Discussion in 'Processors and motherboards AMD' started by polyzp, Jan 6, 2012.
8150 is a waste of money IMO. I would rather buy a 8120.
Metro is a very GPU hungry game i could play it on my phenom II x3 720 BE @ 3.6ghz just fine
EDIT: oh lol i only noticed the avg fps ... yea theres a big difference in the min fps.
metro 34 min is far better than 22 min fps that would be rather noticeable
no, SMT and CMT are still different things mate. CMT still performs worse today because it hasnt got the right patches yet, softwares still doesn't know how it works unlike SMT, almost everything knows about it, its already optimized. btw, im not trying to make s1hit. im starting a discussion ^_^
have you provided something useful yet?? all i saw you do was say, BD is sh1t. not worth the money, a FAILDOZER.
oh, did BD bottlenecked the HD6990?? it means that BD can handle high end setups just like yours . if you will see, the phenom II x6 bottlenecks more than BD. if you have seen poly's graphs, there is a graph there that the hd6990w/BD scored closely with
not all people only play games on their computer, some play games while encoding, and doing some F@H. some uses it for their work(i guess not since it consumes alot of power on full load ), maybe those people chose BD because BD excel in the apps they are using. some are enthusiast of amd(enthusiast = follower), and some just curious why it turned out to be like that.
lol, im not trying to insult anyone, maybe just trying to prove a fact, but i told in the last sentence that i was joking... can you people not be serious at all things?? or just guilty perhaps// maybe thats why you get mad at simple jokes
BD is not crap, it just did not reached peoples expectations.
True, but the point i'm trying to make is that it is a better Arch than Phenom.
Yes, it's still in it's infancy but will improve. AMD in the CPU department are behind intel (apart from Llano).
What's made AMD attractive was the price performance ratio.
Which is lacking this generation, 8150 more expensive than 2500k yet slower (uses more electricity too than SB an gives lower performance), often no better than phenom 2 an far more expensive than it. That's why people see BD as bit of flop this time round
I know that and i also am aware of Bulldozers performance with some apps that its equal or even surpasses the 2600k by a bit.
But i think that most people upgrade their CPUs because of gaming...otherwise i don't think amd would step down from the high end CPU market for a while. Also i think that most people who need a CPU for work or other CPU intensive apps they are willing to get the best CPU possible and again...they skip AMD and buy intel's 1000$ cpu.
Edit: also i had been an AMD user until i bought my 2500k ...i understand what you're saying with the "curious why it ended up like this" part...i was a bit tempted to buy the BD even tough reviews said it was bad..but im glad i didn't. Also i wanted for a long time to change to intel but i didn't had the money to buy a mobo also.
haha, yeah, i also have friends that used to have amd, but jumped to intel due to the bad reviews.
but for servers, opterons give you the bang for the buck ^_^. still depends on the program though, but with the usual real world apps most servers used, opterons excel on it. but as i said, consumers must know what every cpus is more than capable of so they can choose which brand they will buy that excel on what they do.
does anyone know if the next batch of BD will be still produce by global foundries or by tsmc like AMD gpu?
DIRT 3 revisited ..AGAIN! FX @ 4.0 Ghz. Tomorrow Fritz Chess benchmark, then after Cinebench 10, then SpecviewPerf 11
Ahem, this is not my section but something's gotta be done.
Anymore insults towards another member, accusations of trolling, or thread derailing will result in some punishment. All this guy is trying to do is post benchmarks of BD, discussing these benchmarks are one thing, insulting members or calling people fanboy's is another.
:banana: were all friends here , no need for personal attacks, but in their defence, calling someone a fan boy isnt really that bad haha, uke2: let karma do its thing
your graph shows @4.8ghz
Wasn't it supposed to be 4.0ghz for both chips to be fair.
Page 2!! c1:
I use intel...
Most games, particularly with a 60hz monitor (which most people still use) have meaningless differences.
The fact remains that for the typical person, BD or i7 performance is 'all the same'.
I wouldn't use BD for 120hz gaming (which I do...), but that's a non-issue for most people.
It's slower than i7 for large compute... which few people do.
I agree that the 2500K is the value king right now. Better than BD, better than SB-E.
I think its great what your doing in this forum ...It just shows us, the customers that decided to pick an AMD based platform what and what it cannot do, in terms of the competing product(s), since other processor makers are not up to competing in this tight market.
i'll post it for you so you wont bother backreading anymore, i know its kinda hard to backread. hehe..
sorry sir if i called agent a fanboy... i know calling someone a fanboy is an insult, but he insulted someone that is pure innocent... in my post i said i was joking, but in his post he is not ^_^. he should better off read the netiquette. my apologies again sir
Ok im not trying to be mean here or anything im just trying to make some sense from this:
FX 8150 @4ghz at 1920x1080p with 8x AA on Ultra you get 125.1 avg fps
i7-3960X @ 4.2ghz at 1680x1050 with 8x AA on ultra gets 119.52 avg fps (@1080p 110.60 fps)
Again...im not trying to prove anything just trying to make some sense out of this..im a bit tired so if i made any mistakes don't bash me please.
i cant see any reason for them bashing you... XD why do you seem to worry so much? XD
anyways, maybe DIRT3 is really optimized to use multi core/multi threaded processor so they work great on 8 core. they are properly coded unlike some games that only runs on two threads... XD