Return of AMD FX: My OC'd AMD FX 8150 review with OC'd 6990 - First Results UP! - Page 4

---TK--- · 02-04-2012, 20:27 | posts: 14,673 | Location: New Jersey, USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by mik

just to add.

how come you said nvidia?? he used hd6990 as it is what he has and only get benchmark graphs that is used with an HD6990.

im a newbie here btw but i cant see any reason why people bash someone that worked hard and get no respect. so do you mean that if one benchmark show that intel got beat up that is skewed while if one benchmark show that intel beating up amd that is 100%unbiased.... what do yah reckon?

My suggestion to you would be to read the entire thread before making a post like this. Just skimming the title and reading random posts will result in the post you made here.

Agent-A01 · 02-04-2012, 21:26 | posts: 5,617 | Location: USA

Ah this thread is a pure failure. we all know that BD is trash... move along

---TK--- · *Last edited by ---TK---; 02-04-2012 at 21:44.*

edit not worth it

polyzp · 02-04-2012, 21:55 | posts: 142

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agent-A01

Ah this thread is a pure failure. we all know that BD is trash... move along

scared into your beliefs?

mR Yellow · 02-04-2012, 22:08 | posts: 495 | Location: South Africa

@ Agent, trash? Have u tried the product?
BD has potential. Not going into further discussion over this.

---TK--- · 02-04-2012, 22:18 | posts: 14,673 | Location: New Jersey, USA

agent like all the rest of us here read the proper reviews from various sites and thats how he came to that conclusion, its a bit harsh but essentially true. you have the oc the BD very high in order to get good performance out out it. and bear in mind only a very small percentage of users overclock anything. stock clock the BD is a very bad performing chip. sure oc to 4.8ghz and compare to various chip not nearly as high is going to give the impression that it is a good cpu purchase. OP you told me you would oc the fx to 4.0 and compare it to the 2500k at 4ghz also. that fx at 4.8 is going to look good against a 4c 4t cpu running at a measly 4ghz. I have no problem with your fx 6990 benchmarks per se but you need to level the playing field against bd competition is what I have been saying all along. you have posted these benchmarks on many major sites yet you claim you do not work for amd or get free gear from them. level the playing field and the people on here will take you more seriously

Agent-A01 · 02-04-2012, 22:18 | posts: 5,617 | Location: USA

Yep BD is trash. Cant beat a 4 year old first gen i7 and uses considerably more power. You think thats potential? yeah ok

k3vst3r · 02-04-2012, 22:27 | posts: 2,403 | Location: Manchester UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK4ever

agent like all the rest of us here read the proper reviews from various sites and thats how he came to that conclusion, its a bit harsh but essentially true. you have the oc the BD very high in order to get good performance out out it. and bear in mind only a very small percentage of users overclock anything. stock clock the BD is a very bad performing chip. sure oc to 4.8ghz and compare to various chip not nearly as high is going to give the impression that it is a good cpu purchase. OP you told me you would oc the fx to 4.0 and compare it to the 2500k at 4ghz also. that fx at 4.8 is going to look good against a 4c 4t cpu running at a measly 4ghz. I have no problem with your fx 6990 benchmarks per se but you need to level the playing field against bd competition is what I have been saying all along. you have posted these benchmarks on many major sites yet you claim you do not work for amd or get free gear from them. level the playing field and the people on here will take you more seriously

that an 4.8 BD uses 150w more power at that overclock compared to similar Intel SB at same clock speed

---TK--- · *Last edited by ---TK---; 02-04-2012 at 22:31.*

when you say potential do you mean buy a BD now and wait for windows 8 to arrive?
and seriously every single 1 of op posts have been in this thread alone, I would expect the same in the other sites as well. this smells like amd viral marketing.

k3vst3r · 02-04-2012, 22:30 | posts: 2,403 | Location: Manchester UK

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK4ever

when you say potential do you mean buy a BD now and wait for windows 8 to arrive?

he probably means revised version like phenom 1 was crap but phenom 2 far better, like piledriver would be like rev 2 of BD

---TK--- · *Last edited by ---TK---; 02-04-2012 at 22:40.*

Quote:

Originally Posted by k3vst3r

he probably means revised version like phenom 1 was crap but phenom 2 far better, like piledriver would be like rev 2 of BD

PD is expected to be 10-15% increase only of BD or might be 15-20% do not remember exactly.

OneMustFall · 02-04-2012, 23:06 | posts: 91 | Location: USA

Quote:

I do not need to post anymore in this thread as I said everything

But yet here you are..........come on get a life and post in the intel forum...your starting to get stupid obsessed with this post,your just trolling now.

---TK--- · 02-04-2012, 23:12 | posts: 14,673 | Location: New Jersey, USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneMustFall

But yet here you are..........come on get a life and post in the intel forum...your starting to get stupid obsessed with this post,your just trolling now.

hi there newbie, some new guy like you quoted me asking why I was talking about nvidia in this godawful thread so I asked him to reread the thread. I decided to jump back in. not that its any concern of yours. I post in any section of the forums that interest me. again none of your concern

bonob · 02-04-2012, 23:46 | posts: 328 | Location: France

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK4ever

hi there newbie, some new guy like you quoted me asking why I was talking about nvidia in this godawful thread so I asked him to reread the thread. I decided to jump back in. not that its any concern of yours. I post in any section of the forums that interest me. again none of your concern

man you are talking from post to post that BD is **** and the op making viral marketing and you still says that you are interested in the thread it look like a schizophrenic way to act.

OneMustFall · 02-04-2012, 23:53 | posts: 91 | Location: USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK4ever

hi there newbie, some new guy like you quoted me asking why I was talking about nvidia in this godawful thread so I asked him to reread the thread. I decided to jump back in. not that its any concern of yours. I post in any section of the forums that interest me. again none of your concern

It must concern you quite a bit since you must keep trolling in the AND section,oh wait you must be one of them AMD fanboys that got there heart broken by BD then jumped ship to intel,now all you can do is bash on AMD to get out all that built up hormones you got going on.Seems to be the trend here.

polyzp · 02-04-2012, 23:57 | posts: 142

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneMustFall

It must concern you quite a bit since you must keep trolling in the AND section,oh wait you must be one of them AMD fanboys that got there heart broken by BD then jumped ship to intel,now all you can do is bash on AMD to get out all that built up hormones you got going on.Seems to be the trend here.

haters love to hate

And just because I dont post in other sections of the forum, doesnt mean im a viral marketer. Some guy in anandtech said just because I dont post in AMDzone, means i work for AMD. People are jumping to some crazy conclusions. The review is mostly focused around FX's strengths for now, but who says im not going to do the 2nd half of the review exposing some of its weaknesses (so far my WinRar post does an ok job of exposing one - check it out before you assume anything). My review is continuously growing, I already have more benchmarks tested than alot of review sites

.

---TK--- · 02-05-2012, 00:00 | posts: 14,673 | Location: New Jersey, USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneMustFall

It must concern you quite a bit since you must keep trolling in the AND section,oh wait you must be one of them AMD fanboys that got there heart broken by BD then jumped ship to intel,now all you can do is bash on AMD to get out all that built up hormones you got going on.Seems to be the trend here.

I'm not bashing on amd. If they had good cpus Intel would have to lower prices. My problem with this thread is the clock speed on the Intel side. If all CPU speeds were the same I doubt this thread would even exist. This thread is here to sell BD cpus and if you Google OP name followed by bulldozer you will see this on all the major sites. I have read all the BD reviews on launch and they tell a very different story than this thread.

---TK--- · 02-05-2012, 00:03 | posts: 14,673 | Location: New Jersey, USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by polyzp

haters love to hate

And just because I dont post in other sections of the forum, doesnt mean im a viral marketer. Some guy in anandtech said just because I dont post in AMDzone, means i work for AMD. People are jumping to some crazy conclusions. The review is mostly focused around FX's strengths for now, but who says im not going to do the 2nd half of the review exposing some of its weaknesses (so far my WinRar post does an ok job of exposing one - check it out before you assume anything). My review is continuously growing, I already have more benchmarks tested than alot of review sites

.

No bro I looked you up here every single post is dedicated to this thread alone. Probably the same for all the major sites you posted this review on. You sole concern is promoting amd products.

---TK--- · 02-05-2012, 00:08 | posts: 14,673 | Location: New Jersey, USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneMustFall

It must concern you quite a bit since you must keep trolling in the AND section,oh wait you must be one of them AMD fanboys that got there heart broken by BD then jumped ship to intel,now all you can do is bash on AMD to get out all that built up hormones you got going on.Seems to be the trend here.

I don't bash bd it does not need my help for that. In 4 pages I made several concerns about clock speed differences and was pretty much blown off. Everybody reading these benchmarks take into account the different clockspeeds on the CPU and take this review with a grain of salt gurus. Peace out

OneMustFall · 02-05-2012, 00:18 | posts: 91 | Location: USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK4ever

No bro I looked you up here every single post is dedicated to this thread alone. Probably the same for all the major sites you posted this review on. You sole concern is promoting amd products.

Have you ever considered some people are happy with there amd systems.I fall into that catigory.I had a phenom 9500 before i got the 965,and im perfectly happy with it as other's are happy with upgrading to bulldozer.So your upset that people might buy a BD setup by reading this post!Are you seriuos,wow you do have problems you need to step back check your self and read what you are saying..Is there a DR.Phill in the house.

---TK--- · *Last edited by ---TK---; 02-05-2012 at 00:42.*

That's the goal of viral marketing bro. To sell amd cpus. To make them look better than they really are. Hence my many requests for fair testing were ignored. In many reviews in gaming 6 core thuban was superior to the 8 core BD. that's why you still most amd guys with p2 4 or 6 cores. Or the others went with the price performance king now the 2500k. If your happy with what you have fine by me. The other FX 6 and 4 cores were beaten by athlons and 4 core p2. Some people make decisions buying cpu-s. Maybe even reading this thread. Is it wrong of me to steer them in the right direction? I knew OP was a little off ignoring my claims for a fair clocked CPU fight.

Agent-A01 · 02-05-2012, 01:43 | posts: 5,617 | Location: USA

Yeah compare a 2600k 4.8 to a BD 4.8.. you know the 2600k destroys it then, but this crap review posts high clocked BD to low clocked intel cpus to make it look like BD is actually good, when it is not.

BD is a failure. 8150 is an actual 4core cpu with SMT with dedicated hardware.. makes it perform worse than thubans. and look at those 6core and 4 core BDs.. real 3 cores and 3 SMT threads. the FX4100 is a real dual core with an extra 2 threads of SMT..complete failure. If you are arguing that they aren't crap, you either are a huge AMD fanboy who cant agree with that true statement, an owner of a failure BD cpu who is to proud to admit that he has a crappy cpu, or an amd rep trying to sell a failed cpu series.

---TK--- · 02-05-2012, 02:04 | posts: 14,673 | Location: New Jersey, USA

Careful Agent you don't want to be called a troll like me for speaking the truth. Lol

OneMustFall · 02-05-2012, 02:29 | posts: 91 | Location: USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agent-A01

Yeah compare a 2600k 4.8 to a BD 4.8.. you know the 2600k destroys it then, but this crap review posts high clocked BD to low clocked intel cpus to make it look like BD is actually good, when it is not.

BD is a failure. 8150 is an actual 4core cpu with SMT with dedicated hardware.. makes it perform worse than thubans. and look at those 6core and 4 core BDs.. real 3 cores and 3 SMT threads. the FX4100 is a real dual core with an extra 2 threads of SMT..complete failure. If you are arguing that they aren't crap, you either are a huge AMD fanboy who cant agree with that true statement, an owner of a failure BD cpu who is to proud to admit that he has a crappy cpu, or an amd rep trying to sell a failed cpu series.

So there a true failure so what,whats that mean i cant or other's cant like amd cpu's,what crack pipe you intel fanboys been smokin.
you guys are the true failures,this is how non-newbies represent guru forums,real nice.

---TK--- · 02-05-2012, 02:41 | posts: 14,673 | Location: New Jersey, USA

Were failures because we said BD is a monumental failure? Its not nearly as good as this thread attempts. To make it out as. It is done by comparing bd at 4.8 vs low clocked Intel's. I am no fan of any company. I am a fan of performance. I will not hesitate to switch brands for better performance, unlike some of the other people in this thread. I would never buy a product based on fanboism. That is just dumb brand loyalty.