever CPU offers the best bang for the buck. I don't care if it says AMD or Intel on the box. At present, that CPU happens to be the Intel 2500k, which when overclocked offers unrivalled value for money and performance. I trust Drunkenmaster won't attempt to say that the statement in bold, is incorrect? Or will he?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom