sir, i think it's more on d board compatibility side instead of chip. i got sticks which can happily run 2.1k on one board but disliked by another. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by duron
Printable View
sir, i think it's more on d board compatibility side instead of chip. i got sticks which can happily run 2.1k on one board but disliked by another. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by duron
True, but it is a little of both really. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ah_khoo
agreed. it also depends on whether or not the imc of the chip play nice with the ram being used. :)
i thought the IMC has the upper hand when controlling or having compatibility issues
not necessarily coz sometimes same chip & ram can yield different results on different boards sir. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by duron
Man I can't wait! My mother has been wanting a new computer for a while, so when I told her that her next computer could have 8 cores instead of 6, she immediately told me she would wait and she's on pin and needles with excitement, waiting for BD to come out. I'm building her a high powered Adobe Suite Graphics Station. Possibly later with a second screen. I can't wait till I get to mount that new CPU!!!
Is it true that you get better faster processor for the same money as for buying Intel cpu?
---
- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't know, but I know BD is gonna be real fast.... and I don't buy Intel because of their business practices, so really for me its the only other option. Even though there's two companies with lots of options to choose from, it still feels like a very limited choice. I really wish AMD would get its act together and recover from the blows its suffered.
no, that's not true.Quote:
Originally Posted by LLiH
What you will get is a competitively priced CPU that will be better than Intel at some some, while worse at other things. It may be a little cheaper for the power you get, as AMD doesn't have quite the reputation as Intel.
As for the upcoming BD chip from AMD. I suspect multithreaded apps it will be better, while single threaded it will be worse (for your money anyway). Will you notice.... nah, I doubt it.
I hope they're out by the end of September. I'm more than ready :)
After that I'm going to upgrade my GPU with AMD's next big thing when it hits.
yeah & while their at it maybe they could release FM2 by January :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Blacklash
Waiting on FM2 probably is a wise move. I'll be happy if overclocked BD can hang with overclocked SB well. If FM2 ends up blowing BD out of the water in performance, I'll eventually move to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by duron
I'm tired of playing the waiting game so I'm snatching up BD when it hits.
Oh looks like AMD discovered Netburst architecture - I smell patent war :ROTF:
Not if AMD allready have right to some patents of Netburst.
You remember what Intel had to settle with AMD? :)
Bulldozer has nothing to do with Netburst. It has high clock potential,that is the only similarity.
Only one month away now....
What's the expected price on these? I'm not crazy about the FX returning, they were as bad as the old P4 extreme chips with way too high a price for what they did not do.
Wooo! 2 posts since 08', darn forum change over :p:
:up: gotta support the underdog, intel is a damn monopoly!Quote:
Originally Posted by Judaeus Apella
the anticipation for both BD and the HD7000 series is killing me....Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacklash
pffft 2012 is the end of the world remember?? AM3+ will go out in style with no replacements :DQuote:
Originally Posted by duron
Last I read (on digitimes/pcmag) server parts will be released Sept 26th, followed by the desktop parts a few weeks later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus
Having speed demon design does not mean it's like netburst.....Quote:
Originally Posted by SoF
BD will have higher IPC than K10.5, while Netburst had lower IPC than Pentium 3.
It's like AMD decided to make it a speed demon AND a brainiac chip at the same time.
And they designed something superior to hyperthreading (modules).
Actually pushing higher IPC was not the design goal in BD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Apokalipse
Can you elaborate on that? I seriously doubt that BD wasn't meant to be faster clock-for-clock. AMD hasn't pushed real IPC improvements in K10 so that would mean that they would be satisfied with IPC that is comparable to K8 (2003?).
IPC may not have been the largest design goal, but it has indeed increased in the BD core regardless.
But they did push IPC. It just wasn't the only thing they pushed.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Indeed,IPC will probably increase with Bulldozer core but not by much- think 10% in int and similar for FP (without recompile). With Llano we had a >6% (AT measured up to 14% and as low as 3%), just by some smaller tweaks and upping the L2 cache size to 1MB. With BD ,we have a whole new L2 cache that is now shared,we have some massive pipeline changes (to allow higher clock) and we have some major uarchitectural improvements in instruction fecth,decode,branch prediction and last but not least prefetching.All these are a big step up and will offset any IPC impact that longer pipeline (or 3rd ALU) might have had on Bulldozer average IPC.