• 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!

Martini1991 said:
Stop saying AM3+ isn't pointless, there's no evidence it isn't. Same thing really isn't it? ;)

And like I said, an AMD employee stated that the CH IV would obviously handle it better than a basic AM3+ board. Ergo, AM3+ isn't a magic standard.
Click to expand...

Not a magical standard no, But basic AM3+ boards will probably hit the minimum standard better than the expensive AM3 boards would. As they were built to spec, knowing the spec of the new socket.
 
wannabedamned said:
Not a magical standard no, But basic AM3+ boards will probably hit the minimum standard better than the expensive AM3 boards would. As they were built to spec, knowing the spec of the new socket.
Click to expand...

I'd agree that similar priced boards, the AM3+ one would handle BD better, as they're newer etc.
I mean purely mid range.
High end boards after a while seem to incur no advantage. When overclocking on a Phenom II, the chip would reach its limits well before the Extreme could outpace the Formula of the Crosshair IV variety.
 
Martini1991 said:
Stop saying AM3+ isn't pointless, there's no evidence it isn't. Same thing really isn't it? ;)
Click to expand...
no

i've shown/posted differeces between am3 to am3+, not only from asrock. but u still think AM3+ is pointless
Martini1991 said:
And like I said, an AMD employee stated that the CH IV would obviously handle it better than a basic AM3+ board. Ergo, AM3+ isn't a magic standard.
Click to expand...
just wait and see.

also ch v has better VRM's (Extreme Engine Digi+: A Powerful combination of analog and digital Phase Power design elements) than CH IV are only digital , same as the Asus Sabertooth
 
Last edited:
gareth170 said:
no

i've shown/posted differeces between am3 to am3+, not only from asrock. but u still think AM3+ is pointless

just wait and see.

also ch v has better VRM's (Extreme Engine Digi+: A Powerful combination of analog and digital Phase Power design elements) than CH IV are only digital , same as the Asus Sabertooth
Click to expand...

That's down to the board, not the socket. ;)
You haven't given any evidence, you've given companies statements, but no actual CPU evidence.
My Asus Maximus IV has those phases, evidence that it's not an AM3+ thing :p

The improved power design of the CH V probably won't have it clocking further than the CH IV. Point in question, the CH IV Extreme and CH IV Formula will take the same CPU to the same speeds, unless in extreme cases, which we're not talking about.
 
Last edited:
Martini1991 said:
That's down to the board, not the socket. ;)
You haven't given any evidence, you've given companies statements, but no actual CPU evidence.
Click to expand...
what did i say above that "i've shown/posted differeces between am3 to am3+ socket, not only from asrock, but u still think AM3+ is pointless" one said amd may bring chips with larger pins

also i remember seeing am3+ is HT 3.1?
 
Last edited:
gareth170 said:
what did i say above that "i've shown/posted differeces between am3 to am3+ socket, not only from asrock. but u still think AM3+ is pointless

also i remember seeing am3+ is HT 3.1?
Click to expand...

I'm not denying there's differences. I'm saying, will those differences do anything real world performance wise?
If not? It's pointless, second iteration is out on FM2.
Word is BD is crippled for AM3+, I'm not sure I buy it, but it coincides with the "Second interation will rawk!!!111!!" talk.

That then begs the question, why not go straight to FM2? The backwards compatibility is a moot point as people would have already had an AM3 board.

EDIT : If AMD make a CPU with bigger pins, then fair enough, but that doesn't give AM3+ a point :p.
 
Last edited:
Martini1991 said:
I'm not denying there's differences. I'm saying, will those differences do anything real world performance wise?
Click to expand...
thats my point, u can't say AM3+ is pointless untill we know....

i've never said am3 is pointless , but i'm not going to say yeah am3 boards will give same results as am3+ because thees no proof of that

there no performance proof.
 
Last edited:
Martini1991 said:
But BD's supposedly crippled for AM3+. Delve into it, and it makes no sense.
Click to expand...
i wasn't talking about of bd is crippled for AM3+ , or not
Martini1991 said:
I'm on about AM3+ being pointless in a completely performance point of view.
Click to expand...
i can't say about the raw performance but HT 3.1 to HT 3.0 i guess would be a performance hit even tho it maybe very slight

also i think BD turbo core on am3 won't work same as on am3+
 
Last edited:
so if im going to build my first pc in like 10 years for bf3 would you reccomend me to wait till the release of this? . or do you think it wont make much diffrence to the prices of building a sytstem.
 
gareth170 said:
if people wants to get the full performance/features from a AM3+ BD chip, they should get a am3+ board.
Click to expand...

Martini1991 is being pedantic & ignoring the logic of assumed progression because it fits his argument that way.
Of course sometimes the new is no better or in some cases worse, but that's not the norm.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom