FX 8120

Zeed · 20 Mar 2012 at 22:21

hehe so true.
Bf3 might be a bad examople tho. That engine is so good on multicore cpus. Try skyrim with high rez texture pack and ****

Martini1991 · 20 Mar 2012 at 22:30

MNA24 said:
Well here is my GPU usage on BF3 playing the single player mission "Fear No Evil" at 1080p with everything on ultra:

Is this a bottleneck?

Yes it is.
And BF3's very GPU limited and is highly multithreaded.
Running a game that isn't so multithreaded will high light the bottleneck more.

Point being, BD isn't worth the purchase.

Martini1991 · 20 Mar 2012 at 22:31

Stas823 said:
I have rome total war and I'll play it tonight just for you

You need to be end game, and if you come up with some crap like it's running amazing, you're lying

.

MNA24 · 20 Mar 2012 at 23:02

Martini1991 said:
Yes it is.
And BF3's very GPU limited and is highly multithreaded.
Running a game that isn't so multithreaded will high light the bottleneck more.

Point being, BD isn't worth the purchase.

Well if piledriver turns out to be a bag of balls I may consider a move to purchase my first ever Intel cpu. As the for the moment, the mild bottleneck isn't doing me no great harm thankfully.

Well this has certainly been informative :cool:

Martini1991 · 20 Mar 2012 at 23:05

MNA24 said:
Well if piledriver turns out to be a bag of balls I may consider a move to purchase my first ever Intel cpu. As the for the moment, the mild bottleneck isn't doing me no great harm thankfully.

Well this has certainly been informative

Oh. it won't do, but it's certainly proof that AMD's BD is naff for gaming when CPU's that are cheaper, predate it, and have half the cores are better

2500k is pushing 3 cards better than your CPU can push 2, it speaks volumes.

Annoys me to hell and back when people preach "GPU IS MOST IMPORTANT PART!".

MNA24 · 20 Mar 2012 at 23:13

Martini1991 said:
Oh. it won't do, but it's certainly proof that AMD's BD is naff for gaming when CPU's that are cheaper, predate it, and have half the cores are better
2500k is pushing 3 cards better than your CPU can push 2, it speaks volumes.

Annoys me to hell and back when people preach "GPU IS MOST IMPORTANT PART!".

I think with all these sweaty beast GFX cards on their way like the rumoured GTX 780 the CPU is going to be crucial.

p.s nice speakers man, ive got a set of them myself, LOVE the basssssssss!

danjama · 20 Mar 2012 at 23:45

Martini1991 said:
I'm not saying it isn't an upgrade, it obviously is, just the extent you'd notice in gaming is going to be nil.
Your CPU's bottlenecking your cards, it's amusing you handicapped your rig with a bulldozer.

wow, you're not coming across very well here, mate

Martini1991 · 21 Mar 2012 at 07:46

danjama said:
wow, you're not coming across very well here, mate

By being completely factual?

paradisiac · 21 Mar 2012 at 08:16

danjama said:
wow, you're not coming across very well here, mate

from what I remember, before bulldozer came out, Martini1991 defended it to the hill and was expecting great things from it. I also believe he held off from jumping on the SB bandwagon, until official information about BD came out.
so in my opinion he is one of the best people to take advice from, as he is less bias than most*

*if I am wrong, then I appologise

Martini1991 · 21 Mar 2012 at 08:21

paradisiac said:
from what I remember, before bulldozer came out, Martini1991 defended it to the hill and was expecting great things from it. I also believe he held off from jumping on the SB bandwagon, until official information about BD came out.
so in my opinion he is one of the best people to take advice from, as he is less bias than most*

*if I am wrong, then I appologise

I held out for BD until that *3 months time slide*.
And they still missed that window.

Up until about then I was positive about BD, it wasn't until stuff started trickling out and stuff I saw, which then turned my opinion massively negative, which, when BD launched, I was right to be so.

I was also right about BD's lack of core/thread priority too, in that when it first launched, the threads would go down the cores, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 instead of the 1,3,5,7,2,4,6,8 it should have done (Like 2600k does)
I did expect the FX8150 to constantly best the 2600k in highly multithreaded applications, I was wrong, which is amusing, as my opinion at that time wasn't great of BD, and it still managed to let me down.

paradisiac · 21 Mar 2012 at 08:22

Martini1991 said:
I held out for BD until that *3 months time slide*.
And they still missed that window.

Up until about then I was positive about BD, it wasn't until stuff started trickling out and stuff I saw, which then turned my opinion massively negative, which, when BD launched, I was right to be so.

I was also right about BD's lack of core/thread priority too, in that when it first launched, the threads would go down the cores, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 instead of the 1,3,5,7,2,4,6,8 it should have done (Like 2600k does)

thought so. I was looking for big things from AMD too, but I went SB pretty early on as the upgrade bug was too much.
is the problem down to the hardware or currently not properly compatible software?

Martini1991 · 21 Mar 2012 at 08:25

paradisiac said:
thought so. I was looking for big things from AMD too, but I went SB pretty early on as the upgrade bug was too much.
is the problem down to the hardware or currently not properly compatible software?

It's nothing to do with compatibly, it's simply the fact that software isn't ready for a CPU which depends on all its 8 cores being used to best the competition

.

One could argue, BD's ahead of its time, but then, how so? The CPU should perform in all situations, which frankly it doesn't, in some cases slower than the 2009 Phenom II's.

When I'm out later, I'll expect the usual suspects to come in and have a completely opposite and sometimes over the top opinion to my post

MNA24 · 21 Mar 2012 at 08:41

Martini1991 said:
By being completely factual?

I think he was hinting at the lack of tact in the delivery of your fact sandwich.

gareth170 · 21 Mar 2012 at 11:02

tbh im the best people to take advice from. i say it how it is. i bought a 8150 so yes i would know more about it. it is crap compared to the 1090t/1100t and 2500k

most people here know i've always prefered amd but after getting a 8150 enough was enough and i decided to go for intel and im so glad i did

simple as that

Stas823 · 21 Mar 2012 at 11:19

mmj_uk said:
Given the trend of the thread I'm sure it will run amazingly well for you.

(In the same way that a Ford Mondeo owner is perfectly happy until they drive a Ferrari. )

Haha how very true it did run at 30-40fps so not great

Martini1991 · 21 Mar 2012 at 11:31

Stas823 said:
Haha how very true it did run at 30-40fps so not great

Not end game it didnt, or at least not with my settings, I can bring it down to 8 fps on my sandy

Stas823 · 21 Mar 2012 at 13:24

Martini1991 said:
Not end game it didnt, or at least not with my settings, I can bring it down to 8 fps on my sandy

I only played a quick battle on all top settings

appletree · 21 Mar 2012 at 15:26

Martini1991 said:
It's amusing you handicapped your rig with a bulldozer.

Hehe - I like ring of it: "I handicapped my rig with bulldozer"

This pretty much sums my idea of Bulldozer's value in a PC build. You can hardly find a better fitting word than "handicap".

Martini1991 · 21 Mar 2012 at 15:27

Stas823 said:
I only played a quick battle on all top settings

Well then that's abysmal, and also not the settings I use

Zuban · 21 Mar 2012 at 15:56

its a bit like if you had the choice of two cars, both identical except for the choice of two different engines, both the same price, both will get you to your destination, but one will get you there using less fuel and in less time than the other. why would you choose the worse one!.