Yes, I'm curious about this tooQuote:
Originally Posted by nex_73
Printable View
Yes, I'm curious about this tooQuote:
Originally Posted by nex_73
God this reminds me of all the other massively failed launches, R600, Fermi and the first Phenom. I'm sorry the writing is on the wall this is not going to end well.
If they really got things fixed they really need to leak a benchmark that doesnt show it as a bloated piece of ***** before the bad press adds up. Incredible as it sounds this place always is the mover and shaker in the overclocking industry, if word gets out that we all think the chip blows ass it'll eventually filter into the press; ie anandtech and tom's. Then the :banana::banana::banana::banana: hits the fan.
I've been holding out hope that Bulldozer would outperform SB but but this kind of kills it. Look like there won't be much in the way of real upgrades until 2012?
baah they don't even beat a Phenom 1055 in thoses bench with 2 additionnal cores ( ofc i don't speak about SPI ) .. you should wait 2014 .. ( joke inside )
Holy :banana::banana::banana::banana: almost 1,5 Vcore and not stable in 4,1ghz whats wrong ?
Please, save us all and go buy sandy bridge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentential
You troll and spread :banana::banana::banana::banana: all over every one of these threads just to steer other people away from AMD...which is funny since you own an 1090T.
OBVIOUSLY IF IT REALLY PERFORMS WORSE THAN ATHLON 64 THEY WILL NOT RELEASE IT. :ROTF:
Just to be clear, a 6400 X2 @ about 3.4 Ghz gets 24-25 seconds in 1M.
Heck, i beat that superpi score with my Opteron 165...
yes i kn ow this,but everyone knows they find a way into the market and forums.it just seems to be a bad idea to purposely gimp your ES's,knowing they will be leaked?Quote:
Originally Posted by imamage
i cant wait to see they real ones and i hope they do awesome.i want one
Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanek
Exactly. This is serious business here!
Hey everyone, time to draw your conclusions of BD performance from this pristine ES sample that is slower than AMDs current lineup. Obviously this is a desirable source of information of real performance numbers? Lets do more benchmarks with this ES and continue to compare the results while drawing even more very accurate conclusions. :clap:
It's a B0 ES that's what's wrong :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by PytonOrm
Seriously, those who compare it with SB all the time go and buy SB.
I would be happy if BD was 15-20% faster than Thuban, since it would be a nice upgrade.
Oh no! Their ES sample sales are sure to suffer!! Thanks for clearing that up for us. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by QuadDamage
What the hell is this circus all about?? :confused:
First chiphell makes BD benching a bing event, now another person posts youtube videos like it wasn't any big deal...
With so mane people having no regard to what a NDA means, I can perfectly understand why AMD sends out crippled samples, if they want to hold their cards close to their chest.... :shakes:
i did not compare just asking :) great if u can get better performance than your own system. but its early es chip so thats crap thing, hope better with retail thenQuote:
Originally Posted by repman
Yes I know you didn't compare (but others did), I didn't write that post very well so I apologize for that :);)Quote:
Originally Posted by PytonOrm
1. B0 ESQuote:
Originally Posted by PytonOrm
2. Mem @ 2400MHz
Then you have this:
6300MHz@1.55v?
31.5x multiplier seems weird, as bingo13 told us it's below 27x for the B0 ES
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...postcount=1217
Exactly...Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
Honestly I find these pre-working part benchmarks to be as useful as life advice by DJ.
Look if we already know AMD is keeping their mouths shut until launch time, why is it so hard for people to just wait? Much less needless panicking
Pretty much this, even eraly silicon (A0) form intel usually gives the same performance as retail chips (only is lower frequency) and so ppl usualy can judge pretty accurate how retail will perform.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
This chip on the other hand is pretty bougs... nothing seems to be right, so I wouldn't give to much on the performance numbers.
Maybe its just me, but logic seems to suggest exactly the opposite.Maybe thats why intel doesnt cripple es`s , and is not such a "hush hush" about their affairs.Quote:
With so mane people having no regard to what a NDA means, I can perfectly understand why AMD sends out crippled samples, if they want to hold their cards close to their chest....
Somebody earlier said any publicity is good publicity, but i think this doesnt apply to any technology, as it becomes "tainted" with a "feeling" amongst the less educated ones.
Just like "intel is always better" and "amd is unstable" kind of thing, which prevailed amongst many to this day.
Its clear that even many among us doesnt see why this sample performs poorly, all gloom and doom started even here.I dont even wanna know what going on less informed forums.
edit:
I often see "leaks" about apple products, and somewhow they almost always make seem like the product is great, for example ipad 2 was allegedly coming with some uber high res screen, in reality it had same screen, but the leak was putting it above average,not below.
Im pretty sure some people who bought this, to this day think they have uber resolution...
what baffles me is that people from this community (obviously not you :D)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
just go out and post whatever just so that they either increase their post count or just to give themselves a true sense of self... this threads tend to look more and more like the batcave.... I mean a troll-cave
How do you know AMD crippled samples? What would be the point, everyone expects retail chip to be better than early ES anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
There is no benefit to AMD not publishing great numbers if available, unless they are going to release DB after IB.
Back in the day of the A64 AMD leaked out chips and there was benches all over the net before nda was up.If they had a monster we would of seen it.
You mean one 800Mhz K8 that was dog slow? Sure,looks exactly like this "superman" Zambezi ES.Records are gonna fall :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Skratch
edit:
found one!
Wow,1.4Ghz A64 barely faster,or sometimes much slower(!) than Athlon XP @ 1.4Ghz.Yikes! We all know that A64 was indeed 15-20% faster than Athlon XP,it's all history now.I'm just trying to show how ridiculous above quoted post is.
edit 2:
look at the gaming tests of A64 @ 1.4Ghz.It sucks :p:.It must be slower than P4 @ 1.4GHz and much slower than Athlon XP @ 1.4Ghz.Oh wait,it turned out it was much faster in the end.Sorry for that :(.
I cant remember his name but there were a few chips that were leaked to show gaming performace and for the first time people could break 25k 3d01 with a stock card.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
A64s were pounding intels chips and amd had them leaked.its perfect marketing to slow sales down from the other side.
Just like we get reviews of up coming ssds to stop you from buy one thats out now.
quote me right now,BD WILL FAIL,that is why the freaking ceo was fired right when the sandy bridges benches came out.they new there chip was going to fail against SB.
A lot of people believe they know how to run companies, product launches and PR... could it be that a lot of members here are CEO material? Headhunters must be regularly checking this forum :D