AMD Zambezi news, info, fans !

[Manicdan]

thats just marketing, i have yet to see a single commercial about their 1000$ products, everything i see is about "second generation core i series being visually better"

[hirsch]

thats just marketing, i have yet to see a single commercial about their 1000$ products, everything i see is about "second generation core i series being visually better"

I didn't mean the performance of an i7 990x - just in general, they have the fastest low-, mid- and high-end CPU and as all of you understand that's why they rule the market and can have the highest price, so in the end, real performance controls the market.

(Btw, you should start looking at ESLs commercials, it's all bout Intels extreme stuff, but maybe that's because of the names of their tournaments )

--

I've a question, am I the only one that think it's embarrassing/funny/weird that they compare there new top model against a 1,5 year old processor that probably performs worse then the 2500k/2600k in the comparing games. Imo that make this (http://tof.canardpc.com/view/a53a68e...1068e8af28.jpg) slide worthless because if they would have compared it with the better performing 2500/2600 the slide would have looked very very different...

EDIT:

They sell caue that is all anyone knows, they sell cause every windows based software company has recomendations of Intel bla bla, or better in the hard ware requirements sheets (excpet some games now days). That's the only reason my company sells and install Intel, is cause "it said we had to"

And why you to think the situation looks like that?

The market (Intel) needs competition in stuff that matters to customers!

[jimbo75]

I've a question, am I the only one that think it's embarrassing/funny/weird that they compare there new top model against a 1,5 year old processor that probably performs worse then the 2500k/2600k in the comparing games. Imo that make this (http://tof.canardpc.com/view/a53a68e...1068e8af28.jpg) slide worthless because if they would have compared it with the better performing 2500/2600 the slide would have looked very very different...

Don't you think it's embarrassing/funny/weird that their $1K top model loses more than it wins in gaming to their $220 model?

It's marketing. People are extremely stupid and actually believe that price indicates performance. They will see slides like this and think "WOW thats AMAZING". Enthusiasts know the score so why bother with it unless you are just looking to nit-pick irrelevent stuff? Believe it or not, it's a marketing teams job to make their chip look AS BEST AS POSSIBLE. That's what they are doing. Remember the 36% faster in gaming physics benchmark intel did for the new SB-E's? Or did you just deliberately forget that?

[Lokinhow]

Guys, Wprime is integer or floating point intensive?

[hirsch]

Don't you think it's embarrassing/funny/weird that their $1K top model loses more than it wins in gaming to their $220 model?

It's marketing. People are extremely stupid and actually believe that price indicates performance. They will see slides like this and think "WOW thats AMAZING". Enthusiasts know the score so why bother with it unless you are just looking to nit-pick irrelevent stuff? Believe it or not, it's a marketing teams job to make their chip look AS BEST AS POSSIBLE. That's what they are doing. Remember the 36% faster in gaming physics benchmark intel did for the new SB-E's? Or did you just deliberately forget that?

Ehm, why should that be embarrassing/funny/weird? As you probably know, most of the games out there (today) can't use more than 4 cores, in best case. And games dosen't benefit that much from CPU-power if it isn't the bottleneck - right? And what do you mean with this "People are extremely stupid and actually believe that price indicates performance"? In my point of view, price indicates performance VERY well. For example compare the i3-2100 to the i7-2600k - which have the best performance and cost the most... <--- PRICE indicate PERFORMANCE, end of that discussion!

[jimbo75]

Ehm, why should that be embarrassing/funny/weird? As you probably know, most of the games out there (today) can't use more than 4 cores, in best case. And games dosen't benefit that much from CPU-power if it isn't the bottleneck - right? And what do you mean with this "People are extremely stupid and actually believe that price indicates performance"? In my point of view, price indicates performance VERY well. For example compare the i3-2100 to the i7-2600k - which have the best performance and cost the most... <--- PRICE indicate PERFORMANCE, end of that discussion!

Except it doesn't. See my previous example where the Gulftowns and SB-E's massively higher price clearly does not lead to higher gaming performance. See the higher clocked, cheaper Deneb quads that outperform the more expensive Thuban's.

Price does not equate to performance in gaming, but the general public has zero clue about that. All they will see is a much cheaper chip performing the same as an incredibly expensive chip. What did you say in your last few posts? Only gaming performance matters, and you are an "enthusiast" who would pay $1k for the best cpu? Did you buy Gulftown 18 months ago? Cuz until SB it WAS the fastest gaming cpu and still is in the higher threaded ones.

[hirsch]

Except it doesn't. See my previous example where the Gulftowns and SB-E's massively higher price clearly does not lead to higher gaming performance. See the higher clocked, cheaper Deneb quads that outperform the more expensive Thuban's.

Price does not equate to performance in gaming, but the general public has zero clue about that. All they will see is a much cheaper chip performing the same as an incredibly expensive chip. What did you say in your last few posts? Only gaming performance matters, and you are an "enthusiast" who would pay $1k for the best cpu? Did you buy Gulftown 18 months ago? Cuz until SB it WAS the fastest gaming cpu and still is in the higher threaded ones.

Gulftown/SB-e maybe isn't worth their price if we are talking gaming performance but still the price indicates their performance because SB-e (6 core) will probably be the best performing chip in the world when it releases (just like 980x/990x are or were) in any applications (games/benchmarks/what ever). "See the higher clocked, cheaper Deneb quads that outperform the more expensive Thuban's." as I said, most of todays games can't benefit from more then 4 cores, so ofcourse Denebs will benefit from higher freq. when both deneb and thuban are based on the same articheture. But in that scenario we are talking about 1 or maybe 5 FPS at most, right?

And the only reason that I used gaming performance for my comparison was that the review I founded only included gaming benchmarks that should show real performance. Earlier this day I read that it's more than 465 000 000 gamers in the world today, so just ask yourself if they would've read that review, would they care about FPS in games or score in Cinebench?

Yes I did, and I've chips from both Intel and AMD (ex. 980x/930/2600k/1090T/965/940).

[dess]

Hey, guys, wasn't it posted just a bit earlier? Isn't showing 3DMark11's CPU-based Physics Score as "3D Gaming" measure is even more cherry-picking, blatantly manipulative and simply laughable...? (BTW, why they're even concerned about gaming performance, since as you say "no one" use SB-E for that?) And who the hell cares about "Slide Show Creation"? Perhaps other test results was just lower?