So I wnet and bought a Bulldoser

StonedPenguin · 17 Nov 2011 at 12:40

loldozer.

Marine-RX179 · 17 Nov 2011 at 12:50

Cool Breeze said:
No Offence but your Q6600 probably draws more juice on Idle...

Only around 30-33W...not enough to keep me warm

Under load though....it's not too bad on keeping me nice and warm, with the 100W~120W...but I think the 5850 dump more heat keeps me warmer

Cool Breeze · 17 Nov 2011 at 12:54

kedge said:
Did you feel the earth move?
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51D6DDTZZZL.jpg

Lol very good !

Marine-RX179 · 17 Nov 2011 at 12:54

Bleek said:
Considering at idle the Bulldozer consumes LESS power than a Phenom II x4 and x6, and clock for clock very close to the Intel i5 and i7, you'd be right.

Under load at stock clocks it's about ~20-25w higher which is some way off his 200-300w comment.

Fail at reading is fail. I clearly said overclock and you go and talk about idle. FX8150 at 4.6~4.8GHz does consume 200~300W extra comparing to i5 2500K at 4.6~4.8GHz under load.

I was trying to make something positive out of the Bulldozer and say extra performance, gaming and keeping one warm at the same time, and you are trying to say it doesn't do that lol.

Bleek · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:13

Marine-RX179 said:
Fail at reading is fail.

You question my reading capacity and yet can't even compose a correctly structured sentence.

"lols and fails"

And yes of course your 'heating the room' philosophy was in defence of Bulldozer, it was clearly a positive comment. How silly of me to have missed that.

Martini1991 · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:18

Bleek said:
Considering at idle the Bulldozer consumes LESS power than a Phenom II x4 and x6, and clock for clock very close to the Intel i5 and i7, you'd be right.

Under load at stock clocks it's about ~20-25w higher which is some way off his 200-300w comment.

Bleek · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:25

Martini1991 said:

Check a few reviews, at idle clock for clock it's much closer to the Intel brigade than the AMD.

I appreciate overclocked and under load it punches past everything, but that wasn't my point, and lets be frank how often is your cpu at 100%?

Bleek · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:32

Martini1991 said:

As an example and using Anandtech figures as per this article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/9

If we take the Intel 2600k as our baseline the AMD is using 9% more power running at 6% higher clock. That's pretty close, no?

JAGRocks09 · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:35

Bleek said:
As an example and using Anandtech figures as per this article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/9

If we take the Intel 2600k as our baseline the AMD is using 9% more power running at 6% higher clock. That's pretty close, no?

I wouldn't say it's that close, you also have to consider that the performance per clock is less for Zambezi

Bleek · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:42

JAGRocks09 said:
I wouldn't say it's that close, you also have to consider that the performance per clock is less for Zambezi

I'm sorry but you're missing my point.

My comment about power consumption was in reply to a flippant remark on how hot and power hungry Bulldozer is. As a result performance hasn't been mentioned or considered.

Martini1991 · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:43

When overclocked under load, it's very power hungry, as is SB-E. Under idle though? BD's not that bad at all in comparison to Phenom II. I get your point.

Bleek · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:45

Martini1991 said:
But it uses more wattage, for lower performance.
I get what you're saying, however it's a moot consolation imo.

Agree performance per watt is an entirely different story, but I was commenting on simple wattage.

edit: just saw you edited because you saw my previous post, we're stepping over each other here! But we're in agreement.

Martini1991 · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:46

Bleek said:
Agree performance per watt is an entirely different story, but I was commenting on simple wattage.

I changed my post when I re-read your post.

Bleek · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:47

Martini1991 said:
I changed my post when I re-read your post.

And I edited mine when I saw your edit... how long can we keep this up?

Martini1991 · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:49

My mind has blown.

Marine-RX179 · 17 Nov 2011 at 13:52

Bleek said:
You question my reading capacity and yet can't even compose a correctly structured sentence.

"lols and fails"

And yes of course your 'heating the room' philosophy was in defence of Bulldozer, it was clearly a positive comment. How silly of me to have missed that.

If you are taking a serious approach to this thread, then you really are doing it wrong. There's no need for more posts like "OMGZZZ!! You should have bought a i5 2500K instead!"...there's enough of those threads around.

Bleek · 17 Nov 2011 at 14:02

Marine-RX179 said:
If you are taking a serious approach to this thread, then you really are doing it wrong. There's no need for more posts like "OMGZZZ!! You should have bought a i5 2500K instead!"...there's enough of those threads around.

I was merely balancing out all the negative comments with an objective and realistic one. There was nothing fanciful about it.

PiKe · 17 Nov 2011 at 14:05

I was hoping this thread was in GD.

GTO656 · 17 Nov 2011 at 14:13

hw many watts does the bulldoze use?

DanielGrout · 17 Nov 2011 at 14:14

Please can we get back on track.

I'm interested in how it is for day to day.

My P2 is bottlenecking my GFX performance in BF3 - I can see all 4 cores maxed. I guess it's the CrossFireX + the extreme resolution.