• 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!

1)To get that VRAM, you'd need to crossfire two 5970 2GB VRAM cards.
So yes, it is good value.

2)I'll leave the value debate alone, as seriously can't understand how you're justifying a platform with value when it offers a much lower base performance.

1) I don't understand.
CF does not give you more Vram.


2) Because again its 2 different point, features and performances are 2 different points and you can only see it from a performance point and not everyone needs the performance.
In you need performance then you buy Intel, pointing out that AMD motherboards are better value for money is not defending the platform as being better, its just pointing out facts.
 
Last edited:
1) I don't understand.
CF does not give you more Vram.


2) Because again its 2 different point, features and performances are 2 different points and you can only see it from a performance point and not everyone needs the performance.

1.) Your Sapphire has "4GB" VRAM right? (2 x 2GB) = Total of 2GB usable. To get that same performance and VRAM, you'd need to Crossfire two 2GB 5870's (2 x 2GB) = 2GB usable VRAM. (I made a typo)

2.) Not everyone needs the performance? Not everyone needs the "features" leave the value debate alone, we differ. Value for money is what you spend and then use as far as I see it. Having features I don't use doesn't make it good value, as you could get a cheaper board with the features you use, now that would be value.
 
Last edited:
gareth170;20264754[B said:
]i mean a 1090t/1100 beats a 8150 clock for clock even in multi-threaded apps[/B]

so BD would need at least 10 cores just to get to phenom ii performance level clock for clock in multi-threaded
Only in app's that don't use 8 threads.
You can't really do clock for clock from 6 cores to 8 cores unless you compare using the same amount of threads.

I get what you're saying however.

Like I said ages ago, compare an FX6100 to an 1100T at the same clock, you'd be surprised. Hey look, I was right ;)
 
1.) Your Sapphire has "4GB" VRAM right? (2 x 2GB) = Total of 2GB usable. To get that same performance and VRAM, you'd need to Crossfire two 2GB 5870's (2 x 2GB) = 2GB usable VRAM. (I made a typo)

2.) Not everyone needs the performance? Not everyone needs the "features" leave the value debate alone, we differ.

1) 2GB 5870's were still at least £250 cheaper than the 5970 4GB, = £500 cheaper for my if i went 4x 5870 2GB.

2) We know you think that everyone needs performance over everything else.
 
Last edited:
Only in app's that don't use 8 threads.
You can't really do clock for clock from 6 cores to 8 cores unless you compare using the same amount of threads.

I get what you're saying however.

Like I said ages ago, compare an FX6100 to an 1100T at the same clock, you'd be surprised. Hey look, I was right ;)

CINEBENCH uses all threads and the results we've seen so far a 1100t still beats a 8150 clock for clock
 
Last edited:
...which makes no difference whatsoever.

IIRC,AMD released some updates for Linux during the summer regarding Bulldozer.

Edit!!

If you see the leaked slides from AMD,the Windows 8 schedulers give upto 10% improvement in game performance. On top of this even SMT needed proper support in Windows.
 
Last edited:
... there are plenty of home users who use more than me with 12-16 disk RAIDs.

Who exactly are these home users who are using 16 hard disks?
I have 7 hard disks, in total, for 3 computers and that's a lot.

To have a single array of 16 disks, in a home, is very rare.
 
Back
Top Bottom