Quote Originally Posted by informal View Post
IMO this doesn't make sense. We are now in 2011. AMD knew what kind of cores it will have to fight this year and in the years to come. Core generation already had pretty big advantage in integer workloads(some due to compiler advantages some due to better uarchitecture). Now I'm supposed to think that even though AMD knew the gap will be around 35-40% ,at similar clocks,they will go with 15% slower design (IPC) versus their own familiy 10h and hope to make up all this by clocking it sky high? They would need 5.5-6Ghz to match QC SB with SMT which will never happen. Bulldozer can barely touch 4Ghz with Turbo on and this is not on all cores. Something is not right here...
Unless AMD is preparing to release an embarrassingly fail of a product, which will have an ironic moniker for years, something indeed doesn't add up. I wish AMD would end the quiet period, and just state how it performs.