bulldozer has had serious problems. I've lowered my expectations.
Printable View
bulldozer has had serious problems. I've lowered my expectations.
If you don't want BD, why are you still posting in BD threads? I keep seeing you drop by to make negative comments, why not just move on? Everyone wins. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
With DDR4 around the corner in 2012/2013, I wonder if AMD would start taking precautions with this with AM3/FX chipsets although that is a long time to go without releasing a new chipset (however X58 lasted forever almost)
-PB
One question everyone should be asking.
WHERE IN THE :banana::banana::banana::banana: ARE THE MODS AND ADMINS.
this thread is a trainwreck
Well you banned movieman, you should blame yourself.
:p:
ok but still.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
one nice thing about this thread.
It has given several people the name tag with dumbass written on it
I think that forums name is ANA__TECH , heheheh , I tried to explain but as they say , If donkey is thirsty you can provide water but donkey still has to do the drinking , you cant do drinking part for the donkey.Quote:
Originally Posted by richierich
Why the heck are all these people basing BD on a CRIPPLED ES sample used specifically for testing. These were crippled for a reason, to prevent leak to the general public and I'll say it's working as damned intended since it's pretty obvious that NDA for all these reviewers is like pinky swearing to 5 year old.
But serious can the trolls leave or grow up.
I think thats more of a imc support issue than a chipset issue and I really doubt ddr4 is very big on the radar at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by paulbagz
drawback from of hype.Quote:
Originally Posted by kazuyakun
imo next time someone (intel/amd) should try to hide everything about upcoming cpu. including even a fact that they are developing a new thing. just released when the product will be finished.
Nooooooooo, an environment of 100% rumor, speculation & FUD would lead to total chaos.Quote:
Originally Posted by prznar1
Well considering most RAM kits are starting to push the thresholds of DDR3 it would be starting to make itself known sooner or later.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
Either way, keen to see BD do AMD proud.
-PB
added V.S. 2500K at 4G video
if there would be no upcomming product, there would be no chaos ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
you know I am a 100% intel fanboy, but i would never base anything on early ES samples, especially these. PPL have too high expectations for BD, its going to be good guys no doubt, but don't think its going to be a SB rapist. It shoudl be about equal if not a bit below to SB in performance, that is what i would guess, but they'll prob OC to 7ghz under LN2.
heh. true, and not true. how much difference can be there comparing es to retail product? few 0.x% in overall performance?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8QRK...re=uploademail
BD 5.66
2500k 5.79
cinebench. both @ 4GHz.
this is getting lol.
We will! and then only amd fanboys will buy amd chips .......Quote:
Originally Posted by repman
In reality , I wish to buy either intel or amd , but amd is just making that
impossible with bad price>preformance ....
I just upgraded my e8500 to 2600k , but never even had any amd
alternatives .... amd really needs to keep competitive in the chip game
since we would all hate an intel monopoly ....
kudos to amd on their vga cards !! excellent ..
oh look a gimped BD...Quote:
Originally Posted by prznar1
your post if what i was reffering to with "this is getting lol" :PQuote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
btw i dont think the BD was even at 4 Ghz.
im thinking the multi may be limited to 14 actually. look at the cinebench result. it says @ 3.5 Ghz. which would need an HTT speed of 286 for 4 GHZ
Plus i think they disabled the write function of the cache if not the complete cache.(l2 and l3).
I would also like to know what they have the NB multi at. my guess is they have it locked under 10. This would severely limit the multi threaded performance of an 8 core chip
I guess it only uses 4 cores when paralleling.Quote:
Originally Posted by prznar1
its 32-bit OS....
Cinebench reported 3.5ghz for bd and 3.39ghz for the 2500k, 8c/8t vs 4c/4t but cpuz reported 4ghz for both.Quote:
Originally Posted by prznar1
yes i know. i can see :P
with intel there is no difference, with AMD i am sure there will be a lot.