LinkBack URL
About LinkBackshttp://translate.google.de/translate...0%2F160285.htm
Simply - if true WOW!
http://translate.google.de/translate...0%2F160285.htm
Simply - if true WOW!
16 core processor faster than 4 core processor shock?Originally Posted by Uriel
*sits back and imagines a debate like the LOTR vs SW one in Clerks*
Kalniel: "Nice review Tarinder - would it be possible to get a picture of the case when the components are installed (with the side off obviously)?"
CAT-THE-FIFTH: "The Antec 300 is a case which has an understated and clean appearance which many people like. Not everyone is into e-peen looking computers which look like a cross between the imagination of a hyperactive 10 year old and a Frog."
TKPeters: "Off to AVForum better Deal - £20+Vat for Free Shipping @ Scan"
for all intents it seems to be the same card minus some gays name on it and a shielded cover ? with OEM added to it - GoNz0.
More to the point 8 genuine int cores vs. 4 genuine int cores. An interesting suggestion of performance, but no more than that. I think we all know it's going to hammer Phenom II: I think we all kind of expect it to outperform i7 9xx on the whole (although I think it might still struggle to get past the 970X / 980X). Until the replacement platform for 1366 is out, though, we won't really know what to compare this to.
Other thoughts from the article? Well, if the power draw tables can be believed *that*'s going to be a big story: much lower consumption that the comparitive chips. Also if this is the last PGA platform from AMD that means buying into Bulldozer is going to be pretty much a dead-end market: so it had better be either *very* good or pretty cheap to persuade people it's worth going for a platform with minimal upgrade future...
If was more the single / dual threaded stuff that I found surprising. No surprises on the mulththreaded stuff but beating an i7 975 with a lower clock in Crysis Warhead is impressive. IIRC, Crysis Warhead doesn't benefit particularly from more than dual core.
Edit: Comparatively that might put it on par with Sandy Bridge, clock for clock in single / dual threaded games and give it an absolute thrashing for multithreaded stuff. I was not expecting that.
Last edited by Uriel; 18-02-2011 at 03:45 PM.
<removed>
If only if it wasn't published for April Fools 2010
Uriel (18-02-2011)
D'oh - goes to find a handful of salt...
It was published a day late then...
I did wonder why all of the "related stories" mentioned April Fool's
BLOODY BULLDOZER WHYDONT THEY RELEASE IT I AM REALLY PI8SSED OF AND YES I AM SHOUTING! I CANT BELEIVE THAT AMD EXPECT US TO WAITING LIKE THIS FOR AND THEY SAY IT WILL RELEASED IN THE SECOND QUARTER WHICH MEANS JUNE JULY IN THE SHOPS, AND AT THAT TIME IT WILL COST 500 POUNDS TO BY THE SLOWEST BULLDOZER PC CONFIGURATION SO REALLY WHAT IS THE POINT. boooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
hope that you enjoy that post btw
Erm... It's only a CPU...
Last time AMD put out a big architecture change with the original Phenom, they had a fairly significant errata issue that needed a fudged BIOS update crippling CPUs to fix.
This is a much bigger architecture change and I'd much rather they took their time and got it right.
As someone who works in the industry I can say that stuff is not ready until it's ready, they can not just release stuff if it is not releasable!
They can, they just wind up shipping an unstable, broken product that they then have to recall over a "chipset issue".
Yes, Sandy Bridge owner here. Not a happy one either. I've not had so many BSODs in years (though they only occur on boot) and I can't seem to find the cause of the problem. I've also got one broken SATA port already...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
