Quote Originally Posted by BeepBeep2 View Post
There is no way that it can be an improvement...
AMD is now 80% behind SandyBridge in Cinebench CPC, uses ~20% more power than the old architecture...giving a generous 10% leeway in a 30% gate shrink, 30% behind in WinRAR, which happens to be the only place so far that FX really "shines".
I hope Piledriver comes with some "I'm on acid" 50% IPC increase...

They need 20% more clock vs Llano so 700 Mhz over Llano, 3.8 Ghz should beat Llano by a few percent
Cinebench is irrelevant metric,but with same thread count AMD is just 10% or so behind SB. This is very good result in one of the benchmarks that don't fit well with Bulldozer's shared FPU. It does consume more power but this is entirely GloFo's fault. Design is probably not working as well as AMD had hoped but to call it a failure is wrong. Clock for clock is irrelevant for most buyers,general performance and performance/$ is what matters. I have already posted links in my previous post where BD destroys Thuban in almost all real world applications that are relevant for desktop users. In games it's on par or faster than Thuban/Deneb. It does cost more but with slight price correction Thuban is going the dodo way soon with 8170 and Piledriver coming. Just forget K10,it was a good core let it go