Oh my god, get over yourself maleficarus. You are so high and mighty. AMD hyped the **** out of Bulldozer, slides, videos, saying it would decimate the competition. And Duke Nukem Forever took 12+ years to deliver, of course it was doomed. You take that long to make any game and it's going to get **** reviews.
It's what I wished too, but at this point AMD just can't leverage it. I think most of us wanted an SB-eclipsing performance, not a "Me too!" one. In any case, no, we don't have to buy these first gen BDs just to support AMD. Their GPU side is pretty much thriving, and, heck, anyone not owning a PII could just get that for an upgrade and/or wait for next gen. BD. It's not like not buying BD right now would kill AMD overnight. In any case, FX-8150 stock isn't exactly readily available in almost everywhere. In Newegg, it's still out of stock with a price tag of $280. TigerDirect still has it at a lower price, though; $260. Then again Newegg has a $15 off promo code, bringing an i5-2500K to $205. And PII X6 1100T is at $190. Hm.
It was called FUD! The thing that I hate the most that causes the most problems in this industry. The spreading of fear, uncertainty and doubt... YOU are one of the biggest FUD posters! I have been a member here long enough to know who is and who isn't. I have been here for over 4 years... Yes I am high and mighty and mature and logical which pisses everyone off on hardware forums LOL!
I think it does pretty good in threaded software, although for gaming, sorry to say but it is crap. It'll hold its own in games when the gpu is being stressed, but that's not really a cpu task.
Are they having a laugh with those BF3 benchmarks? 3 fps? that is in the margin of error and is totaly GPU bound. So I could run that on my Q9650 and get the same frame rate. AMD marketing, who are they trying to fool? Stick a dual card combo or a 6990 in there and we will see which holds 60fps and which doesn't due to crap CPU per clock performance unable to feed the GPU's fast enough. If people just wanted 30 fps they wouldn't need a top end CPU anyway as any high clocked chip of the last 3 years can feed a high end single GPU setup.
Didn't know 'mature' means using exclamation marks and LOLs when arguing. We learn something new everyday, it seems.
Umm, I'm sorry to tell you this but your 460 is not as fast as a 560, especially a 560Ti. At stock clocks the 560Ti is noticeably faster, uses less power and generates less heat. Sure you might be able to OC your 460 to match a stock 560 but then that wouldn't be a fair comparison now would it? Like others have said, these new FX cpu's have been disappointing because of the issues already mentioned.
Bloody hell malerificus, full of yourself much? If you love the new Bulldozer chips so much, feel free to buy a few of them. The fact is, they took four years to develop, were massively hyped up, and were outperformed by a four core processor (and possibly matched by a 2.5 year old Quad Core i7 920) Awesome.
well it's good to know that I'm not the only one out there to think bulldozer was not a complete fail. for many of the benchmarks, it was on par with the 2500k and the 2600k. give it a bit of an OC and it's a faster chip. price is the issue here and a big one at that, have the chip drop to $200 levels and it'd be more attractive. really, AMD isn't THAT far behind. (though, i'm actually pretty surprised about how a 1100t still holds up against a 2500k and for that reason I'm not considering upgrading my rig for quite some time.)
Guys don't waste your time arguing with maleficarus, He is a self proclaimed bigot. I mean seriously read some of the stuff he puts and then says he's smart and mature...oh wow. he just compared a rather largely oc'ed 460 to a stock 560 as been as fast as....well yeah.. fact is if you compared a 460 and 560 at same speeds the 560 would do better and use less power. Prove him wrong and he will still come up with some crazy way in his head how he's right, don't waste your time.
To be honest, for everyone who games at 1080p with 4xAA, the fx will run those games just as well as the competition. And it's handy in multithreaded apps. But yeah, AMD still messed up a bit with this one.
I didn't try anything, you are incorrect and full of crap. The 460 is not faster than the 560, even with your 460 clocked according to your specs it would only be the same speed as a stock clocked non-Ti 560. Not to mention the fact that the 560 would consume less power and generate less heat than your OC'd 460. Seriously, who in the hell are you trying to fool? Oh well, believe what you want if it makes you happy. Back on topic. While I don't consider the FX line a failure, I can't help but feel let down by this first generation as I was really expecting a bit more. More performance and less power/heat over the previous line, and overall they really didn't deliver.
playing the latest games, take BF3 for example. Why not take another game, oh wait, you can't, as thats the only game its good in. They seriously can't expect people to spend over £200 just on BF3 (the game + a bully).
Actually that would be Intel who succeeded to sell more P4 than AMD succeeded in selling AMD64's despite the latter being better. Intel inside, the jingle and all that..
