• 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!

ChrisGTL said:
Retail 2500k £168 on OCUK this week.

AMD need to review their BD prices , OCUK have already reduced by £20 - must be a good reason for this...
Click to expand...

Indeed.
It's pretty sad when the RRP is 220, you can get a 2600k for just a little more.

From another forum, but relevant. ;

Higher single-thread performance benefits all applications, higher core counts only benefits work loads that can take advantage of the core. This can be clearly seen by the 2600K, whose exceptional performance per core means that it is strong in virtually every application tested on it, and even in highly threaded benchmarks, has enough grunt to match the 8-core BD.
Click to expand...
 
Martini1991 said:
If it's performing slower than the 1100T in some applications (The majority) at stock, how isn't that a u-turn? The 8150 is the flagship at a higher clock, more cores, more transistors.
Click to expand...

I don't want to be a pedant but your use of the term 'u-turn' is misleading.

It's both faster and slower dependant on what you're doing, that's now what you'd call a u-turn - I would agree however it's not exactly 'progress' either!
 
oh dear...
im not going to read all posts since NDA lifted this morning,just ask few questions:
where is that pro amd d'master now,since his beloved amd failed so miserably?trying to find another formula for amd "win-win" situation with his page long posts?
i (as many others,who have at least some clue about IT) predicted long time ago that this amd chip will fail epically
and here it is..amd's another fail,but this time they even surpassed they own failure with phenoms TLB bug few years ago..
im just scared about one thing - why would ati still want be part of that amd? They certainly were much better without them..
And to lad (another amd lover) who said that typical Joe's dont care about power consumption..You are deluded.
It is completely pointless to buy this so called "fx" cpu's now from amd..only real fans can do that..
Cant be more happy with 10 month old [email protected] 4 cores atm which basicaly rapes "new" amd 8 core cpu :D
Darn,even my second pc with 1100T looking much better now than this new bull
amd - this is really one epic fail
 
Bleek said:
I don't want to be a pedant but your use of the term 'u-turn' is misleading.

It's both faster and slower dependant on what you're doing, that's now what you'd call a u-turn - I would agree however it's not exactly 'progress' either!
Click to expand...

I said the majority of applications.
If you have a BD 8150FX at 3.6GHZ, it's getting beaten by the 1100T at 3.3GHZ in upto 6 threaded app's in most, thing is, most app's that use 6 threads will also use 8 threads. It'd be better to compete the FX6 with the 1100T.
That's backwards, I.E U-turn.
Maybe I'm overstating.
 
"AMD FX CPUs are back with a vengeance, as validated by the recent feat of setting a Guinness World Records title for ‘Highest Frequency of a Computer Processor,’” said Chris Cloran, corporate vice president and general manager, Client Group at AMD. “While overclockers will certainly enjoy the frequencies the AMD FX processors can achieve, PC enthusiasts and HD media aficionados will appreciate the remarkable experience that AMD FX processors can provide as part of a balanced, affordable desktop system.”

So AMD think that the Guinness Record is a selling point for the end-user?
 
ChrisGTL said:
"AMD FX CPUs are back with a vengeance, as validated by the recent feat of setting a Guinness World Records title for ‘Highest Frequency of a Computer Processor,’” said Chris Cloran, corporate vice president and general manager, Client Group at AMD. “While overclockers will certainly enjoy the frequencies the AMD FX processors can achieve, PC enthusiasts and HD media aficionados will appreciate the remarkable experience that AMD FX processors can provide as part of a balanced, affordable desktop system.”

So AMD think that the Guinness Record is a selling point for the end-user?
Click to expand...

Please don't start this discussion up again. The 10-20 pages of it we had a week or two ago was more than enough.
 
haha what a load of farce AMD are. a laughing stock by many. terrible game performances, higher power iput the SB and 8 slow cores LOL.

RIP AMD. they are losing it big time.
 
Those wondering about which AMD CPU is best for gaming:

The Phenom II X4 980X if you run older games and don't overclock.
The Phenom II X6 1100T if you run any games and overclock to 4GHz+ is a beast. Also if you're running old games you can disable cores to optimise the OC with the right mobo.
The FX-8150 isn't far behind the 1100T as you've seen in my review, but it does perform quite well in BF3 from the numbers I've seen, and should make up some ground in future games that are better optimised for 8 cores.

Windows 8 can boost the FPS by up to 10% (ref. L4D2) due to scheduling changes, but it's unclear if this will also benefit Intel in the same manner or not. Maybe it will, but not quite as much due to core count and the AMD Turbo speeds that are going on.

If you're looking at a whole new system now, there's really only one sensible way to go if you want the best performance at this moment in time and for the foreseeable future, and that's a P67 or Z68 motherboard with the 2500K or 2600K Sandy Bridge CPUs. It pains me slightly to say that AMD isn't as good an alternative as it should be with the FX CPUs, as we all need competition to keep the prices good and market fresh.
 
Last edited:
2vnhzra.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom