Return of FX : GA-990FXA-UD7 - OC'd AMD FX 8150 / 6990 Performance Comparison Review - Page 2

Agent-A01 · 05-04-2012, 15:54 | posts: 5,710 | Location: USA

Yes gaming is a real world test

polyzp · 05-05-2012, 00:25 | posts: 142

Only you would think im "mad" haha. What i meant was, gaming under 1080p resolution with a gtx 690 is not a good representation of "real world" performance.

---TK--- · 05-05-2012, 00:34 | posts: 14,938 | Location: New Jersey, USA

no, I said this before testing cpu performance at low resolutions show a cpu`s strengths or weaknesses. being a "benchmarker" I thought this would be obvious to you?

polyzp · 05-05-2012, 22:57 | posts: 142

Quote:

Originally Posted by ---TK---

no, I said this before testing cpu performance at low resolutions show a cpu`s strengths or weaknesses. being a "benchmarker" I thought this would be obvious to you?

It does show its strengths and weaknesses but doesnt give a complete understanding for real world performance. For such a high end card, anything under 1080p isnt realistic. Id like to see eyefinity gaming results on an overclocked FX vs an overclocked 3770k for the gtx 690, not 1024x768. This to me is a more realistic comparison for a 1200 USD GPU. Te i7 is the obvious winner either way, but its more realistic to benchmark real world tests under real world conditions is my point.

IcE · 05-05-2012, 23:00 | posts: 7,097 | Location: Toledo, Ohio

Quote:

Originally Posted by polyzp

It does show its strengths and weaknesses but doesnt give a complete understanding for real world performance. For such a high end card, anything under 1080p isnt realistic. Id like to see eyefinity gaming results on an overclocked FX vs an overclocked 3770k for the gtx 690, not 1024x768. This to me is a more realistic comparison for a 1200 USD GPU. Te i7 is the obvious winner either way, but its more realistic to benchmark real world tests under real world conditions is my point.

Doing "real world" benches just masks the weaknesses of any given component, and is therefore pointless. In the "real" world, an E6600 is still good enough.

polyzp · 05-06-2012, 06:39 | posts: 142

Quote:

Originally Posted by ice445

Doing "real world" benches just masks the weaknesses of any given component, and is therefore pointless. In the "real" world, an E6600 is still good enough.

I disagree, an E6600 is pushing it. Any two core cpu would show significant pitfalls in any modern game even with GPUs much less powerful than the gtx 690.

IcE · 05-06-2012, 09:10 | posts: 7,097 | Location: Toledo, Ohio

Quote:

Originally Posted by polyzp

I disagree, an E6600 is pushing it. Any two core cpu would show significant pitfalls in any modern game even with GPUs much less powerful than the gtx 690.

Given the situation and prevalence of DX9 games on antiquated engines, a dual core is not as hard to game with as you might think. BF3 can still get 40 fps average in a 32 man on an E8400.

DarthElvis · 05-06-2012, 22:34 | posts: 171

Any test, anywhere, you need a 5-800Mhz overclock to even be competitive with an i5,or even a Thuban. BD is a failure, Pure and simple. Clock for clock, the entire FX line is outperformed by SB, IB, and even AMD's previous generation. Spin it anyway you want, you now have 2 threads here trying to spin this garbage into something worthwhile. It's not working. You can't polish a turd.

Oh well, maybe PD will bring something to the table.