Discussion in 'Processors and motherboards AMD' started by Mikcannon, Nov 2, 2011.
^^^you must have missed all the reviews putting BD against the amd thuban and losing.
Ignorance is bliss.
I know i guess i posted in the Intel troll thread.
Since when did Intel even come close in Graphics. Try playing a graphics intensive game without relying on another companies graphics card, I can do that with AMD.
see the problem with being a fanboy is you are limiting yourself to 1 company. sure the gpu`s are good, but you chose a dog of a cpu to be in a gaming rig. me I have no alligence to any company. if company A sucks I buy company B. the post I quoted does not make sense to me.
Snappy can you post RE5 (dx10) benchmark score?
Run fixed bench (2nd) and with everything else maxed - 4xaa or 8xaa its up to you (it doesnt matter since its cpu bound).
I'll try it when i get home. I'm an over the road truck driver and typing on my Intel Laptop hah.
Bulldozer failed for two reasons, one, clock for clock, the IPC is actually slower than Denab and SIGNIFICATELY so. I believe AMD ending up not working on IPC increases because they hoped they would be able to clock the CPU at the spend it was designed for ... 4.5ghz stock. At that speed the IPC differneces would not have matter and it would have been the fastest CPU on the market.
But we all know intel tried to have a long pipeline (bulldozer is like 20 steps compared to sandy bridge and denab when are 12-13 i believe) super fast clocking CPU .. but they couldn't solve the power issues... IDK how AMD thought they, with their 1/10th of resources compared to intel, would find a way to prevent bulldozer from being a power hog..
AMD has two options, find a way to get the clocks to a 4.5ghz stock with voltages at acceptable levels, or improve the IPC so that at least clock for clock it at least matches denab...
I would be interested in this as well
It's not about company size or resources. AMD was a considerably smaller company when they released the K7 Athlon...but managed to outperform Intel.
In game settings everything turned to max. single 5850. (still waiting for my 2nd 5850 for xfire)
CPU-Z of processor settings.
not bad for a single 5850, can you run unigine and 3d mark 2011 pls
Idk 100fps looks kinda weak at 4.5ghz..I get 96.5fps at 3.57ghz.
Its extremely cpu bound and i see he has the same spikes at first 20-30sec as me (1st part 125fps, 2nd part 117fps, lowest 87fps).
heh to be honest i was expecting something like thatc1:
Even in a CPU bound scenerio....the GPU will still have some impact, and your's is a good bit faster than his...
and im at ultra low reso.. :infinity:
Really when i changed from 4xaa to 32xcsaa, added AO-Quality and fps stayed the same heh..Well at least in 2nd (fixed) benchmark.
Anybody with a p2 or i7 have a 5850 to test?
Of course it's selling out. Not many were put out, and people are getting them because they'll be worth alot to collectors one day.
its called the avg consumer does not read reviews or do research. very bad for the amd guys. if this crap sells good whats instore next piledriver with a 10-15% increase selling at a premium? no thanks
people here always look at a PC with the gamers eyes, but the fact is bulldozer is a very good CPU look at the review posted on guru, the fx is always second or third behind the i7 2600k or the 980X on video transcoding and multi threaded apps. People who buy hardware are not only gamers keep that in mind.
'BD' !! What a mess by amd !! Are they going forword or backward ? If performance is same or low then ur price tag should be remain low !!
Being a user of amd i feel sorry for them !!