yea i see it the same as well. i am very impressed with i7s performance. they made a pretty nice cpu. but we have to face the facts here. most people buy cpus for things other than running sandra all day or everest. people buy them to actually use them. like playing games. the game performance of the phenom II was good whether you believe it or not. when you are running games that get 150+ fps you can hardly say that i7 destroys the amd cpu when it gets 300 and the amd gets 150. who needs 300 fps? we have to look at a realistic situation. with games that have fps at around 70 or below the phenom is getting close performance to i7. plus it gets lower temps and appears to overclock better. not to mention that its platform is cheaper. so when you look at it yes it gets destroyed by i7 in most of the benchmarks but you have to look at it with the facts that matter. and i would surely accept 55 fps instead of 60 fps for half the price, lower temps, and a chance to overclock it to possibly get the same or better performance than its competing chips. phenom II is a winner in my books even tho its performance can't even match i7.Originally Posted by Tiridum
sure no problem
the way I see it:
- phenom2 = similar performance with Core2 (5% in both directions)
- phenom2 does have a small die size, much smaller then i7 so they can sell it cheaper then any i7
- phenom2 uses a much cheaper platform then i7
- phenom2 isn't a competitor for i7
- phenom2 is a very nice midrange cpu, low watts, low temp
- people can finally start choosing amd again, because their performance really sucked with agena
even though i have a Intel E8400, I really like to buy a deneb if overclocks are good, i don't care about stockspeeds
Bookmarks